warfelg Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 26 minutes ago, jebrick said: I agree. The only way he gets close is if a team thinks he is the missing link to a SB. Oakland may be that team. I seriously doubt any other team, cap space or not, will pay over 13M. 10-12M is more likely if he has a good year. My guess is he sits out 8 games. That would be smart for him. Oakland won’t have the cap space. They gotta pay Mack, Cooper, Bryant. And I think sitting out would be stupid. What if he sits out til week 10 and Conner has like 750 yards rushing 5 TD; Samuels throws in there 300 yards receiving and 2 TDs? That’s just off Bells pace from last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chieferific Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 I think we're overthinking it. Bell is a top 3 RB (if not #1). There is always a team that overpays a superstar. He will get over paid by ONE team next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Who will NE part with to get him next season, thats the real question. Should have traded Bell for a kings ransom. Now we get nothing but a 3rd round comp in the future for one of our 2 best players. Great job FO, great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcash4 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Sitting out 8 week, in my opinion, is beyond idiotic -- especially for a guy who has come this far and is taking this gamble on breaking the bank. The pro and con list is entirely too long on the con side. The team could have great success diminishing his overall value, he will be greatly lagging behind on a team with a brand new OC and would be starting at page 1, there is a greater risk of injury being that far behind physically at that portion of the season, etc. He either needs to play and be good or sit out entirely and let his value sit where it is. I think Bell was pushing too far to get max value for the RB spot. Its a valiant effort to help his position mates, but he seems to forget how this all works. If he would have taken $14M, it sets that market for Johnson, who then sets the market for Gurley, who sets the market for Elliot. By the time it gets to Gurley that contract could well in fact have been $17M. No team was going to start Bell at $17M and then have the market go up from there. Also, the lone team vying for your services in the Steelers was never going to jump from McKinnon getting paid $7.5M/year to the next RB contract being $17M a year -- no matter the overall usage of the player. It will be very interesting to see if DJ gets an extension this off-season and what that will be. If DJ takes $10-$12M/year, I think Bells gamble instantly fails. For his sake, I hope he and his agent are in DJ and his agents ears, if setting the market is ultimately Bells goal. I think the max Bell would be getting on the open market, as the first RB to do it, would be about $15M and if DJ gets a contract that is well south of that he is screwed. Unless DJ breaks the system, I dont think that any offer is going to be significantly better in FA in 19 than the Steelers (ie: Jumping from $14M to $17M), and that to me would not be worth the gamble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 27 minutes ago, wwhickok said: Who will NE part with to get him next season, thats the real question. Should have traded Bell for a kings ransom. Now we get nothing but a 3rd round comp in the future for one of our 2 best players. Great job FO, great job. Little exercise here: count how many starting, high level, and dependable rotational backs were drafted in the 3rd round or later. Now put together that along with $15mil in cap savings And it’s a little disengenous here to blame the FO. They wanted to keep him and even made a slightly absurd offer and he still said no. That’s on him not the FO. And you aren’t getting a “haul” for a RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcash4 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Just more thoughts on Bell: If he really is planning on playing the whole season, it doesn't make sense to skip training camp. Last year, when it was pretty obvious the Steelers would tag you again, it was a ploy to show dissatisfaction and use the little leverage that he had to attempt to help his negotiations in the future. This year, there is little chance of that happening a third time, so sitting out does not accomplish anything. What it does do, however, is slow his adoption into a new offense with a new coordinator, regardless of how similar things can be. Also, if he trains on his own and is injured severely, the Steelers can rescind the offer and he can be left with nothing. Signing it is financial protection from injury, and there is virtually 0 chance they would line him up in the pre-season. IF he is serious about being ready game 1, I hope he realizes that training camp is in his benefit to his ultimate goal of producing to the tune of $17M a year. If he doesn't show up though, It is a great opportunity for us to see what we have behind him. Giving Connor starters reps is a fantastic chance to showcase him and give a guy like Samuels some reps. I don't think Bell skipping camp hurts the Steelers as much as it could potentially hurt himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KJtheWicked Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 Here’s a hypothetical... if you could go back to the 2017 draft, would you take Dalvin Cook over TJ Watt? I was thinking about that today. It’s tough, because Watt has been solid so far. But Cook looked like a future all-pro before the injury. Swap the Conner pick for Carl Lawson and you still have a solid OLB. Plus, we still would’ve had Bell last year with Cook spelling him, so the injury may not have happened. After the season, Bell would’ve been let go, and that 14.5M could’ve been spent on defense. I know now these questions are typically exercises in futility, but this is one I remember thinking on draft day being a possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 5 hours ago, warfelg said: Oakland won’t have the cap space. They gotta pay Mack, Cooper, Bryant. And I think sitting out would be stupid. What if he sits out til week 10 and Conner has like 750 yards rushing 5 TD; Samuels throws in there 300 yards receiving and 2 TDs? That’s just off Bells pace from last year. What if he blows out his kneed this season going into FA? A season ending injury would cost him more than sitting out some games to lower the risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 5 minutes ago, jebrick said: What if he blows out his kneed this season going into FA? A season ending injury would cost him more than sitting out some games to lower the risk. Which is why any agent that tells him to turn down 5/70 with 30 guaranteed as aRB should be fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rivers Posted July 17, 2018 Author Share Posted July 17, 2018 6 hours ago, Chieferific said: I think we're overthinking it. Bell is a top 3 RB (if not #1). There is always a team that overpays a superstar. He will get over paid by ONE team next year. are teams still that naive? Without OL or good QB in this league, just forget it. Then consider CB's value today as well as WR. Selfish RB's are down the list of priorities but wait and see. Bell is in the wrong generation for what he wants. Too bad this will affect the team IMO, and not in a good way. If he doesn't play until week 8, I expect both connor and samuels to rack up the yards and points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 im just thankful that bell didnt sign what the steelers were actually offering. i think the steelers were wrong for even offering 10+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcash4 Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 2 hours ago, warfelg said: Which is why any agent that tells him to turn down 5/70 with 30 guaranteed as aRB should be fired I think Bell has a moving bar of acceptance for what he wants, but I agree -- those agents should have been pushing for it. Outside of actually getting $17M/year, what is an outcome that truly makes this gamble on himself worth passing up $14M a year as a running back today? Baring David Johnson blowing the doors off the market for duel threat RB's with a $15M extension, I don't know how Bell wins this gamble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 TJ Watt over Dalvin Cook was the right choice. But I also expect an RB in the first 2 rounds next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFF Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 I’d be mighty interested in Mark Ingram at say 3 years $15 mill next year if they wanted to save a top 3 round draft pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muncher Posted July 17, 2018 Share Posted July 17, 2018 would guaranteed contracts really be beneficial to the players? i think they are stupid enough to think the number would stay the same as the contracts are today. i would think the contracts would drop dramatically so the teams could protect themselves from player that get injured, fake injury and decide to 'loaf' because they already got their money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.