Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
But with today's CBA, you sit a guy for a year and you have to decide before year four whether or not to pick up his option for year five. You'd be taking an awful and unnecessary risk.
If the #1 pick needs a year, don't take him.
I actually think it's a far smaller risk.
Essentially you're weighing the benefit of his production as a rookie and that surplus value of him playing as opposed to paying him to sit against what he will become down the road.
I see it this way:
If a QB works out with a team he's not leaving before 35 unless a significant injury occurs.
If a QB doesn't work out, he's almost never getting a second contract, anyway.
You never draft quarterbacks for what they are, but what they will become. The Colts didn't draft Luck for what he gave them in 2012, but what he's going to give them from 2014-2022.
The cost of the first contract is sunk upon the draft pick, and it's significantly less deleterious than in the past.
I just think you have to approach the player independently.
If it were a RB, LB, OL, DL, or DB, I'd definitely agree with you, but QB is the position that experiences the greatest change from college to pro, and I think that if you believe a player will benefit more from observation than having their asses handed to him, it's not a red flag.