Le'Veon Bell

[BURGH86STEEL]

Do you know he is the only all pro (1 time) runningback in 20 years to start a SB?

Secondary?
2019 T Matthieu
2018 Gilmore
2015 Aquib
2015 Harris
2014 Revis
2013 Richard Sherman
2013 Earl Thomas
2012 Ed Reed
2010 C Woodson
2009 D Sharper (All Pro 10 picks that year)
2008 Troy
2006 Bob Sanders (Short career but AllPro and DPOY)
2005 Troy
2004 Ty Law
2003 Ty Law
2002 Rhonde Barber
2001 R. Woodson

I think one factor you fail to mention is quiet a few of those teams had good pass rushes and defensive units. One CB doesn't make a defensive unit great. I can list DBs that never won a SB. Same can be said for any position.

My stance has always been that there is more than one way or philosophy that wins games and championships in the NFL.

As a fan I want good players at every position within reason. I would never limit the possibility of drafting or resigning a great RB or WR. All depends on the structure of the contract. The same holds true of any position.

[BURGH86STEEL]

It does help.

Having great players from every position helps a team win a championship. Having great 2ndary players isn't the only way to win though.

It's not simply about having those secondary players. It's how the run, defense, pass rush, and pass defense play in unison as one. The 2007 Giants didn't simply defeat the pats because of great secondary play. They put a lot of pressure on Brady to earn that win.

More than one way to win a championship. Games can be won or loss in the trenches.

[NorthCoast]

....

My stance has always been that there is more than one way or philosophy that wins games and championships in the NFL.

.....

I agree with this part.... and the example I always think back to is Trent Freaking Dilfer winning a SB.

[Captain Lemming]

I think one factor you fail to mention is quiet a few of those teams had good pass rushes and defensive units. One CB doesn't make a defensive unit great. I can list DBs that never won a SB. Same can be said for any position.

My stance has always been that there is more than one way or philosophy that wins games and championships in the NFL.

As a fan I want good players at every position within reason. I would never limit the possibility of drafting or resigning a great RB or WR. All depends on the structure of the contract. The same holds true of any position.

You miss my point. I want great players at every position. I want to draft great players at every position. But when signing free agents or extending players elites at certain positions get overpaid. It is a tactical advantage to know that.

You can list great cornerbacks who haven't won a SB? Of course you can. Of course the rest of the team matters. Of course there is the rare Giants or Eagles team that has no elite secondary player.

But you need to value positions differently. Does EVERY SB winner have a great QB? NO. But history says it is the most important position. That is the point.

You mention pass rush. I would break the bank to resign Watt. I would extend elite players at many positions. Not runningback or receiver....especially runningback.

Again look at my list, do the same with all pro runningback. You have a list OF ONE.

[BURGH86STEEL]

I agree with this part.... and the example I always think back to is Trent Freaking Dilfer winning a SB.

Jeff Hosteler, Doug Williams, Joe Flacco, Nick Foles, and Rypian won. All those QB's were not consistently great during their careers. They are the exceptions but it can be done.

[BURGH86STEEL]

You miss my point. I want great players at every position. I want to draft great players at every position. But when signing free agents or extending players elites at certain positions get overpaid. It is a tactical advantage to know that.

You can list great cornerbacks who haven't won a SB? Of course you can. Of course the rest of the team matters. Of course there is the rare Giants or Eagles team that has no elite secondary player.

But you need to value positions differently. Does EVERY SB winner have a great QB? NO. But history says it is the most important position. That is the point.

You mention pass rush. I would break the bank to resign Watt. I would extend elite players at many positions. Not runningback or receiver....especially runningback.

Again look at my list, do the same with all pro runningback. You have a list OF ONE.

There are a lot of factors to consider when building a winner. Different tactics need to be implemented when one tactic can't be put into action. Should a team just give up if they can't implement your philosophy? Should they try to wins in different ways?

If teams can't build a strong defense then they need to take a different approach to win. If a team can't build a strong offense then they have to try and win different ways. The Steelers changed their philosophy last year with Ben injured. Play defense, limit offensive mistakes, keep games close, and hopefully do enough to win. Maybe the Steelers would had made the playoffs last year with a RB like Bell on the team?

All positions get over paid in this era of free agency. None probably worse than the QB position. Some organizations take greater risks. Some organizations prefer to cut their losses with players regardless of the position depending on the situation.

If we count the entire history of the league there will be great RBs on that list. The league is a different place today but RBs have value. RBs don't have as high a value today as they did in the past. There is value for the right RBs depending how they fit into the structure of the team. I keep repeating, contract structure is an important aspect of signing any player.

Hard to believe you would break the bank to resign any player given your stance. I would not break the bank to resign Watt. It all depends on the amount and structure of the contract. Same goes for RBs, WRs, or any other position. It boils down to the value the team places on the player and the structure of the contract. No player is worth franchise QB money except franchise QBs.

The Steelers probably do as good a job as any team placing values on players and resigning them to fair contracts. They kind of make players earn their money.

[feltdizz]

You miss my point. I want great players at every position. I want to draft great players at every position. But when signing free agents or extending players elites at certain positions get overpaid. It is a tactical advantage to know that.

You can list great cornerbacks who haven't won a SB? Of course you can. Of course the rest of the team matters. Of course there is the rare Giants or Eagles team that has no elite secondary player.

But you need to value positions differently. Does EVERY SB winner have a great QB? NO. But history says it is the most important position. That is the point.

You mention pass rush. I would break the bank to resign Watt. I would extend elite players at many positions. Not runningback or receiver....especially runningback.

Again look at my list, do the same with all pro runningback. You have a list OF ONE.

Okay.. so you break the bank to resign Watt and he gets injured like Bosa or we sign Watt, let Dupree go and Watt gets double teamed to death and isn’t as impactful.

Do you cry about his contract limiting us in other areas or just blame other areas for our lack of success if we don’t win SB’s with him on that contract?

paying Bell 14 mill isn’t breaking the bank. That’s been my whole point from the jump.

Teams can throw big money all over the place but as soon as a RB gets a little coin he is the sole reason a team can’t field a competitive squad. Makes no sense.

[BURGH86STEEL]

Okay.. so you break the bank to resign Watt and he gets injured like Bosa or we sign Watt, let Dupree go and Watt gets double teamed to death and isn’t as impactful.

Do you cry about his contract limiting us in other areas or just blame other areas for our lack of success if we don’t win SB’s with him on that contract?

paying Bell 14 mill isn’t breaking the bank. That’s been my whole point from the jump.

Teams can throw big money all over the place but as soon as a RB gets a little coin he is the sole reason a team can’t field a competitive squad. Makes no sense.

I think it's odd that he would break the bank to sign Watt give his stance. Bell was a productive player for the Steelers. I think the reported offer the Steelers gave Bell was fair to Bell and it protected the Steelers. Similar to the way the Titans handled Henry.

Some times teams simply have to win with the players they have until they can get better in other areas.

[Northern_Blitz]

Would you take Henry on the Steelers for the contract he signed with the Titans?

If you let me turn the cap off, of course. Henry is a better RB, but I think Conner is a MUCH better value. And I think we're at a point where we need value in our cap. And it will be worse next year.

I think Ben's cap hit is too high to afford a RB. We're already going to be hurting next year when the cap goes up (and Ben's cap hit ~ doubles).

I don't think we'd give Henry as many touches as he gets in Ten.

And Conner is doing a pretty good job (higher YPC than Henry). Conner is not a better RB than Henry, but he's certainly a better value (with a $5M smaller cap hit).

I really like how our O is constructed this year with lots of good weapons instead of being heavily focused on a single player.

And I don't know who we have to cut to fit the extra $5M under the cap this year. If having Henry on the roster would mean that we wouldn't have been able to fit Bud back in on the tag, I wouldn't want that.

I can see the argument for having an elite back. Even for a team like us where we have a QB with a high salary. Go for broke this year and blow it up next year (which we might have to do anyway).

But we wouldn't give him the touches he gets now (on pace for 350). And we've seen how RBs can get hurt late in the season with workloads like that and the lack of depth their big contracts create can be an issue in the playoffs.

I'm very happy with our O. I'll even be happy with it next year if we feel like it's better to let JuJu walk and use the cap space on the D (with Chase, DJ, and Washington at WR).

[Northern_Blitz]

I think one factor you fail to mention is quiet a few of those teams had good pass rushes and defensive units. One CB doesn't make a defensive unit great. I can list DBs that never won a SB. Same can be said for any position.

My stance has always been that there is more than one way or philosophy that wins games and championships in the NFL.

As a fan I want good players at every position within reason. I would never limit the possibility of drafting or resigning a great RB or WR. All depends on the structure of the contract. The same holds true of any position.

I think the argument here is that if you save a lot of cap room by employing cheap / young RBs and WRs, you have room to get better defensive players.

And a very good QB makes all your skill players on O seem better anyway, so you get better value for the cap $$$ when spending it on D.

This is also why very good QBs on rookie deals is "easy mode" in the NFL. You end up saving > $20M in cap value. And that lets you load up on very good players across your roster.

[BURGH86STEEL]

If you let me turn the cap off, of course. Henry is a better RB, but I think Conner is a MUCH better value. And I think we're at a point where we need value in our cap. And it will be worse next year.

I think Ben's cap hit is too high to afford a RB. We're already going to be hurting next year when the cap goes up (and Ben's cap hit ~ doubles).

I don't think we'd give Henry as many touches as he gets in Ten.

And Conner is doing a pretty good job (higher YPC than Henry). Conner is not a better RB than Henry, but he's certainly a better value (with a $5M smaller cap hit).

I really like how our O is constructed this year with lots of good weapons instead of being heavily focused on a single player.

And I don't know who we have to cut to fit the extra $5M under the cap this year. If having Henry on the roster would mean that we wouldn't have been able to fit Bud back in on the tag, I wouldn't want that.

I can see the argument for having an elite back. Even for a team like us where we have a QB with a high salary. Go for broke this year and blow it up next year (which we might have to do anyway).

But we wouldn't give him the touches he gets now (on pace for 350). And we've seen how RBs can get hurt late in the season with workloads like that and the lack of depth their big contracts create can be an issue in the playoffs.

I'm very happy with our O. I'll even be happy with it next year if we feel like it's better to let JuJu walk and use the cap space on the D (with Chase, DJ, and Washington at WR).

You wouldn't take Henry for the threat and value he provides right now over Conner? Having a back like Henry and the Steelers would find it easier to close out games running the ball. Having a RB like Henry would be like having Bettis again, only faster. Can you say home run threat. Again, the Steelers could make it work depending on the structure of the contract. They were going to make it work with Bell.

Tomlin has a history of giving his "bell cow" RB plenty of touches. Conners touches have probably been reduced because of his history of injuries.

I definitely follow what you guys are saying. I don't discredit that philosophy. Teams continue to value RBs though. Even the Pats invested a 1st round pick in a RB. I think if you have a good RB or WR then you should make a financial effort to keep those player. It all depends on the structures of the contracts. I don't view one philosophy better than another philosophy, only different. Organizations that can develop different philosophies to win have a much better chance of remaining competitive.

I don't think organizations should limit the possible ways they construct rosters. It all depends on the amount and structure of contracts. If you can't win games having great defensive players then you better find ways to win games other ways. The Steelers found ways to win games and remain competitive once their defense fell off.

[NorthCoast]

NFL Running Backs Value Breakdown
By: Gavin Rodriguez | September 26, 2020


An incredibly one-sided debate over whether running backs are an important position in the NFL has raged for quite some time now. All of the data points towards the same conclusion: running backs do not matter. There are two layers to that argument. The first one is that running the ball is simply not effective. Instead of targeting a great running back in order to improve your run game, it is wiser and infinitely cheaper to simply just throw the ball more. The second layer is that even if the run game was effective, a running back is a result of his own environment. It’s not that the running back is not talented, it’s that there is a surplus of talented backs who will put up essentially the same production. When a running back takes a handoff, there are no legitimately discernible skills that separate him from other backs. The difference in applicable skills between a practice squad rookie and a guy like Saquon Barkley is essentially non-existent.

NFL Running Backs Value Breakdown
Receiving Running Backs Matter

The caveat to that is the fact that receiving backs can matter. Generally, running back targets are still not very efficient. However, there is an inherent selection bias to those claims, considering that quarterbacks under duress will tend to dump it down to their running back, lowering efficiency. There is some value to running backs who catch passes. Austin Ekeler and Christian McCaffrey are especially good at this, ranking one and one respectively in PFF receiving grade for running backs since 2017. The below numbers illustrate this.



As shown by those numbers, McCaffrey and Ekeler are especially efficient with a pretty high volume. McCaffrey averages around 0.25 EPA/target while Ekeler averages 0.30. Since 2017, only the Kansas City Chiefs have a higher EPA/dropback than McCaffrey, at 0.262. In regards to rushing the ball, it is obvious that running is not effective. Only two running backs have a positive EPA/rush. One of them is New Orleans Saints standout Alvin Kamara, and the other is Green Bay Packers running back Aaron Jones.

Comparing Environments
From 2017-2019, Jones added around 13.5 expected points when he ran the ball. Kamara, mainly on the back of an incredible 2017 season in which he averaged 6.1 yards per rush, has added around 12.1 expected points. On lower volume, Jones has produced more in the run game than Kamara. But how much of that did he control?

Without Kamara’s production included, the Saints rushing offense cost them 30.58 expected points, which would put Kamara at +42.6. When the Packers didn’t have Jones on the field, they lost 53.11 expected points. With Jones having 13.5 points added, that would put Jones at +66.61, easily the highest total in the NFL.

Pro Football Focus helps confirm this. In terms of run blocking grade, the Packers ranked 20th in 2017, 23rd in 2018, and sixth in 2019. Their average grade was 64.1. While the Packers offensive line is easily the best pass blocking unit in football, arguably a result of an unfair style of play, their run blocking fails to perform at a consistently high level. The Saints, on the other hand, ranked 10th in 2017, 17th in 2018, and fourth in 2019. Overall, their average grade was 67.8, which is a significant over what Green Bay offered.

Last Word
Alvin Kamara and Aaron Jones are the only two running backs that have added positive value in the run game since 2017. Kamara’s value is heavily skewed because of his absurd 2017, and he has cooled off since. Jones, on the other hand, seems to be sustaining his success. Against the Detroit Lions last Sunday, he averaged an absurd 9.3 yards per carry and 0.45 EPA/rush attempt. Despite middling offensive line performance, Jones continues to produce.


Still, it is not like Jones is one of the most valuable assets in the NFL. Despite being the best of the best, he has still only added two touchdowns in surplus value in three full seasons. In an ideal NFL world, Jones would be considered a decent utility player. However, the NFL is not ideal. Teams still run the ball way too much, and it will be a while until that changes. In the mean time, having Jones on the roster, while not the best approach, will result in a huge boost for the offense. The EPA on an average run play is still well below zero, so going from horribly inefficient to somewhat efficient is a significant increase in offensive productivity. In conclusion, Aaron Jones does, in fact, matter

Not sure I am totally on board with this since it is incredibly hard to separate individual positions from team effects.

[feltdizz]

Not sure I am totally on board with this since it is incredibly hard to separate individual positions from team effects.

yeah, that article was written by someone who plays Madden and passes every down and never punts.

[NorthCoast]

yeah, that article was written by someone who plays Madden and passes every down and never punts.

LOL, I think you're right. Even the dude's pic looks like he's a Madden geek

[Northern_Blitz]

You wouldn't take Henry for the threat and value he provides right now over Conner? ...

Not at the difference in cap hit across his contract (which was the question).

So it's not just: Do I want Henry or Conner?

It might be "Do I want Henry and a scrap heap OLB or Conner and Dupree" this year and then maybe "Do I want Henry's cap hit next year to affect resigning JuJu (who we might not be able to hold onto anyway) or fit Watt".

Again, Henry is better than Conner. But I don't think the improvement at RB is worth the increase in cap hit because it will come with a reduction of of talent on D that I think would have more impact than the improvement at RB.

I definitely follow what you guys are saying. I don't discredit that philosophy. Teams continue to value RBs though. Even the Pats invested a 1st round pick in a RB.

I am absolutely in favor of drafting a RB in the 1st round. I think that this is the best way to get very good RB talent at low cap hit. The RB would be on a cheap rookie deal for 4 years, and we could exercise a 5th year option (still undermarket for an elite RB), before tagging for up to 2 years. This is basically what Bell was complaining about (preventing RBs from seeing market value before they start declining). And we didn't even have the option of a 5th year option for him.

I don't think organizations should limit the possible ways they construct rosters.

I don't disagree with you here. I just think that an above average QB makes skill position guys better in a way that is hard to replicate on D. So my priorities would be: (1) do everything possible to get an above average to elite QB, (2) make sure that QB is protected by the O-Line, (3) get impact players on D, and (4) get very good skill players.

Skill players can be important, especially if you have a cheap / not good QB. Otherwise, I'd generally spend on just about anything else first.

Note that I think this priority list can get moved around if we're choosing between bringing back in house guys (who we already know work in our system) and outside UFAs (who we have to pay at or above market value when we don't always know if they fit in our systems).

Obviously, I'm just an arm chair GM. But I think this is how I'd construct a team.