SF's Harbaalke went nuts drafting guys that fell due to injury and it was part of the reason for their collapse. I believe the key to winning is production by first contract studs. About 100% of rookie production is lost if an injured player redshirts or misses camp and half a season of practice. Even worse rookie production isnt realized until 2nd year; 2nd year production isnt realized until 3rd year, etc. And then a decision on the player's longterm value must be made after seeing 3rd years of production instead of 4.
And sometimes it takes 2 years for a players' confidence in the injured body part to return and sometimes not all the athleticism returns. And some guys never get over an injury [See Derrick Sherrod, Justin Harrell].
Imagine if we lost the CHEAP production of Shields' or Daniels' 4th year because they redshirted as rookies; and 3rd and 4th years if recovery took 2 years. And then try to imagine trying to have a meeting of the minds w/ their agents as to their long term value at the end of their 3rd year or 2nd year [if recovery took 2 years]. All it would take is one of 31 GMs to have an exaggerated sense of their potential and we'd lose them. Oh BTW, some teams MUST sign FA's to meet the minimum spending requirements.
Originally Posted by: Barfarn
I understand what you're saying, but where do you draw that line?
Jaylon Smith is such a good player that, if he doesn't get injured, he goes top 12 in this draft. A guy like Shazier went 15th and he isn't as complete a player as Smith is. There's no way he gets past the Bears AND Saints. If a guy like that falls to 27, do you pass over him because he doesn't produce for you in the first ten games of the season?
I've seen him being compared to Derrick Johnson a lot and I feel like it's a very fair comparison. You don't get a complete guy like that very often. Especially not if you're continually winning and picking at the end of the draft.
Do you let all of that slip and draft a guy like Ragland, who very much looks like a 2 down linebacker, because of the potential that his injury lingers on and you only get three years out of him, rather than four? Then, if you're still on the fence, you can add that fifth year for a first rounder. It's not cheap, but it's not ridiculous either. And if he's going to be close to as good as he can be, you resign him after that, as well.
I understand that production on rookie contracts is important. With so much of your money tied up in a QB contract and some other anchors on your offense and defense, you can't go around and sign everyone. I love what a guy like Casey Hayward has done for us on his rookie deal. You do, though, have to keep looking for the best players and build the best team. If you can pick someone up who can eventually be one of those anchors, it'd be crazy to let them slip out of reach over unlikely potential contract problems down the road.
Obviously you do not fill your roster with guys like this. That's where Harbaalke went wrong. Nothing wrong with taking a shot on someone this talented once in a while if he does make it to our pick, though.