Lionstop speaks: Off-season prediction pt 1

[Gulf of Brazil]

NE has Ridley/Vereen both as FA's this year leaving wisky RB James White, Blount, Bolden and Gaffney... so probably right on that assumption...


Sea has Lynch, who might just walk away after this year, plus Christine Michael and Turbin... there's a possibility here where they might be interested in a RB, depending on Lynch's future

 

[Dr. Evil-er]

I'm not you, Dr. Evil-er, but my initial offer to Suh, prior to or even during FA, would be close to the following. You can waive your magical wand however it best fits.

7 year 122.5 M with 63.5 M in guaranteed $$$$
31.5 M guaranteed Base Salary.....20M Signing Bonus.....12M Roster Bonus

I would make sure all the guaranteed $$$ were out of the way by end of his 4th year in this contract

Year..............Base Salary.............Signing Bonus.............Roster Bonus
2015.............3.0M.......................5M..........................3M.................= 11.0M+ the 9.7 leftover=20.7
2016.............7.5M.......................5M..........................3M.................= 15.5M
2017.............9.5M.......................5M..........................3M.................= 17.5M
2018...........11.5M.......................5M..........................3M.................= 19.5M
2019...........17.0M..............non-guaranteed with 0.00 $ dead-money
2020...........20.0M..............non-guaranteed with 0.00 $ dead-money
2021...........21.0M..............non-guaranteed with 0.00 $ dead money
____________________________________________________________________________________

JJ Watts contract has roughly 51M in guarantees and 10M signing bonus/10M roster bonus. If Watt is on the roster come 3-5 days after new league year, this year, his 2015/2016 Base becomes fully guaranteed.

This alleged contract for Suh, blows Watt out of the water, IMHO and is more than doable....

ADD your tweaks to it however you deem necessary, Dr. Evil-er

JJ Watt Contract Details and Salary Cap Charges | Over The Cap
Gerald McCoy Contract Details and Salary Cap Charges | Over The Cap

Can't amortize a roster bonus. It's a one year hit. Bucs and Texans both used brilliant strategy of taking out some of the later year hits by plunking onto this years cap hit on both guys because each team had unused space. That's smart.

LewAAnd (thanks Swarm) would have turned salary into bonus so he could push it back. There is no logical reason to do that but its all he knows how to do.

 

[lionstop1]

Carolina, Baltimore, Indy? I could see any one of them taking a RB. Even the Packers would possibly love hitting everyone with a two headed monster and take one of them despite having Lacy. Could you imagine that offense, then? Plus, they would still have a entire draft to add more people.

Not saying it will happen but the LAST thing I want to see is a great, successful team take a player we pass on and he ends up really good.

 

[Microwahevo]

I can't see GB taking a RB. Starks is a very viable backup and often times is used more than Lacy. They need help on D and I suspect that's where they'll go early.

 

[themuzzer]

I can see Indy taking a RB in the first round. But all the teams you mentioned lionstop draft after Detroit, they would have to trade up to to get ahead of us.

 

[jdwills126]

I can see Indy taking a RB in the first round. But all the teams you mentioned lionstop draft after Detroit, they would have to trade up to to get ahead of us.

yea the Trent Richardson trade doesn't look so good eh?

Were the Lions pick I wouldn't focus on any position as a top 15 guy could slide and if that a LB, WR, or lineman the Lions would have to think upgrade.

Even if Suh leaves. A good DT could be had in the second and a Guard/Center might find their way to the third. And that doesn't even touch on Free Agency. The only position I would not take regardless is TE!

 

[LPinSLC]

NE has Ridley/Vereen both as FA's this year leaving wisky RB James White, Blount, Bolden and Gaffney... so probably right on that assumption...


Sea has Lynch, who might just walk away after this year, plus Christine Michael and Turbin... there's a possibility here where they might be interested in a RB, depending on Lynch's future

They are in love with Michael and view Turbin as a Lynch type back. Why would they draft a RB in the first?

 

[lionstop1]

Obviously, my line of thinking is different than most of yours. When I think about this, I think of value, opportunity, upgrading and the best player available. I think only a few teams actually draft for need in the first round. If Gordon is ranked 20th overall by 75 percent of the league (higher for some) and a team that is picking 28th or so has a decent RB, but Gordon is better, I think they consider it. Usually, its the perfect storm when the best player available lines up with team needs.

As for N.E, Seattle and the Pack, I think they would take those guys if they had them ranked high enough.

 

[tpaulus_2]

NE has Ridley/Vereen both as FA's this year leaving wisky RB James White, Blount, Bolden and Gaffney... so probably right on that assumption...


Sea has Lynch, who might just walk away after this year, plus Christine Michael and Turbin... there's a possibility here where they might be interested in a RB, depending on Lynch's future

Did not know that! Vareen might be a good value signing to add to the RB stable. He's already used to being a committee guy, and San Diego already proved with Woodhead that the pass catching backs in New England's system travel well. I'd definitely be happy if we signed him to a team-friendly 2 or 3 year deal.

They could go for a RB, given that they're losing two of their top guys, but Blount really seems to be taking the lead, White was drafted, imo, with an eye on losing one or both of Ridley/Vareen, Boldin is a system guy for them who performs well when called on, and Mr. 200 yards Jonas Grey is under contract next year as well. No RB early for the Pats, imo.

Seattle has three backs they really like under team control next year, including a pair of relatively highly drafted back-ups behind the super-star Lynch. I'd expect them to go o-line, d-line, or especially WR early, imo.


Overall probably two of the deepest RB groups in the league.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Obviously, my line of thinking is different than most of yours. When I think about this, I think of value, opportunity, upgrading and the best player available. I think only a few teams actually draft for need in the first round. If Gordon is ranked 20th overall by 75 percent of the league (higher for some) and a team that is picking 28th or so has a decent RB, but Gordon is better, I think they consider it. Usually, its the perfect storm when the best player available lines up with team needs.

As for N.E, Seattle and the Pack, I think they would take those guys if they had them ranked high enough.

Remember there hasn't been a RB taken in the 1st round of the last two drafts, with studs like Le'Veon Bell, Eddie Lacey, and Jeremy Hill all going going in the 2nd round.

Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, and David Wilson all went in the 1st round in 2012. Richardson has been an unmitigated disaster as a top 5 pick. Wilson is out of the league due to injury, and Martin has had a very promising career derailed by injuries. The best RB in that draft was easily Alfred Morris, and he didn't come off the board till the 6th round.

The lone 1st round RB in the 2011 draft was Mark Ingram by the Saints. He turned in a pretty decent season this year, but still has yet to crack 1,000 yards in a season in 4 years now. Arizona made Ryan Williams the next back off the board and injuries have relegated him to the Dallas Cowboys practice squad. New England took Shane Vereen as next RB off the board, and while he's been an alright role player, he's certainly not a lead back. The next RB up, on the very next pick, was our own Mikel Leshoure. Enough said there. Daniel Thomas rounded out the 2011 2nd round RB busts. Demarco Murray and Stevan Ridley in the 3rd finally gave that draft it's 1st 1,000 yard backs.

C.J. Spiller, Ryan Mathews, and some guy named Jahvid Best went in the 1st round in 2010. Spiller has had some success, as has Mathews, but I bet neither team would make the same pick again. We all know how it went down with Best- yet another RB felled by injury. Dexter McCluster was next off the board, then Toby Fucking Gerhart. Ben Tate and Montario Hardesty rounded out the 2nd round of another unimpressive RB draft.

2009 saw Knowshown Moreno, Donald Brown, and Beanie Wells in the 1st round. LeSean McCoy was the 4th RB taken, at pick #53, showing yet again how hard it can be to peg the best RB from a class.

Darren McFadden went top 5 in 2008, followed by Jonathan Stewart, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, and Chris Johnson in the 1st round. Jones and Mendenhall are out of the league now, although Mendenhall had a pair of 1,000 yard seasons, as did Stewart, who continues to be an OK back in Carolina. McFadden has definitely failed to live up to expectations. Johson was well worth the pick, imo, but then dropped off sharply. Matt Forte went in the 2nd round and Jamaal Charles went in the 3rd round, more proof of how off teams can be on which RBs will be worth the investment.

You have to go all the way back to 2007 to find a draft with lasting impact backs in the 1st round. Adrian Peterson was a top-ten pick, followed by Marshawn Lynch at #12. Since then Chris Johnson has been the only other 1st round back that you can one can make an argument for being really worth the pick. Basically, it's been 6 or 7 drafts worth of a lot more 1st round busts than 1st round studs.

I know we see this current batch as the next wave of impact backs, but it's been the same every draft that I laid out. Lots of great looking backs that just didn't work out as expected. they were all drafted with the expectation of being a lead "bell-cow" back with pretty much none of them living up to those expectations.

I think teams as a whole are getting pretty leery about investing their top draft pick on a player whose career is so often over in a matter of years. The bust rate seems to be higher at RB due to the injuries- I don't have any statistics on that, just my observation.

I'm not saying a team should never take a RB in the 1st round, but look at the list of names I listed above and tell me who was worth the high picks they were taken with? The best RBs these last few drafts have went in the 2nd round, do we need to use a 1st rounder to get a good one?

It's an interesting debate, to be sure...

 

[lionstop1]

Good stuff TP.

While I believe the NFL (teams) have gone away the RB position, I also believe that its on the way back as teams realize that having the ability to run is key to a certain level of success. The issue with the position over the years is that none of those RBs presented a great deal of worthiness with the exception of a few. Those that were picked early clearly had the potential.

Theres enough evidence over the years that show teams are willing to take chances on the guys they like at the position. I see no difference here and I just happen to think this year's group of RBs will benefit from the lack of good RBs in the league, great prospects leading the group and how teams with young QBs will attempt to find that run game to help their QBs.

It will take just a handful of teams to believe these RBs are really good players and some good things from the combine for teams to start thinking about taking them in the first round. No team wants to miss on the next best RB or any player for that matter.

Right now, it just looks like if you like Gordon or Coleman, teams will have to think about investing late in the first or they miss out.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Good stuff TP.

While I believe the NFL (teams) have gone away the RB position, I also believe that its on the way back as teams realize that having the ability to run is key to a certain level of success. The issue with the position over the years is that none of those RBs presented a great deal of worthiness with the exception of a few. Those that were picked early clearly had the potential.

Theres enough evidence over the years that show teams are willing to take chances on the guys they like at the position. I see no difference here and I just happen to think this year's group of RBs will benefit from the lack of good RBs in the league, great prospects leading the group and how teams with young QBs will attempt to find that run game to help their QBs.

It will take just a handful of teams to believe these RBs are really good players and some good things from the combine for teams to start thinking about taking them in the first round. No team wants to miss on the next best RB or any player for that matter.

Right now, it just looks like if you like Gordon or Coleman, teams will have to think about investing late in the first or they miss out.

I don't disagree with any of your post except this last part. In my opinion last year and the year before was the same thing- the analysts all want to put the top RBs at leas somewhere in the 1st round just based on common sense (the best players at pretty much every position crack the top 32 on most big boards, right?) and past experience. But then when these last two drafts have gone down these backs that were probably mid-to late 1st round talent all dropped pretty much a full round.

Bell, Lacey, Hill were all absolute studs last year- there's no doubt they would go in the top 20 in a re-draft, but it looks to me like teams are shying away from drafting RBs in the 1st, with an eye on taking one in the 2nd once that first back goes off the board.

I think Coleman, Gordon, and Gurley are all very talented backs- I'd be happy to add any of them to our offense. But are they that much better than Lacey or Hill or Bell, none of whom teams were high enough on to take in the 1st? That's what I think about when I see these analysts putting two or sometimes three RBs in the 1st round of their mock drafts.

Maybe this is the year that gets switched up, though, you never know...

 

[lionstop1]

While I think Lacey, Hill and Bell are good players, I think this class is way better than them, especially if Gurley doesn't get hurt. Plus, I think those guys are some of the reason why teams might consider taking one in the first round. What are the teams that like these guys that are too far down in the second round supposed to do to get them? If a team has Gordon ranked the 23rd best player and they pick at 28, they cant just think that he will be available in the second round.

In Detroit's case, assuming that Suh is back and they lose Bush, and Gordon or Coleman are available, I see a good investment there considering what the Lions want to do on offense. Thats not to say they cant do it in the later rounds, I just hope they dont think like most fans and not draft a RB early because of the trend.

 

[Gulf of Brazil]

the way I look at this draft, many pundits are claiming a deep RB/DT/CB class but I don't see many prospects, at any of those position's, that are all that appealing once you get past the top 3-5. JMO. Hence, if you want one of the top prospects, you'll have to do some maneuvering (up/back) or take them earlier than you might want to or you'll lose out on the opportunity to draft who best fits. IMO.

example... best DT's Williams (USC) gone, Shelton (WAS) gone, M. Brown (TEX) most likely gone, Goldman (FSU) most likely gone... before pick #23.... same with CB's Trae Waynes maybe PJ Williams... then you're left with T's that may possibly be gone early 2nd rd Bennett (tOSU) or Carl Davis (IWA)

same for the top 3 RB's ... most likely long gone before 2nd rd pick #54

 

[Gulf of Brazil]

^^^ you got to pick your poison, take them earlier than some might expect, lose out on them, or trade up from next rd, while losing other later or future picks

 

[Gulf of Brazil]

this is nothing more than speculation, when I read this article....... but.... you know how draft speculation begins... the hype


Todd Gurley potential first-round target for Patriots, Seahawks - NFL.com


and he's coming off an ACL repair...


So I'd think a now healthy Gordon or Coleman would come before Gurley, IMO

 

[Gulf of Brazil]

gotta respect this quote at the bottom to a degree


The draft perspective from a conference champion's standpoint just isn't the same as that of a club with a top-10 pick. At the least, they have the luxury of drafting more for value and less to plug an area of dire need. And who could argue with the value Gurley would bring at the end of the first round? Jeremiah currently ranks Gurley as the draft's No. 14 talent.


The rich, very possibly, get Gurley.

 

[lionstop1]

Blue,

Excellent post and I agree 100 percent. Its all speculation but at this very moment I see #23 being right in line where those RBs start offering this value we speak of. Nobody can convice me that the Pats or Seattle or anyone else wouldnt think about these guys IF the value is great. Neither team is done with their SB runs so adding a young, premeire RB would be good.

 

[tpaulus_2]

While I think Lacey, Hill and Bell are good players, I think this class is way better than them, especially if Gurley doesn't get hurt. Plus, I think those guys are some of the reason why teams might consider taking one in the first round. What are the teams that like these guys that are too far down in the second round supposed to do to get them? If a team has Gordon ranked the 23rd best player and they pick at 28, they cant just think that he will be available in the second round.

In Detroit's case, assuming that Suh is back and they lose Bush, and Gordon or Coleman are available, I see a good investment there considering what the Lions want to do on offense. Thats not to say they cant do it in the later rounds, I just hope they dont think like most fans and not draft a RB early because of the trend.

I like all three of this year's top backs, but you're clearly higher on them then I am to say that they're way better than Hill, Lacy, and especially Le'Veon Bell. Bell had 2,215 total yards from scrimmage this season, which is the 22nd most productive season all-time. That's outstanding production and a benchmark any of the backs in this upcoming draft would be hard-pressed to match or break.

If any of the three we're discussing are simply just as productive as Lacy or Hill, then they'd be well worth our 1st round pick. Lacy has started his career with back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons, a 4.4 yard average, and 24 total TDs. That's 1st round production. Hill would be an ideal fit in our offense. With the weapons we have in the passing game, a big hammer like him busting up the middle would give defenses fits. He averaged 5.1 YPC on his way to an 1,100 yard rookie season.

I'm not saying Coleman, Gurley, and/or Gordon won't do as good or better, I just think you might be under-selling these three young backs who, in my opinion, are emerging as some of the next wave of the top backs in the league. If we draft any back at #23 this year and he's as productive as these guys, then we did great on that one.

I do agree with your premise that the talent and production of recent second round backs may spur a team to take a guy earlier in hopes of getting a top back, though.

 

[tpaulus_2]

Here's some food for thought:

Thirteen running backs cracked 1,000 yards this year in the NFL. Only one, Marshawn Lynch, was a 1st round pick.

Of the top twenty RBs this season, only three, Lynch, Mark Ingram, and Jonathan Stewart, were drafted in the 1st round.