Still Pissed Off

chet380 · Feb 16, 2017

1. That the Hawks didn't take a chance with a 7th Rd pick for La'el Collins -- he wasn't charged, they weren't seeking his arrest .. they wanted to interview him -- since not one of the other teams rolled the dice, was there collusion?

2. That in 2014 the Hawks selected OT Garrett Scott instead of Duvernay-Tardif -- L D-T has been a starter for KC for the past 2 years -- D-T's SPARQ was near the top of the list and better than Scott's and was a med school student so he has some smarts.

Attyla the Hawk · Feb 16, 2017

To be fair, it would have been really tough for us to draft Collins a year after Clark.

Also, I loved the Garrett Scott pick. It sucks that the medical came back after the draft. But Scott was very much an amazing athlete. I didn't have a problem with the pick when it was made. I thought it was a very wise selection. But we'll never know.

Missing_Clink · Feb 16, 2017

Well if this regime has shown one thing when it comes to the draft, they are fairly incompetent at evaluating and drafting college OL players. Whether its Cable, JS, or the scouts, someone needs to be relieved of their OL drafting duties.

There are marked missteps like this in the OL for every draft with this team. The Collins one really does stand out though.

getnasty · Feb 16, 2017

If I remember correctly Collins wasn't going to sign if he was drafted after the 3rd round.

kf3339 · Feb 16, 2017

getnasty":14gyv5qr said:
If I remember correctly Collins wasn't going to sign if he was drafted after the 3rd round.

Yes, but he also wouldn't have been able to sign as a UDFA with the Cowboys. So he either would have had to take a contract with us, or sit out a year and do the draft again. The op was talking about a 7th round pick. Not exactly a big risk.

dopeboy206 · Feb 17, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":22dfjxz4 said:
To be fair, it would have been really tough for us to draft Collins a year after Clark.

Also, I loved the Garrett Scott pick. It sucks that the medical came back after the draft. But Scott was very much an amazing athlete. I didn't have a problem with the pick when it was made. I thought it was a very wise selection. But we'll never know.

Why would it be tough? The police just wanted to interview Collins. It's not like he has a bad rap sheet.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DJrmb · Feb 17, 2017

kf3339":xwag8ltr said:
getnasty":xwag8ltr said:

If I remember correctly Collins wasn't going to sign if he was drafted after the 3rd round.

Click to expand...

Yes, but he also wouldn't have been able to sign as a UDFA with the Cowboys. So he either would have had to take a contract with us, or sit out a year and do the draft again. The op was talking about a 7th round pick. Not exactly a big risk.

There's also an aspect of being a decent human being and not being a douche. Forcing a guys hand like that is not really a good way to cultivate a relationship with someone you expect to sacrifice their body & health in working for you.

His agents had determined that after the 3rd round his best opportunity to make the most money was to go undrafted because 1. he could choose where he wanted to go, 2. he'd only have to sign a 3 year deal instead of 4, and 3. he'd possibly even get a couple teams bidding for him as a UDFA upping their signing bonuses to lure him in. So, because of that, they asked that no teams draft him after the 3rd and let him have the choice. It would seem the more classy move is to honor that request, especially since it came out that police believe he had nothing to do with the murder which made his draft stock drop unfairly.

I don't blame Seattle for not drafting Collins one bit, I think they were right not to.

Basis4day · Feb 18, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":32qq4f0w said:
To be fair, it would have been really tough for us to draft Collins a year after Clark.

It was the same draft as Clark, making it even more difficult.

But being angry about it is a perfect example of hind site bias.

chet380 · Feb 28, 2017

The Hawks picked Scott immediately before L D-T despite his better SPARQ score

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... -extension

ivotuk · Feb 28, 2017

Have to admit, the La'el one baffled me. There have been a few missteps, and it's even harder if the choice seems obvious to us fans. But then again, there are things that we are not privy to.

THe one I'm still aggravated about the is long snapper. I don't blame Hauschka for all of those missed kicks. A new, inexperience LS that keeps getting blown up at the LOS screws with a kicker's process.

I believe that choice cost us 1 game, and 2nd place (ended up HFA) for the playoffs. What cost was saving less than a million dollars? A Superbowl?

seahawkfreak · Feb 28, 2017

Basis4day":2bmhqtgd said:
Attyla the Hawk":2bmhqtgd said:

To be fair, it would have been really tough for us to draft Collins a year after Clark.

Click to expand...

It was the same draft as Clark, making it even more difficult.

But being angry about it is a perfect example of hind site bias.

Collins was questioned, released and was determined not to be a suspect. He did nothing wrong. There were no accusations or plea downs. Dallas never received any negative publicity so why would it have been "tough/difficult" to take Collins later in the draft?

Jimjones0384 · Feb 28, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":354bilj0 said:
To be fair, it would have been really tough for us to draft Collins a year after Clark.

Also, I loved the Garrett Scott pick. It sucks that the medical came back after the draft. But Scott was very much an amazing athlete. I didn't have a problem with the pick when it was made. I thought it was a very wise selection. But we'll never know.

Yeah, the public and press would have eaten them alive had they went for Collins so close to Clark. It's two years removed now, so I think they could absorb another risk now. Especially seeing that Clark hasn't caused any trouble since then.

jammerhawk · Mar 1, 2017

Meh, the retroscopic examination of any draft decisions of course can create points of serious finger pointing and WTF were they thinking questioning of the decisions made or not made.

It's well to remember that Collins was a key person of interest in a murder investigation and all 32 teams passed on drafting him as a consequence. That he was eventually exonerated makes all 32 FOs subject to the same WTF questioning. As well Collins made it clear that he would not sign if drafted late by any team so he got his wish and was able to pick his landing spot.

Of course it would have been a great thing to have drafted him but it would have sucked even more and hurt the team if he'd wound up being charged with murder. Imagine the negative press the team would have faced if that had happened. Remember as well the BS that surrounded her he drafting of Clark from the nimby press. As it has turned out both players have moved on from their "character" questions but the political environment of the time as well needs to be factored.

That said Seattle would have a good OT now if Collins had been snagged. I'm still OK with their decision and coulda woulda shoulda blame if applicable should apply to every FO.

Attyla the Hawk · Mar 1, 2017

jammerhawk":3v2aafsb said:
That said Seattle would have a good OT now if Collins had been snagged. I'm still OK with their decision and coulda woulda shoulda blame if applicable should apply to every FO.

Also, outside of the potential legal issues, we can't discount the fact that Collins was willing to sit out an entire year.

We can't know if that was just a bluff or not. However in his particular case -- I think it's relatively easy to see that from a numbers perspective, it was a move he could easily have made.

Had he been drafted, it would have been for a low contract number. And he'd be locked in for 4 years. He was very clearly an R1 talent and probably a top 20 at that. So in truth, had he just held out and got picked in R1 the following year, he'd have made more in 2016, than he would have for his entire 4 year late round deal had he simply conceded and signed to a day 3 contract.

The delta between a 6th round contract, versus a priority UDFA signing is very minimal. Add the benefit of only having a 3 year deal (can be extended after 2nd year) -- also made for incredible leverage on Collins' part. After year two, he will probably be making more in years 3, 4 and 5 on an extended deal than he actually would have had he been picked in R1. The only cost to him being the risk incurred that he get injured or not ultimately be worth resigning.

Bottom line is, that Collins' situation was very unique. And the almost certainty that he would not sign if drafted day 3 factored heavily. The only real expectation that he wouldn't make good on his threat would be if he were so worried about potential injury devastating his career. But if he sits out a year that risk is almost non existent. And the risk is the same if he is drafted versus going UDFA. Again the difference between is tiny (we're talking 435k versus 450-460k per year).

But also, there are fewer (as in no) limitations to how much of that base salary can be guaranteed. Quite literally as a UDFA, he could have demanded his entire salary be guaranteed. Which would have put his guaranteed money at or around that of a high 2nd round pick.

If you are interested in a more detailed explanation of why it was absolutely smart for Collins to make this threat, check out the post draft analysis by OTC here:

http://overthecap.com/what-can-lael-col ... ree-agent/

The simple fact is, had we burned a 6th or 7th on him, he would have held out. The numbers bear it out. He had zero reason to relent and accept getting drafted in that range. Only the UDFA route provided some unique ability to recoup the loss of potential income. And also potentially turn into a better deal than even getting picked at 16-20 overall within the first 5 years of his career.

So I wouldn't be too PO'ed about this. We weren't going to be able to sign him and every GM in the league instantly arrived at the same conclusion. He would have held out even if the Cowboys drafted him.

seahawkfreak · Mar 1, 2017

jammerhawk":2hnxupdq said:
Meh, the retroscopic examination of any draft decisions of course can create points of serious finger pointing and WTF were they thinking questioning of the decisions made or not made.

It's well to remember that Collins was a key person of interest in a murder investigation and all 32 teams passed on drafting him as a consequence. That he was eventually exonerated makes all 32 FOs subject to the same WTF questioning. As well Collins made it clear that he would not sign if drafted late by any team so he got his wish and was able to pick his landing spot.

Of course it would have been a great thing to have drafted him but it would have sucked even more and hurt the team if he'd wound up being charged with murder. Imagine the negative press the team would have faced if that had happened. Remember as well the BS that surrounded her he drafting of Clark from the nimby press. As it has turned out both players have moved on from their "character" questions but the political environment of the time as well needs to be factored.

That said Seattle would have a good OT now if Collins had been snagged. I'm still OK with their decision and coulda woulda shoulda blame if applicable should apply to every FO.

He said he wouldn't sign if drafted after round 3. To me this should have been irrelevant as players do not get to decide when and where they get drafted. Collins and his agent later said this was a bluff.

Collins and Clark's incidents cannot be compared as Clark was actually charged with something. Collings didn't get drafted because everyone thought they could sign him as an undrafted free agent for less than a 7th round pick. If franchises were so afraid of political fallout, there would not have been so many teams in a frenzy ready to sign him after the draft.

drrew · Mar 1, 2017

seahawkfreak":2ry5ne4b said:
Collings didn't get drafted because everyone thought they could sign him as an undrafted free agent for less than a 7th round pick.

You're making up history.

Collins didn't get drafted because the mother of what was thought was his unborn child was murdered and his formal interview with the police wasn't taking place until the Monday after the draft. It had nothing to do with trying to save the difference in dollars between a 7th round pick and an UDFA. Once that meeting took place and it came out publicly that he wasn't a suspect that Monday night, the frenzy was on.

It wasn't about saving money, it was about not having clear information that he hadn't shot a woman 6 days before the draft started.

Read this: http://mmqb.si.com/2015/05/15/lael-coll ... estigation

hawknation2017 · Mar 2, 2017

Regarding Collins, 32 teams didn't draft him out of respect for the situation he was put in. After being screwed out of millions in guaranteed money, due to circumstances and bad timing beyond his control, his agent asked that he not be drafted so he would have the opportunity to at least sign wherever he wanted.

jammerhawk · Mar 2, 2017

More historical reconstruction, Collins was on record as saying he would refuse to sign and go back in the fallowing season's draft if he was drafted late, and he just happened to be a person of interest in the recent murder of the mother of his child,i.e.: a suspect.

The later fact was pretty important to a lot of FO people who removed him from their draft boards as a result. The second fact was mostly posturing by Collins and I seriously doubt anyone would have passed him up out of a sense of fair play based upon the request of his agent. it did allow him to sign where he wanted however.

chris98251 · Mar 2, 2017

I think Dallas treated him as a high draft pick which is why he signed there.

Seahawkfan80 · Mar 3, 2017

Attyla the Hawk":9piofxzj said:
jammerhawk":9piofxzj said:

That said Seattle would have a good OT now if Collins had been snagged. I'm still OK with their decision and coulda woulda shoulda blame if applicable should apply to every FO.

Click to expand...

Also, outside of the potential legal issues, we can't discount the fact that Collins was willing to sit out an entire year.

We can't know if that was just a bluff or not. However in his particular case -- I think it's relatively easy to see that from a numbers perspective, it was a move he could easily have made.

Had he been drafted, it would have been for a low contract number. And he'd be locked in for 4 years. He was very clearly an R1 talent and probably a top 20 at that. So in truth, had he just held out and got picked in R1 the following year, he'd have made more in 2016, than he would have for his entire 4 year late round deal had he simply conceded and signed to a day 3 contract.

The delta between a 6th round contract, versus a priority UDFA signing is very minimal. Add the benefit of only having a 3 year deal (can be extended after 2nd year) -- also made for incredible leverage on Collins' part. After year two, he will probably be making more in years 3, 4 and 5 on an extended deal than he actually would have had he been picked in R1. The only cost to him being the risk incurred that he get injured or not ultimately be worth resigning.

Bottom line is, that Collins' situation was very unique. And the almost certainty that he would not sign if drafted day 3 factored heavily. The only real expectation that he wouldn't make good on his threat would be if he were so worried about potential injury devastating his career. But if he sits out a year that risk is almost non existent. And the risk is the same if he is drafted versus going UDFA. Again the difference between is tiny (we're talking 435k versus 450-460k per year).

But also, there are fewer (as in no) limitations to how much of that base salary can be guaranteed. Quite literally as a UDFA, he could have demanded his entire salary be guaranteed. Which would have put his guaranteed money at or around that of a high 2nd round pick.

If you are interested in a more detailed explanation of why it was absolutely smart for Collins to make this threat, check out the post draft analysis by OTC here:

http://overthecap.com/what-can-lael-col ... ree-agent/

The simple fact is, had we burned a 6th or 7th on him, he would have held out. The numbers bear it out. He had zero reason to relent and accept getting drafted in that range. Only the UDFA route provided some unique ability to recoup the loss of potential income. And also potentially turn into a better deal than even getting picked at 16-20 overall within the first 5 years of his career.

So I wouldn't be too PO'ed about this. We weren't going to be able to sign him and every GM in the league instantly arrived at the same conclusion. He would have held out even if the Cowboys drafted him.

This is some great reading. Really appreciate the post. A question if I may, Do you, or anyone else in Dot Netland, think this sets a precedent (good or bad) on future signings? Would there be a way the NFLPA would keep this in the next CBA for future contracts?

Still Pissed Off

Member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads