Discussion in 'Sports Talk' started by Timsup2nothin, Dec 26, 2018.
The kind of profound insight us mere mortals could not have come up with in a million years.
I thought I heard this morning that Pitts won't use the Franchise tag on Bell and he tweeted "free at last"
Anybody think he's going to get the money he thinks he's worth? I'll start out with a NO. And suspect that he'll eventually sign for big bucks but not what he was originally planning.
I anticipate bell will go to a team that 1) has cap space to burn and 2) needs better run game.
Candidates I nominate: Colts, Jets, Raiders, 49ers, Cardinals, Broncos, Lions, Packers.
From the teams that have the most cap space, these are the teams that I think could use his talent the most.
Cardinals were actually dead last in rushing yards last year so they are the most likely candidate IMO.
If they couldn't run with Johnson, Bell isn't going to help that much more.
They need help on the line and a passing game to help the running game.
This is accurate. However, I think that your 'no' on Bell getting the money he wants is wrong. He probably won't get the guarantee that he wants, but he'll get the money...though I would agree with he shouldn't. Too many demonstrations that when a team has a "super" running back and that running back goes out they can be replaced by an ordinary running back with minimal loss, while at the same time when a team with an "ordinary" back gets one of those super backs they don't prove to be an upgrade. Bottom line seems to be that teams make the back a lot more than a back makes the team. Bell is going to sign for big money with a crappy team and his production is going to go off the cliff.
I think he wants a lot. but you may be right.
He wants money in the Gurley range, and he'll likely get it even though Gurley has provided one of the best examples as to why he really shouldn't.
They admitted after the Super Bowl he was, in fact, playing injured. Gurley, over the course of his career, is legit worth what they are paying him.
The issue isn't about whether he was playing injured, the issue is that when their fourteen million a year feature-back-heart-of-the-running-game got hurt they signed a guy who was sitting on his couch and that guy promptly had back to back to back to back hundred yard rushing games. Is Gurley better than Anderson? No question. Is he twelve million dollars a year better? Depends on where else you can spend that twelve million a year.
For a team like the Raiders, who have way more cap space than talent, a back that can maybe make them look more competitive than they really are makes a kind of sense. For the Rams, who are about to start bleeding key starters into free agency because they can't afford them under the cap, a fourteen million dollar back is a painful luxury. Whoever signs Bell is effectively admitting that they don't plan on having so much talent that they have to worry about that any time soon.
While I give some credence to that argument, why was Anderson sitting on his couch? One might say that he was asking for money that nobody wanted to pay.
And after sitting on the couch for awhile he was willing to take drastically less money. But then I'm using a similar rational for why Bell won't get all he wants. Every time he wasn't playing the Steelers seemed to be able to find someone that could perform for considerably less.
The worth of the RB seems to have been lessened in the last 5 years. Especially for those looking for a long term commitment, or tons of guaranteed cash.
I have the general impression that Anderson was sitting on his couch because the last two teams he signed with he failed to earn any serious playing time, and on a Rams roster with a healthy Gurley he'd have gotten a third time's the charm you are retired like it or not message delivered fairly clearly. He was (and is) a journeyman talent and as far as I know never got, or demanded, any particularly exorbitant amount of money. His one year deal with the Panthers was reported at 1.7 million, which of course is more than anyone is paying me but as NFL contracts go it's sort of chump change. His high water mark was four million a year or so, which is a quarter of what Gurley makes.
Considering a healthy Gurley vs an injured one/no Gurley is the difference between an electrifying offense and a borderline non-existent one I'm going to say he's worth every penny.
We'll see once he's healthy again. Some are thinking that teams were just finally figuring out a way to slow them down. So was it that or an injury. That will be determined but will sure scare a lot of fantasy owners in the draft next year. Will he still be the consensus number 1 pick that he was last year?
And Tim, thx, I didn't know what he was making before. In our fantasy leagues, he usually got picked as a second to third tier RB so he always had some value.
Problem is that there was actually very little change in the offense when Gurley went out. Several weeks later they got their asses beat in the Super Bowl, but up to that point replacing 15 million dollar Gurley with million dollar Anderson didn't seem to have made much difference.
Don't get me wrong, clearly Anderson is not better than Gurley. The question is whether Anderson and ten million dollars worth of defensive players is better than Gurley.
That is indeed the crux of the matter. Especially since if memory serves, the Rams are in a suboptimal cap position right now and don't have a lot of draft picks to snarf up all those defensive rookies that are reputed to infest the this year's draft.
And now that the meat market Combine has started, everyone is going to be glued to that coverage...
Personally, keeping Gurley is the right choice. I would say he’s a top 5 back in the game.
The only running backs off the top of my head that might be as good (or better) are:
Anyway, according nfl.com Gurley was the best back in the league year so I’d say he’s worth what they’re paying him.
Having suffered with Fournette on my Fantasy teams for the last few years (including some of his other antics) I wouldn't have him on that list.
It’s pretty hard to defend his sophomore campaign but I’m willing to bet that it was a fluke.
Yeah if he has another good one then I'll agree with you. Last year I picked him high. I won't do that this year.
You do get that no one is arguing the point you are making, right? In the happy world of "there's no salary cap and our team has infinite money to spend so we can just hire the very best player at every position, and the second best player to back them up" you get a much different result. But in the real world of the salary cap you get to hire the very best player at one position, maybe, and do you want to spend that silver bullet at running back?
At one point in their illustrious history of mismanagement the Dallas Cowboys had the hall of fame trio of Troy Aikman, Emmet Smith, and Michael Irvin. Awesome. They also had contracts with those three players that left them facing "if everyone else is paid the league minimum we cannot hire enough players to fill the roster." They had to renegotiate those guys into even longer deals just to field a team. That was when the whole 'backloaded contracts' circus tent came crashing down, and frankly the Cowboys have still not recovered. If I recall correctly they were still taking a cap hit for Aikman seven years after he retired.
Separate names with a comma.