Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

27 Mar 2012

Compensatory Picks Announced

The NFL announced the compensation picks for this year's draft yesterday evening. The Raiders were the only team to receive a third-round pick (welcome back to day two, fellas!) and the Colts will get to draft Mr. Irrelevant this year.

Posted by: Rivers McCown on 27 Mar 2012

25 comments, Last at 31 Mar 2012, 11:27am by Raiderjoe


by justanothersteve :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 11:44am

Looks like Oakland has the potential for a much better draft with a #3, 4, and 5. I'm happy with the Packers compensation. TT gets two extra picks in the fourth and seventh. I have a feeling he may bundle a few picks to move up in the first if Hightower falls. Their only "need" positions are OLB, 5T DE, and C. (Also safety if Nick Collins has to retire.)

by Jimmy :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 11:52am

I really wanted to see the compensatory picks scrapped in the CBA. They don't really do what they were supposed to do - compensating teams for losing free agents - because the compensation doesn't arrive until the team has played a whole season. If they got through an entire year then they are probably OK. Also aren't good teams supposed to struggle to keep their best players in free agency? Isn't that the point of a salary cap, to promote parity and make all NFL markets as equal as possible.

I really can't see what the point of these picks is.

by Dean :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 12:14pm

The point is to draft 8 rounds of players in a "7 round" draft - semantics to keep both the owners and the NFLPA happy.

by Jimmy :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 12:31pm

Then just have an eight round draft. I would rather have eight and a half rounds (which is patently daft) than keep the current system.

by Dean :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 2:17pm

The system is absurd, but so what? Hardly worth getting riled up about. If they want to call it 7 rounds when it's really 8, what does it matter?

by Jimmy :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 3:07pm

It grates because everything about the draft is supposed to create parity and then along comes the compensatory system to do the opposite. Just have eight rounds; simpler, fairer.

by tuluse :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 3:20pm

I think this system might actually promote parity. If there is a reason that a team has trouble attracting free agents that they don't control (weather, nightlife, etc), the salary cap doesn't really work for them. They're forced to pay a premium which penalizes them, and the same team would probably have the same premium on keeping their own free agents. So the compensatory system helps with this.

by Jimmy :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 10:46am

This makes some sense. It would make more sense to give them the picks sooner (there is a two month gap between free agency and the draft).

by Jerry :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 6:43pm

Isn't that the point of a salary cap, to promote parity and make all NFL markets as equal as possible.

The point of a salary cap is to limit labor costs, thus increasing profits. Effects on competition are a secondary concern.

by Whatev :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 9:40pm

As I recall, there's also a salary floor and an obligation to share some proportion of their revenues with the players. Furthermore, parity itself is supposed to help revenue by making contests more watchable, at least in theory, so I'm not sure they can't be for both reasons.

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 7:34am

"Also aren't good teams supposed to struggle to keep their best players in free agency? Isn't that the point of a salary cap, to promote parity and make all NFL markets as equal as possible."

All teams struggle to keep free agents. So if I'm interpretting correctly that you're saying the compensatory system favors good teams, that's simply not the case. The highest compensatory pick was awarded to the Raiders (for losing Asomugha, I assume). If you look at the list in the article, it encompasses the full spectrum from recent Super Bowl winners to recent #1 overall pickers.

I agree that this system is more complicated than it needs to be, but it's hardly worth getting upset about.

by Jimmy :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 10:35am

I am saying that there is no point giving teams compensatory picks a year after their players have left (more than a year actually). Also I am not getting upset; it makes no sense so I point it out.

by sjt (not verified) :: Fri, 03/30/2012 - 3:27pm

There isn't enough time to do it in the same year. Free agency only starts about 6 weeks before the draft and keeps going during and after the draft (and in the case of last year, didn't even start until months after). Its impossible to distribute them until the following year.

by Podge (not verified) :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 12:42pm

I'm choosing to believe that the league gave the Raiders a 3rd round pick just so they needed to turn up to the draft on the second day, thus costing them loads extra in hotel rooms.

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 12:49pm

Don't worry, they can figure out a way to trade it for another QB between now and then.

by MJK :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 2:09pm

Nice idea, but compensatory picks can't be traded.

by Jimmy :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 3:06pm

They can however trade any other picks knowing that they have extra picks in the fourth round.

by Dean :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 3:57pm

They would have to have those other picks still in order to be able to trade them.

by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 7:38am

Good point. But that just gave me another thought. What about passing on it? What happens if someone lets the time lapse on the last pick of the day?

(Not that I think the Raiders will do this, mind you. Just wondering if this scenario has ever been contemplated.)

by Whatev :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 1:10am

Well, whatever else the Raiders may be, stingy they are not, so I think this is the wrong approach for the league.

by Raiderjoe :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 1:37pm

Raiders getting good picks. Goig yo cdleebrate tonigjt

by Kevin from Philly :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 1:39pm

Sierra Nevada on draft?

by Raiderjoe :: Sat, 03/31/2012 - 11:27am

Got six pack.of Torpedo. Good and fun tkmes

by ChicagoRaider :: Tue, 03/27/2012 - 5:04pm

It will be interesting to see how the drafting changes (or does not) for the Raiders. They still have the same scouts for at least this draft.

by Mr Shush :: Wed, 03/28/2012 - 4:44am

But different decision-makers. I doubt we'll see 40 times weighed quite as heavily.