Stat why stars like Le’Veon Bell can’t get monster deals

[CGI_Ram]

This article reminds me of how difficult it’s going to be to value Gurley.

———

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...tars-like-leveon-bell-cant-get-monster-deals/

Here's a stat that explains why even stars like Le'Veon Bell can't get monster deals
Le'Veon's elite 2017 production was matched by Green Bay's cheap and inexperienced trio of runners

Le'Veon Bell is one of the best running backs in football, if not the best. This has been true basically since he entered the league as a second-round pick out of Michigan State back in 2013.

Bell has made the Pro Bowl in three of his five NFL seasons (all but his rookie year and the year he tore his knee) and has been named a first team All-Pro twice and a second teamer once. Despite missing 18 games due to injury or suspension, Bell ranks third in the NFL in rushing yards and fourth in rushing touchdowns since the start of his rookie season. He has also been the NFL's most prolific pass-catching running back during that time, hauling in 25 more passes than any other player out of the backfield, and accumulating nearly 300 more receiving yards than the next-closest back as well.

And yet, Bell and the Steelers have now twice failed to come to an agreement on a long-term contract, and if he wants to play in 2018, it will have to be on the franchise tag once again. For all intents and purposes, Bell's Steelers career will be over after the 2018 season, largely because he views himself as a far more valuable player than do the Steelers.

There has been a lot of chatter about the kind of contract Bell wants to receive, with numbers in the mid to high teens per year being thrown around. That, essentially, would pay Bell like a No. 1 wide receiver rather than a No. 1 running back. Bell is the only running back in the league who currently makes more money on a per-year basis than the Falcons' Devonta Freeman, whose current contract pays him an average annual salary of $8.25 million and contained just over $22 million in practical guaranteed money at the time he signed.

The Steelers offered Bell much more than that, but also much less than he asked for. Why? Well, it's obviously because they view his skill set as elite, but not necessarily irreplaceable. That may seem outlandish, but it's really not. Consider this:

Bell 4.79 yards per touch
Packers RB’s (Williams, Jones, Montgomery) 4.79 yards per touch

The Green Bay Packers' backfield trio of rookies Jamaal Williams and Aaron Jones plus converted wide receiver Ty Montgomery averaged exactly the same amount of yards per touch in 2017 as Bell. You might think Bell faced more difficult circumstances with teams ganging up to stop the run while the Packers were going against more wide-open boxes, but that's not true. They had almost exactly the same number of defenders in the box, on average, as well.

Average number of Defenders in Box
Bell 6.81
Packers RB’s 6.82

Bell on his own had greater touch volume than the Packers' trio of backs, but not by much. He touched the ball 406 times in 2017 -- 321 runs and 85 catches. Combined, the Packers' backs had 362 touches. Basically, he touched the ball 2.75 more times per game than they did. And he gave the Steelers the same production as they gave the Packers, only he did it at nearly seven times the cost.

And that, right there, is why it just doesn't seem worth it for teams to make so-called "Godfather offers" to uber-talented running backs. You get the elite production, but the cost basis is just so much higher than it would be to throw a bunch of random backs together in the backfield and get similar production for a fraction of the cost.

When he hits free agency next offseason, there will surely be a team willing to pay Bell big money. Probably not as much money as he asked the Steelers for, but certainly more than Freeman's getting right now. (Assuming Bell stays healthy and productive.) But there will be other teams who pass on Bell, cobble together a backfield out of spare parts for far less money, get similar production, and are able to use the savings to build out the rest of their team.

 

[fearsomefour]

It's true.
Also, rookie deals take guys to their mid 20's usually. Most RB start a quick decline at 30 or so.
I would pay RBs that deserved very well, but, short term deals.
Steelers drafted that kid from Pitt last year.
This will be his last year in Pittsburgh I think.

 

[Loyal]

The one thing the article doesn't address is that star backs can get in a groove and take over a game. Similar yards and similar impact aren't necessarily the same. Who would you rather have at CLink in the 4th quarter with game/season on the line? Todd Gurley or three UDFA's?

 

[Rambitious1]

The one thing the article doesn't address is that star backs can get in a groove and take over a game. Similar yards and similar impact aren't necessarily the same. Who would you rather have at CLink in the 4th quarter with game/season on the line? Todd Gurley or three UDFA's?

True.....but at what cost to the teams cap?
That’s the issue.
Cost basis analysis- is he worth the many times over, higher cost?
I’m just asking the question.

 

[tempests]

Holding out all last offseason, training camp contributed to a sluggish start for Bell and some pedestrian YPC and YPR numbers. The big plays he was accustomed to dried up until the second half of the season.

Rams were top 10 in the league in rushing yards, yards per attempt and rushing TDs in both 2015 and 2017. That was the first time they ranked that high in all three categories since 2001. Due to Gurley's superlative efforts and that he's a mismatch against almost any defense in the league. It would be hard to match or equal his production.

I consider Gurley more grounded and mature than Bell. Don't know whether he'll reach for an utterly unattainable goal like Bell, but unlike Bell, he won't make his contract grievances public.

 

[Loyal]

True.....but at what cost to the teams cap?
That’s the issue.
Cost basis analysis- is he worth the many times over, higher cost?
I’m just asking the question.

Gurley caught the ball as well as any of our WR's last year, and is the hot drop off option for Jared Goff. PLUS, he is the best NFL hurdler in the game today (). Is the cost to the cap worth a Super Bowl win? No guarantees, of course, but I'll take the all-pro hybrid RB/WR, along with the CAP hit in the biggest of games, instead of the 3 Stooges.

 

[CGI_Ram]

I don’t know who is driving this for Bell, but if these numbers are true... this is the kind of deal you don’t turn down, or agents get fired.

That’s really good guaranteed figures and nearly double the salary of the closest running back?

I don’t know what Bell is thinking, but he’s one injury away from this gamble blowing up - big time.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrea...on-with-the-pittsburgh-steelers/#6d62e95b140d

Le'Veon Bell's No-Win Contract Situation With The Pittsburgh Steelers

For the second consecutive season, the Pittsburgh Steelers and their best running back, Le'Veon Bell, were not able to come to an agreement on a long-term contract and thus, for the second consecutive season, he will be playing on the one-year franchise tag.

The July 16th NFL deadline for tagged players came and went with no deal reached; he'll earn $14.544 million in 2018, bringing his two-year earnings to $26.664 million. But that money comes with no true job security, and, apparently, no desire on the Steelers' part to pay Bell for who he is as a player but rather for the position he plays, according to his agent Adisa Bakari (via ESPN's Adam Schefter).

Bakari isn't wrong; the league's running back market is such that paying Bell the reported $17 million in average-per-year salary he was seeking is not realistic, and even Bell's significant contributions to his team over the last five years isn't enough for the Steelers to decide to reset that market. But the Steelers aren't necessarily right, either. Bell resides in a between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place reality that few NFL players experience: He's an elite-level player of a position that no longer commands elite-level money.

The running back market in the NFL is now abiding by a "younger is cheaper is better" model, and the salaries reflect it. Bell, understandably, tops the list of salaries at the position for 2018. That's followed by the Atlanta Falcons' Devonta Freeman at $8.25 million and the Buffalo Bills' LeSean McCoy at just over $8 million.

The cash spending at running back, though, is far more telling. Bell's 2018 money is all cash in form of salary, per the rules of the tag. McCoy, who ranks second in running back salary for this year, is making less than half of that, $6.325 million. In contrast, 30 wide receivers are earning more this season than McCoy, and very few of them touch the football as much in a year as Bell. And no running back is sniffing money anywhere near $17 million in average per-year money.

Bell has 1,541 touches over the past five years—742 times in the last two seasons alone and a league-leading 406 in 2017—which have amounted to a total of 7,996 yards as both a rusher and a receiver. He averages 129.8 yards per game, 86.1 rushing and 43.7 receiving. Bell's argument for a big payday and a true commitment from the Steelers is not unreasonable, as unprecedented as it may be.

But there is a further obstacle to Bell's goal, beyond the flat market and the Steelers' unwillingness to redefine it. It's also that the Steelers are also unwilling to redefine their approach to contracts with players in general. The NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reported that the Steelers offered Bell a five-year, $70 million deal with $30 million over the course of the first two years, an increase compared to the five-year, $60 million with $30 million over years one and two the team proposed last year.

But what's key is not that Bakari denied that report to SiriusXM NFL Radio—those exact numbers are neither here nor there when it comes to the reality of a player's earnings. Rather, as Bakari said herself, "the most important element of it is the guarantee." And the Steelers simply do not give players guaranteed money in the form of salary. Only bonuses—in the form of roster, signing or both—are guaranteed on the day the contracts are inked.

There are no exceptions: Even quarterback Ben Roethlisberger's full guarantee of $31 million is in the form of a prorated signing bonus. Salaries are pay-as-you-go in Pittsburgh. And when running back is increasingly considered an expendable position, the chances for Bell to get fair compensation for longer than a year or two, and from this team in particular, were grim from the get-go. Bell's versatility and high level of talent as a rusher, receiver and blocker have not proven to be enough to sway the Steelers into making his contract an exception to their own rules. It should be noted that these rules are self-imposed and entirely arbitrary and not exactly fair, either.

But being financially fair to players is not a part of the NFL's collective bargaining agreement with the players and their union, the NFLPA. The current CBA expires following the 2020 season, though, and guaranteed money and the structure of player contracts will likely be a flashpoint. Los Angeles Chargers offensive tackle Russell Okung and Los Angeles Rams running back Todd Gurley are trying to galvanize their fellow players and the latter has even suggested a strike if the CBA doesn't include a better and more equitable way to compensate the people who do the actual "Football" part that the National Football League (ostensibly, at least) revolves around.

As far as the Steelers and Bell are concerned, this summer will look much like the last. Bell won't take part in the team's training camp, which begins July 25th, nor the team's four preseason games but will arrive prior to Week 1, which Bakari confirmed, "barring something exceptional." It's possible, like last year, that he's eased back into the offense before getting into his groove (in his first game in 2017 he had just 10 carries for 32 yards and three receptions for another 15). But, as long as he stays healthy, Bell will probably rush over 300 times and be the team's second- or third-leading receiver. And beyond that?

Pittsburgh's general manager Kevin Colbert said in a statement that "After the 2018 season is completed, we again will attempt to work out a long-term contract with Le’Veon in the hope that he will continue his career with the Pittsburgh Steelers." Bell himself said on Twitter that his "desire has always been to retire a Steeler." But it is Bakari who is most likely the most accurate when she asserted that "the practical reality is, this now likely will [be] Le'Veon's last season as a Steeler." Because that is the practical reality of life as an NFL player and particularly that of an NFL running back.

 

[kurtfaulk]

I don’t know who is driving this for Bell, but if these numbers are true... this is the kind of deal you don’t turn down, or agents get fired.

That’s really good guaranteed figures and nearly double the salary of the closest running back?

I don’t know what Bell is thinking, but he’s one injury away from this gamble blowing up - big time.

i heard the offer only included $10m in guaranteed money. he's better off on the franchise tag.

.

 

[MadGoat]

i heard the offer only included $10m in guaranteed money. he's better off on the franchise tag.

.

That's pretty crazy if it's true. I wonder if just like the Steelers leaking of the total contract numbers, if this isn't Bell's camp leaking just the signing bonus to make the team look bad. There are some bonuses that are virtually guaranteed (but not 100%) that teams use for structuring purposes.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.


Ian Rapoport

✔@RapSheet
https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1019324630425915394

Mentioned yesterday the #Steelers final offer to RB Le’Veon Bell was 5 years, $70M. More context today: The fully guaranteed part was his signing bonus of just over $10M. He would’ve made $33M over the 1st two years — in a rolling guaranteed structure. $45M over the 1st 3 years.

6:55 AM - Jul 18, 2018

• 
  979
• 
  617 people are talking about this

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

only a fool of an agent would allow bell to accept this. this is the steelers telling bell to fuck off.

i'm telling ya, bell is gonna make some business decisions when he's running the ball this year.

.

 

[Mackeyser]

Bell, Gurley...Alvin Kamara in a few years..., Zeke Elliot...

There are going to be a few RBs in the next few years who deserve to be paid and I mean on their future production, not their past.

It's why I'm in favor of Max contracts.

I'm sick to death of seeing guys like Osweiler and Jimmy G just ravage the cap while guys like LeVeon Bell and Earl Thomas (exceptional players at positions that aren't paid top dollar anymore) can't get paid for actual production.

Without having to pay QBs 15% of the cap, teams would be free to either load up on mid-level vets be it retaining them or in FA that do most of the yeoman's work in the NFL.

Because of the situations with QBs and unlimited contracts that also touch a few other elite players, teams are routinely breaking their core talent structures because they go with youth and rookie contracts over the incremental increase in production and salary from mid-level vets.

At least with a individual Cap... let's say it was $20M... Teams like the Saints and Packers wouldn't be so fragile...and teams like the Rams wouldn't be so desperately in "win now" mode above and beyond typical pressures to win because Goff is on his rookie deal.

Bottom line: QBs on their rookie deal are totally changing how the entire NFL works, has shifted priorities dramatically with respect to how a team is built not only from the draft, but also with respect to free agency and rewards mediocrity due to scarcity. The way to address that is to cap elite contract pay.

That way, while a team can't just buy their way to a Lombardi, they can retain talent. Heck, the Rams would be able to keep most of this crew INTACT. It may push up some upper level salaries, but at the very least, they could pay exceptional players who are RBs, S, C/OG and even some elite kickers.

The Osweiler and Jimmy G contracts in particular really gall me and scream for the existing structures to change...significantly.

Imho, ymmv.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Bell, Gurley...Alvin Kamara in a few years..., Zeke Elliot...

There are going to be a few RBs in the next few years who deserve to be paid and I mean on their future production, not their past.

It's why I'm in favor of Max contracts.

I'm sick to death of seeing guys like Osweiler and Jimmy G just ravage the cap while guys like LeVeon Bell and Earl Thomas (exceptional players at positions that aren't paid top dollar anymore) can't get paid for actual production.

Without having to pay QBs 15% of the cap, teams would be free to either load up on mid-level vets be it retaining them or in FA that do most of the yeoman's work in the NFL.

Because of the situations with QBs and unlimited contracts that also touch a few other elite players, teams are routinely breaking their core talent structures because they go with youth and rookie contracts over the incremental increase in production and salary from mid-level vets.

At least with a individual Cap... let's say it was $20M... Teams like the Saints and Packers wouldn't be so fragile...and teams like the Rams wouldn't be so desperately in "win now" mode above and beyond typical pressures to win because Goff is on his rookie deal.

Bottom line: QBs on their rookie deal are totally changing how the entire NFL works, has shifted priorities dramatically with respect to how a team is built not only from the draft, but also with respect to free agency and rewards mediocrity due to scarcity. The way to address that is to cap elite contract pay.

That way, while a team can't just buy their way to a Lombardi, they can retain talent. Heck, the Rams would be able to keep most of this crew INTACT. It may push up some upper level salaries, but at the very least, they could pay exceptional players who are RBs, S, C/OG and even some elite kickers.

The Osweiler and Jimmy G contracts in particular really gall me and scream for the existing structures to change...significantly.

Imho, ymmv.

The latest CBA addressed the rookie scale and how those top picks, as unproven players, were grabbing a disproportionate amount of the salary pool.

They need to figure out the same for QB’s and the top end contracts being disproportionate.

 

[majrleaged]

The one thing the article doesn't address is that star backs can get in a groove and take over a game. Similar yards and similar impact aren't necessarily the same. Who would you rather have at CLink in the 4th quarter with game/season on the line? Todd Gurley or three UDFA's?

And that is why stats need to be viewed in contexts. Plus it really makes it easier to defense when a pass catching back comes in for the bruiser. I get the thinking of GMs not wanting to pay big bucks for RBs, but some RBs are not replaceable. Did anybody notice the drop off of the Seahawks when Lynch didn't play? Besides comparing the Packers with Rodgers and any other team, really isn't a fair comparison.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

McVay got very good production from his backs in Washington. If the line can block then a star back is not a necessity.

Conversely their would be no way to come close to Aaron Donald's production with a rotation of DTs

 

[Akrasian]

I've said before that thanks to cap restrictions, Gurley is likely odd man out. He's a great player, but as a RB, he is arguably the least likely to merit the extension going forward. IF the Rams have a decent replacement, and if they can get value back in trade, he could be gone at some point. Keep in mind that the money saved would allow the Rams to keep somebody else.

I'm thinking a first and a slew of mid round picks over future seasons, so the Rams can keep depth.

 

[Mackeyser]

That stat is a bit biased with respect to the Packers RBs.

Part of the reason some teams put up stats is that they're constantly in contested games and/or playing from behind.

When accounting for efficiency, there's simply no way the RB committee in GB was keeping up with Bell.

Moreover, even if in that specific instance it were true (as it's most certainly NOT true across the NFL), to buy this argument, one has to believe that even drafting a competent RB committee is reasonable.

As most of the NFL can attest...it's not. We certainly experienced that as Rams fans.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

Ask 32 gms who they'd rather have and 32 of them will say bell.

.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

That stat is a bit biased with respect to the Packers RBs.

Part of the reason some teams put up stats is that they're constantly in contested games and/or playing from behind.

When accounting for efficiency, there's simply no way the RB committee in GB was keeping up with Bell.

Moreover, even if in that specific instance it were true (as it's most certainly NOT true across the NFL), to buy this argument, one has to believe that even drafting a competent RB committee is reasonable.

As most of the NFL can attest...it's not. We certainly experienced that as Rams fans.

The NFL backed off the premiere running back picks years ago. It was one way to help with the salary cap. Having a Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson doesn't have the same affect that it would in the 70's and 80's. Back then an elite back could carry a team. Not so anymore. With the emphasis on passing many teams focus more on receivers and use backs situationally, i.e.., pass blocker, pass catcher, ball carrier. Because of teams having success with the running back by committee, we will continue to see it in the league. Sure Gurley can do it all but at what cost and what happens if he is injured? Hopefully the Rams won't skip a beat with the back ups.....and if they don't? Then why pay a cap breaking sum to Todd?