Le’Veon Bell Thoughts ?

[sherck]

So, looking into this a bit more:

1) Current top RB contract in NFL is Todd Gurley signed in 2018 for $57.500m over 4 years averaging $14.375m per season with $21.950m guaranteed.

So, since Bell wants to be paid top dollar, figure $14.500m or $15.000m per season for the price. Colts have $48m free in 2018, $124m free in 2019 (counting 2018 unused rollover) and $108m free in 2020.

The only salary cap "loss" is opportunity cost on signing Bell instead of some other high priced free agent down the road. Ballard has plenty of cap flexibility to decide what to do with it over the next couple of years.

We don't have a ton of internal free agents that are going to demand top dollar when resigned.

In 2019, top free agents are: Grant, Hunt, Slausson, Vinatieri (cheap), Woods, Desir, Turbin, Geathers, and Good. Grant, Hunt and Geathers might need large contracts if they continue to perform but no one else on the list will be paid anywhere near top dollar. They will have a lot to spend on new free agents.


2) Draft pick compensation. Colts have 5 picks in the top two rounders of the 2019 and 2020 drafts; 2 first round and 3 second round (NYJ 2nd round in 2019).

Rumor has it that PIT wants two first round pick like the Mack trade. Considering how "under valued" the RB position is when compared to a pass rusher, I cannot imagine that they think they will actually get that.

Considering that I think it is likely that one of those five draft picks over the next two years will be spent on RB (most likely a 2nd rounder, IMO), is spending a second draft pick on Bell worth it to get a proven performer? Offer two second round picks and wait until PIT realizes that no one is going to offer more.

3. Peformance.

5 years in league, played in 62 of 80 possible games.

4.3 yard per carry average on 1,229 rush attempts averaging 19.8 attempts per game and 86.1 yards per game.

8.5 yard per reception average on 312 receitpions averaging 5.0 receptions per game and 42.9 yards per game.

In my book, for those that watched Edge is first two years in the league before his injury, Bell is a very small step below him as a rusher and one small step above him as a receiver. He can do all phases of the game well.

4. Age. Bell was born 18 Feb 1992 and is 26 in 2018. 27 in 2019, 28 in 2020, 29 in 2021, 30 in 2022. Not "too" old yet but not a spring chicken in football years.

5. Attitude. No idea. Too many press stories and rumors floating around to decide if he is a cancer or someone who has not been treated well.


I am still on the "too expensive" road on Bell as I too undervalue the RB position. However, having a Bell type RB on the field this season would mean we are probably 3-0 rather than 1-2 in the games we have played thus far.

Walk Worthy,

[Butter]

We aren't going to the SB even with him. If Ballard really wants him wait for free agency.

[FatDT]

Bell is a proven great RB. But as a team I don't think we are where we need to be yet to be spending picks and big dollars on a player like him.

[smitty46953]

Originally Posted by Butter

We aren't going to the SB even with him. If Ballard really wants him wait for free agency.

I agree test him in free agency

[Chromeburn]

I think it is more than 15. He wants to be the top RB AND WR money added on. So 2-3 million in addition. Like a top number 2 WR.

[Oldcolt]

If you can get him for two number two's I'd say do it. Great players, I don't care what position they play, are hard to come by and extremely valuable. They make plays that turn games around. The argument that he will not make us a Super Bowl team is not, in my opinion, very strong. First off maybe he will, nobody knows for sure. Secondly that is an incredibly high standard to meet in order to bring someone in. There can be little doubt that he would improve our team and with our cap situation we should be able to pay him without sacrificing our financial future or flexibility. Unless he isn't the cultural fit Ballard wants, then l'd like to see us get him

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

If you can get him for two number two's I'd say do it. Great players, I don't care what position they play, are hard to come by and extremely valuable. They make plays that turn games around. The argument that he will not make us a Super Bowl team is not, in my opinion, very strong. First off maybe he will, nobody knows for sure. Secondly that is an incredibly high standard to meet in order to bring someone in. There can be little doubt that he would improve our team and with our cap situation we should be able to pay him without sacrificing our financial future or flexibility. Unless he isn't the cultural fit Ballard wants, then l'd like to see us get him

The argument has as much to do with the position as it does the player himself. Probably moreso.

If there were a 26 year old All Pro left tackle available for trade, sure, I'd be interested. Because of what a tackle brings to an offense. Every play he adds the value of keeping Luck clean and making it a little easier for the other OL to do their job of also keeping Luck clean.

Meanwhile a RB, even a great RB like Bell, is capped in terms of how much he can help a team. And with such a short shelf life, and with how many touches he's gotten during his time in Pittsburgh, it doesn't make sense to bring in that type of weapon at this stage of the team build.

We have a QB working his way back from injury, an offense still in the early stages of installation, a young and unproven roster coached and GM'd by a bunch of new guys.

If we're not going to spend what it takes to get a young All Pro guard in the offseason (no draft picks involved there) then I don't see the justification for trading for and then also paying Bell.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by FatDT

The argument has as much to do with the position as it does the player himself. Probably moreso.

If there were a 26 year old All Pro left tackle available for trade, sure, I'd be interested. Because of what a tackle brings to an offense. Every play he adds the value of keeping Luck clean and making it a little easier for the other OL to do their job of also keeping Luck clean.

Meanwhile a RB, even a great RB like Bell, is capped in terms of how much he can help a team. And with such a short shelf life, and with how many touches he's gotten during his time in Pittsburgh, it doesn't make sense to bring in that type of weapon at this stage of the team build.

We have a QB working his way back from injury, an offense still in the early stages of installation, a young and unproven roster coached and GM'd by a bunch of new guys.

If we're not going to spend what it takes to get a young All Pro guard in the offseason (no draft picks involved there) then I don't see the justification for trading for and then also paying Bell.

I've got to agree with this. I don't see the Colts looking to add Bell when they are still trying to create a homegrown team identity. Plus, judging from the holdout, he's prone to becoming disgruntled, and that might not be the right ingredient to add to a young and impressionable Colts team at this point.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by FatDT

The argument has as much to do with the position as it does the player himself. Probably moreso.

If there were a 26 year old All Pro left tackle available for trade, sure, I'd be interested. Because of what a tackle brings to an offense. Every play he adds the value of keeping Luck clean and making it a little easier for the other OL to do their job of also keeping Luck clean.

Meanwhile a RB, even a great RB like Bell, is capped in terms of how much he can help a team. And with such a short shelf life, and with how many touches he's gotten during his time in Pittsburgh, it doesn't make sense to bring in that type of weapon at this stage of the team build.

We have a QB working his way back from injury, an offense still in the early stages of installation, a young and unproven roster coached and GM'd by a bunch of new guys.

If we're not going to spend what it takes to get a young All Pro guard in the offseason (no draft picks involved there) then I don't see the justification for trading for and then also paying Bell.

I think we have our future RG in Braden Smith. The question is how high will our draft pick be in the next draft and what direction we go. If we have a shot at one of the LT’s I think we take it. We should add some complimentary players through FA.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by FatDT

The argument has as much to do with the position as it does the player himself. Probably moreso.

If there were a 26 year old All Pro left tackle available for trade, sure, I'd be interested. Because of what a tackle brings to an offense. Every play he adds the value of keeping Luck clean and making it a little easier for the other OL to do their job of also keeping Luck clean.

Meanwhile a RB, even a great RB like Bell, is capped in terms of how much he can help a team. And with such a short shelf life, and with how many touches he's gotten during his time in Pittsburgh, it doesn't make sense to bring in that type of weapon at this stage of the team build.

We have a QB working his way back from injury, an offense still in the early stages of installation, a young and unproven roster coached and GM'd by a bunch of new guys.

If we're not going to spend what it takes to get a young All Pro guard in the offseason (no draft picks involved there) then I don't see the justification for trading for and then also paying Bell.

I agree that's a strong argument. For me what would make it worth while is if we could get him for a reasonable price, draft wise. With the surplus picks Ballard has picked up, spending a two for a few years of Bell at a high level would be worth it to me. The kicker for me is we are sitting on this crapload of cap space, so if Bell has integrity (big if I know-the front office gets paid to make those decisions)we should be able to frontload a contract and keep our long term financial flexibility. It's fun playing with this but in reality, none of this will happen. He's not going to be a Colt in all likelihood.