Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gianmarco

***Official Melvin "Flash" Gordon*** Thread of Love

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Raptors409 said:

I’ve got him in both my Dynasty Leagues. Not sure why you don’t pay the guy.

Great character and production. Rivers is on his back 9 and you want to surround him with as much talent as you can if you think you have a chance to win a SB.

...and if you don’t, I don’t know why you’re paying Rivers all that money in the first place.

I agree that Gordon has great character and has provided great production. I agree that the team should surround Rivers with as much talent as possible to make a run at the Super Bowl.

The Chargers are going spend about the same amount on talent whether or not they extend Gordon. The question is whether the money is better spent on Gordon or on players at other positions. I'd vote for other positions for a couple reasons: (1) Austin Ekeler and Justin Jackson aren't as good as Gordon, but they're still good. And (2) the difference between a great running back and a good one means a lot less, in terms of expected team wins, than the difference between a great cornerback or linebacker or offensive tackle or wide receiver and a good one. Running backs get a lot of attention from fans and fantasy owners because they have the ball in their hands a lot and score a lot of points. They're extremely visible. But in terms of winning games, star running backs don't seem as important as stars at many other positions, so that's not where teams should necessarily spend large portions of their salary caps. JMHO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

I agree that Gordon has great character and has provided great production. I agree that the team should surround Rivers with as much talent as possible to make a run at the Super Bowl.

The Chargers are going spend about the same amount on talent whether or not they extend Gordon. The question is whether the money is better spent on Gordon or on players at other positions. I'd vote for other positions for a couple reasons: (1) Austin Ekeler and Justin Jackson aren't as good as Gordon, but they're still good. And (2) the difference between a great running back and a good one means a lot less, in terms of expected team wins, than the difference between a great cornerback or linebacker or offensive tackle or wide receiver and a good one. Running backs get a lot of attention from fans and fantasy owners because they have the ball in their hands a lot and score a lot of points. They're extremely visible. But in terms of winning games, star running backs don't seem as important as stars at many other positions, so that's not where teams should necessarily spend large portions of their salary caps. JMHO.

If the decision was in April and it was between Gordon and all the other running backs on the market, his value would be lower.  Instead, it's between Gordon and ekeler/ etc. That's leverage for Gordon - i think most of us agree that Gordon is better than that tandem, including the chargers, who have made an offer to increase the salary of a holdout player under contract.  

So the first vector of the decision is, are they better with him or without him.  The second is, are they better with or without other players. And there i probably agree with you. The difference between Gordon and ekeler may be less than the difference between hunter Henry and their next best tight end option.  Then again, the chargers spent a higher pick on Gordon, are paying him more money and are talking extension with him first, so that's not necessarily true.

But let's assume it is. Is there a third vector?  Or is the decision between ekeler/henry and Gordon/scrub tight end in 2021?

The third vector is between cap discipline and mortgaging the future.  And they should mortgage.  

If this were the 2009 and rivers had a decade plus left, i would value cap discipline more because my goal would be to win as much as possible over the next decade.  But this is close to the end of his career. Rivers probably isn't playing in 2023, and his play may drop off before then,  and they're currently a 12 win caliber team.  In 2023 they will likely be searching for a quarterback.  So their goal should be to win as much as possible now.  

And they have access to cap money if they want it. Give rivers a multi year extension with a huge signing bonus, low salary and extra years he'll never actually see.  You can borrow a lot of money from a veteran quarterback if you're trying to win.  The chargers are just getting started.  

That doesn't mean they should pay everyone way more than they're worth.  What it does mean, though, is that a top player like Gordon has leverage if he holds out at this point in the year because he knows his value is higher in August 2019 than April 2020, and that the team should be more willing to pay him in 2019 than they would have been in 2009. So even though he's asking for more than what the market thinks he's worth, the chargers really should be willing to pay him a premium because he's right.  

I don't disagree with them preaching cap discipline, but they really should - and almost certainly will - end up offering him more than his "value". 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

If the decision was in April and it was between Gordon and all the other running backs on the market, his value would be lower.  Instead, it's between Gordon and ekeler/ etc. That's leverage for Gordon - i think most of us agree that Gordon is better than that tandem, including the chargers, who have made an offer to increase the salary of a holdout player under contract.  

So the first vector of the decision is, are they better with him or without him.  The second is, are they better with or without other players. And there i probably agree with you. The difference between Gordon and ekeler may be less than the difference between hunter Henry and their next best tight end option.  Then again, the chargers spent a higher pick on Gordon, are paying him more money and are talking extension with him first, so that's not necessarily true.

But let's assume it is. Is there a third vector?  Or is the decision between ekeler/henry and Gordon/scrub tight end in 2021?

The third vector is between cap discipline and mortgaging the future.  And they should mortgage.  

If this were the 2009 and rivers had a decade plus left, i would value cap discipline more because my goal would be to win as much as possible over the next decade.  But this is close to the end of his career. Rivers probably isn't playing in 2023, and his play may drop off before then,  and they're currently a 12 win caliber team.  In 2023 they will likely be searching for a quarterback.  So their goal should be to win as much as possible now.  

And they have access to cap money if they want it. Give rivers a multi year extension with a huge signing bonus, low salary and extra years he'll never actually see.  You can borrow a lot of money from a veteran quarterback if you're trying to win.  The chargers are just getting started.  

That doesn't mean they should pay everyone way more than they're worth.  What it does mean, though, is that a top player like Gordon has leverage if he holds out at this point in the year because he knows his value is higher in August 2019 than April 2020, and that the team should be more willing to pay him in 2019 than they would have been in 2009. So even though he's asking for more than what the market thinks he's worth, the chargers really should be willing to pay him a premium because he's right.  

I don't disagree with them preaching cap discipline, but they really should - and almost certainly will - end up offering him more than his "value". 

Have to factor in teams have to consider if they give in too much, what other players will think next time they want more money. So decision not made in a vacuum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

If the decision was in April and it was between Gordon and all the other running backs on the market, his value would be lower.  Instead, it's between Gordon and ekeler/ etc. That's leverage for Gordon - i think most of us agree that Gordon is better than that tandem, including the chargers, who have made an offer to increase the salary of a holdout player under contract.  

So the first vector of the decision is, are they better with him or without him.  The second is, are they better with or without other players. And there i probably agree with you. The difference between Gordon and ekeler may be less than the difference between hunter Henry and their next best tight end option.  Then again, the chargers spent a higher pick on Gordon, are paying him more money and are talking extension with him first, so that's not necessarily true.

But let's assume it is. Is there a third vector?  Or is the decision between ekeler/henry and Gordon/scrub tight end in 2021?

The third vector is between cap discipline and mortgaging the future.  And they should mortgage.  

If this were the 2009 and rivers had a decade plus left, i would value cap discipline more because my goal would be to win as much as possible over the next decade.  But this is close to the end of his career. Rivers probably isn't playing in 2023, and his play may drop off before then,  and they're currently a 12 win caliber team.  In 2023 they will likely be searching for a quarterback.  So their goal should be to win as much as possible now.  

And they have access to cap money if they want it. Give rivers a multi year extension with a huge signing bonus, low salary and extra years he'll never actually see.  You can borrow a lot of money from a veteran quarterback if you're trying to win.  The chargers are just getting started.  

That doesn't mean they should pay everyone way more than they're worth.  What it does mean, though, is that a top player like Gordon has leverage if he holds out at this point in the year because he knows his value is higher in August 2019 than April 2020, and that the team should be more willing to pay him in 2019 than they would have been in 2009. So even though he's asking for more than what the market thinks he's worth, the chargers really should be willing to pay him a premium because he's right.  

I don't disagree with them preaching cap discipline, but they really should - and almost certainly will - end up offering him more than his "value". 

I agree with all this.   In addition, there is another factor at play.   The Chargers need to win and win soon in order to build a fan base in LA before they move into the new stadium.   Right now they are having trouble selling out a 30K seat soccer stadium.   Now is not the time for fiscal responsibility.  Making news by overpaying Gordon will sell a lot more tickets than making news by refusing to pay him will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bostonfred said:

Those are just recent examples off the top of my head.  I'm sure there's others.  I understand that they're not all perfect analogies to this situation and that there  may be other examples of teams doing fine without an elite back.  

It doesn't change the fact that losing a top running back is really bad for a good team and can easily contribute to a 12 win team missing the playoffs the following year.

Some of your examples are terrible (PIT, BUF are obvious, didn't really look closely at the others after those). Also, you are treating year over year results as if the RB was the only change, which obviously was not true in any one of your examples. And you brought up a very small sample size.

For these reasons, I disagree with your bolded conclusion. The part after that - losing a top RB can contribute to a playoff team missing the playoffs - is obviously true, but it is as generic as it gets. I mean, losing a top player at any position can contribute to that, so that fact isn't particularly relevant.

56 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

And they have access to cap money if they want it. Give rivers a multi year extension with a huge signing bonus, low salary and extra years he'll never actually see.  You can borrow a lot of money from a veteran quarterback if you're trying to win.

This is false unless you assume a very significant discount from Rivers, mainly because they have already borrowed money from Rivers twice. $7.5M of his cap hit in 2019 is from previous restructurings to help the team's cap. He also still has $4.5M remaining from the signing bonus for his 2015 contract. All of that must hit the cap in 2019, regardless of whether or not he is extended. The going rate for a QB of Rivers' caliber who signs a new contract is in the neighborhood of $25M to $30M per year with substantial guaranteed money. You advocate giving him a "huge" signing bonus. What does that come to, $10M+ per year? Now give him just $1M in salary this year. Boom, we are at $22M+ in 2019 cap hit. Compare that to his current 2019 cap hit of $23M. It doesn't work the way you suggest.

1 hour ago, bostonfred said:

I don't disagree with them preaching cap discipline, but they really should - and almost certainly will - end up offering him more than his "value". 

An issue with this is that next year Bosa is set to play on a 5th year option. If they do this for Gordon, they will have to pay more for Bosa next year. Then they will face Mike Williams the year after. Then James the year after that. Cap discipline matters here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bostonfred said:

Pittsburgh 2017 13-3, made playoffs

Pittsburgh 2018 9-6-1 missed playoffs

(bell may be better than Gordon, but Conner played better than Ekeler)

Bills 2017 9-7, made playoffs

Bills 2018 6-10... McCoy went from 1586 total yards to 752. 

Cowboys have made the playoffs 2 of the last 3 years.  Which one did Zeke miss time? 

Jaguars 2017 playoffs with a healthy fournette.  2018 can't be blamed on fournette - they were 3-5 with him and 2-6 without.  

How did the rams look before and after Gurley got hurt?  

2014 Seahawks with lynch were 12-4, won the division and went to the superbowl.  2015 with Thomas Rawls they still won 10 games, made thewildcard spot and lost in the division round of the playoffs.

Those are just recent examples off the top of my head.  I'm sure there's others.  I understand that they're not all perfect analogies to this situation and that there  may be other examples of teams doing fine without an elite back.  

It doesn't change the fact that losing a top running back is really bad for a good team and can easily contribute to a 12 win team missing the playoffs the following year.

I think its a massive oversimplification to think that RB made a huge impact for any of those teams. 

The Steelers offense was actually better in 2018 than 2017, the defense missed Ryan Shazier, and they lost a lot of close games because Boswell suddenly forgot how to kick, after being a pro bowl candidate before. 

The Bills switched to a rookie QB, who also missed games, and had multiple Nathan Peterman starts, which may or may not be better than starting you or I at QB, its an auto loss either way. 

Zeke playing was only a small piece of the puzzle in Dallas. The health of Tyron Smith, Jaylon Smith, the drafting of Vander Esch and trade for Cooper, were all more important than having Zeke back. The run game barely missed him when he was out, its just the production was split between multiple guys, guys who collectively had a higher YPC than Elliott no less. 2016 had a healthy Sean Lee, at an all-pro level, o-line health, and a still useful(though declining) Dez Bryant.

The Jags were powered mostly by an inordinate amount of defensive TD's, and turnovers. 

The Rams missed Cooper Kupp a hell of a lot more than Gurley. They went to the Super Bowl anyway.

Seattle was arguably a better team in 2015, they just ran into a Panthers team who was better than anybody in the NFC was in 2014. The offense was better in 2015 than 2014.

My point being, while yes, these teams all missed or had underperforming RB's, ultimately their downfalls were elsewhere, and I don't see that applying to the Chargers right now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Some of your examples are terrible

which obviously was not true

And you brought up a very small sample size.

obviously true, but it is as generic as it gets.

that fact isn't particularly relevant.

This is false

I enjoy your contributions on topics you're knowledgeable about but i would prefer you don't quote me or engage me directly anymore because I spend my time here to enjoy discussing things with friends and i don't find your style very friendly when you're talking to me. Too many years of Manning vs Brady.  I haven't always been respectful with you either and for that i apologize.  You seem to be able to play nice with other people, please do that instead.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

I enjoy your contributions on topics you're knowledgeable about but i would prefer you don't quote me or engage me directly anymore because I spend my time here to enjoy discussing things with friends and i don't find your style very friendly when you're talking to me. Too many years of Manning vs Brady.  I haven't always been respectful with you either and for that i apologize.  You seem to be able to play nice with other people, please do that instead.  

I too enjoy most of your posts. Even posts I disagree with, because they usually either contain interesting and useful information or stimulate good conversation or both.

I'm sorry that you feel this way. There was no disrespect in my post. Disagreement does not equal disrespect. Nothing I posted was insulting or disrespectful. Sometimes written words come across different than the same words would in verbal conversation, especially among iFriends, though I suppose you made it clear here that you wouldn't put me in that group.

That said, I am interested in this conversation and will post about it when I feel compelled to post, whether that is to respond to you or otherwise. You can feel free to ignore my posts if you like.

:shrug: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, travdogg said:

My point being, while yes, these teams all missed or had underperforming RB's, ultimately their downfalls were elsewhere, and I don't see that applying to the Chargers right now.

You're right, in the real world we can't isolate every injury to see which one is the most important, and all of those other teams had other injuries.  And the chargers will have injuries this year too. The healthiest teams at the end of year tend to do better.  If they fail to get Gordon on the field, it's like startinthe year with an injury to a star player. And a lot of teams recently have had difficulty when they played without their star running backs. 

Can you name some teams that lost a stud running back this late in the year or later and improved? Atlanta maybe? Philly's backfield fell apart and they didn't repeat.  The 49ers planned around McKinnon and he got hurt early but i don't think that was only because of him.  The titans and browns improved when they changed to a better running back, although the browns were obviously more because of Baker. 

I get that the conventional wisdom is that teams can get by without a top running back but I'm struggling to think of examples where a team lost their top back and improved over their previous season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bostonfred said:

Pittsburgh 2017 13-3, made playoffs

Pittsburgh 2018 9-6-1 missed playoffs

(bell may be better than Gordon, but Conner played better than Ekeler)

I don't think the RB position hurt the Steelers last season. Their kicker Boswell did hurt them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day...the way FA is set up is to the disadvantage of an RB.  In order to get to it, they have to release control of their market value via usage patterns.  By the time they do get to FA, they’ve already reached the tipping point in their careers.  The teams know this and the RB’s do too.

The only control they have is to withhold services in a manner that exposes their bodies to the least amount of damage.  Everybody criticized LeVeon saying he couldn’t make up what he passed up with the franchise tag.  But your next NFL contract in never guaranteed, especially RB’s.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, simey said:

I don't think the RB position hurt the Steelers last season. Their kicker Boswell did hurt them.

Conner fumble in Week 1 cost them a win and playoff spot (in retrospect).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, tangfoot said:

Conner fumble in Week 1 cost them a win and playoff spot (in retrospect).

Boswell missed a field goal near the end of the 4th quarter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, bostonfred said:

I get that the conventional wisdom is that teams can get by without a top running back but I'm struggling to think of examples where a team lost their top back and improved over their previous season. 

Vikings, 2014 - Adrian Peterson had been their top rusher for 7 straight years.  Didn't have him that year, went from 5-10-1 to 7-9.  Of course he came back the following year and they went 11-5 as he ran for like 1,500 yards.  Those two examples I guess are a wash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a lot of talk about whether it is worth it for the Chargers to give Gordon extension, but what does this do to fantasy value.  The obvious answer is decline.  Where would you value him now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, smbkrypt24 said:

I see a lot of talk about whether it is worth it for the Chargers to give Gordon extension, but what does this do to fantasy value.  The obvious answer is decline.  Where would you value him now?

It would depend on where he ends up of course but it’s hard to imagine a better spot than the Chargers (although he could see an o-line upgrade in a new place) with his heavy volume and great offense around him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

It would depend on where he ends up of course but it’s hard to imagine a better spot than the Chargers (although he could see an o-line upgrade in a new place) with his heavy volume and great offense around him.

So today right now.  What is the downgrade.  Where is he in your rankings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, smbkrypt24 said:

So today right now.  What is the downgrade.  Where is he in your rankings?

He’d move out of the top 10 for me for sure. I don’t have everything in front of me but a rough guess would be RB13-15.

I’m getting the feeling he misses a lot of games this season and heads elsewhere next year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/2/2019 at 1:29 PM, tangfoot said:

Conner fumble in Week 1 cost them a win and playoff spot (in retrospect).

Connor being hurt down the stretch hurt them when they had to turn to Samuels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Houston Chronicle's John McClain reports the Texans are not interested in trading for Melvin Gordon.

The Texans shockingly cut backup D'Onta Foreman on Sunday, sparking speculation they were in the market for Gordon. McClain shoots that speculation down, however, reporting the Texans are only interested in a backup for Lamar Miller. The Chargers also have not shown any signs they are willing to move Gordon. At this point, it would be a surprise if Gordon ended up in Houston.

RELATED: 

Lamar Miller

, Houston Texans

SOURCE: John McClain on Twitter

Aug 5, 2019, 10:01 AM ET

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

He’d move out of the top 10 for me for sure. I don’t have everything in front of me but a rough guess would be RB13-15.

I’m getting the feeling he misses a lot of games this season and heads elsewhere next year. 

I may be more risk averse than you are, but I'd probably have Gordon around RB20. Even if he comes back, what kind of shape will he be in? Its possible even if Gordon plays out this final year, Ekeler will have a bigger role than he has the last 2 seasons. 

For comparisons sake, I'd probably have Ekeler as a top-30 RB right now. 

I 100% agree that Gordon is likely to miss games this year, and leave next year. Of course, I never thought he was going to be a Charger beyond his rookie deal. Not with his knees, and their team build.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, smbkrypt24 said:

So today right now.  What is the downgrade.  Where is he in your rankings?

I do a partial keeper auction league.

Gordon went for low 50s last year.

Because I think he will sign at some point (perhaps after missing a couple of games), I'd pay up to $20 for him. In my league, that is an unlikely winning bid. But- then again, auctions are different than drafts.

In a hypothetical dynasty draft, I'm still bullish enough to take him towards the back end of round 2. Again, that is unlikely to be enough.

In redraft- back end of round 3. Would need two building blocks before I start trading in hypothetical reporting dates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took him at 29 overall last night and today I kind of feel uncomfortable with it. Not sure I would do that if I was drafting today. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2019 at 4:35 PM, travdogg said:

I'd disagree with all of this. They easily make the playoffs without Gordon. They went 4-0 without him last year, No RB is making a 12-4 team a non playoff team. It maybe costs them 1 game, maybe. KC took a big step backward this offseason on defense and possibly a small one on the o-line, plus now there is a year of tape on Mahomes. I'd bet on the Chargers winning the division regardless of Gordon's status. Hell, without Gordon, they are still better than KC at RB, maybe by quite a bit.

There is also no reason to assume Rivers doesn't hang around for 3-4 more years. He doesn't take a ton of hits, he doesn't leave the pocket, and he's still throwing a very good deep ball. 

The 3rd would be a year earlier and a lot higher than a compensatory pick. It would also allow the Chargers to get to work on extensions earlier with an extra 5.6 million to play with. 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but is a 3rd comp pick a lock? I thought those were based on salary, and its very possible that a RB doesn't have a top one. 

I know this is a Gordon thread, not a Chiefs thread but hard to see how the 31st ranked D could have taken a big step backwards. Regression works both ways and their historically bad D is probably not going to be as historically bad (not to say it will be good).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, greenline said:

I took him at 29 overall last night and today I kind of feel uncomfortable with it. Not sure I would do that if I was drafting today. 

Right. It's like voluntarily signing up for what Leonard Fournette did to owner's last year (sans injury). Guy is undraftable, atm. Or at least to me, he's getting drafted a Round or 2 too early. Since the downside is he either doesn't play until playoffs have well been determined or doesn't play at all.

For your sake, I'm hoping the Chargers pony up the cashola so you got a steal!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, HULLOBUDMAN said:

I know this is a Gordon thread, not a Chiefs thread but hard to see how the 31st ranked D could have taken a big step backwards. Regression works both ways and their historically bad D is probably not going to be as historically bad (not to say it will be good).

 

The Chiefs D can certainly take a step backward. While they were 31st in yards allowed, they led the NFL in sacks, and were 2nd in D/ST TD's. Its very easy to see them being a worse defense, while also giving up fewer yards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2019 at 9:42 PM, Dr. Octopus said:

He’d move out of the top 10 for me for sure. I don’t have everything in front of me but a rough guess would be RB13-15.

I’m getting the feeling he misses a lot of games this season and heads elsewhere next year. 

As things stand right now he's going RB#10.

It's worth noting.....

K.Johnson(DET)#15

D.Freeman(ATL)#16

M.Mack(IND)#18

J.Jacobs(OAK)#19

D.Henry(TEN)#20

M.Ingram(BAL)#22

C.Carson(SEA)#25

.... I wonder how far he falls if he doesn't show up by the 20th of August? The 1st of September? It would be less concerning if he hadn't referenced L.Bell several time in the past. Or if the chargers didn't have a track record of playing hard ball in these situations. It's strange to me so many people seem to trust the Gordon situation more than Carson right now.

For the record I said all along that the chargers would cave, but imo by offering him $10M when they didn't have to they already did cave and it still wasn't good enough for Gordon. If Gordon really is waiting for that L.Bell-type-deal he's going to be waiting for a very, very long time. The chargers aren't a legit SB contender with that OL even with Gordon. Some folks need to go back and re-watch that playoff game in NE if they think the chargers are on the cusp of a SB. The ONLY team that would give Gordon the workload he's needed to be a ProBowler is TB and they don't have nearly the cap room needed to make Gordon happy even if they wanted to acquire him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

ESPN's Adam Schefter reports holdout RB Melvin Gordon is prepared to sit out regular season games if he does not have a new before Week 1.

Per Schefter, the sides have "not made progress." Contract-year Gordon has seemed to be the most serious of this summer's holdouts. Le'Veon Bell is still more the exception than the rule, but it would be silly not to be worried about Gordon's Week 1 status. There is a real chance he is still away from the team. Austin Ekeler would start and be spelled by Justin Jackson.

SOURCE: Adam Schefter on Twitter

Aug 15, 2019, 7:37 PM ET

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recent articles:

Why you can't compare the Ezekiel Elliott and Melvin Gordon holdouts to Le'Veon Bell's

Melvin Gordon holdout gets more and more expensive

According to the second article, he could be fined $30K per day for every day of training camp he missed. Chargers training camp this year ran from July 25 to August 16, a total of 23 days. So his total fines from missed training camp could be $690K.

According to that same article, he could be fined as much as $329K per preseason game he misses. So he is already subject to more than $1M in fines and about to miss another preseason game, which will push his potential fines above $1.3M.

So if he were to holdout and report after 8 regular season games, as some have speculated he could do, he would be subject to fines of $690K + $329K x 4 preseason games + $329K x 8 regular season games = $4.638M. If he reported after week 8 without a new deal and the team fined him the full amount, he would end up getting paid just $967K for the final 9 weeks of the regular season.

I realize that teams often waive fines if and when they come to terms with holdout players, so perhaps the threat of fines doesn't matter much to Gordon and isn't a real factor in this situation.

One thing I'm unclear on. Game-related fines are withheld from game checks and go to the NFL for a player fund. Does anyone know if that is the case for holding out and missing games? The article characterizes the $329K mentioned above as a fine. If that is the case, then isn't it true that the team saves no cash and also gets no cap relief if they uphold the fines? If so, I suppose I can see why the team has little motivation to uphold the fines, especially since if Gordon returns, they will want him to have as positive an attitude as possible given the situation in order to make a strong contribution to a possible deep playoff run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Recent articles:

Why you can't compare the Ezekiel Elliott and Melvin Gordon holdouts to Le'Veon Bell's

Melvin Gordon holdout gets more and more expensive

According to the second article, he could be fined $30K per day for every day of training camp he missed. Chargers training camp this year ran from July 25 to August 16, a total of 23 days. So his total fines from missed training camp could be $690K.

According to that same article, he could be fined as much as $329K per preseason game he misses. So he is already subject to more than $1M in fines and about to miss another preseason game, which will push his potential fines above $1.3M.

So if he were to holdout and report after 8 regular season games, as some have speculated he could do, he would be subject to fines of $690K + $329K x 4 preseason games + $329K x 8 regular season games = $4.638M. If he reported after week 8 without a new deal and the team fined him the full amount, he would end up getting paid just $967K for the final 9 weeks of the regular season.

I realize that teams often waive fines if and when they come to terms with holdout players, so perhaps the threat of fines doesn't matter much to Gordon and isn't a real factor in this situation.

One thing I'm unclear on. Game-related fines are withheld from game checks and go to the NFL for a player fund. Does anyone know if that is the case for holding out and missing games? The article characterizes the $329K mentioned above as a fine. If that is the case, then isn't it true that the team saves no cash and also gets no cap relief if they uphold the fines? If so, I suppose I can see why the team has little motivation to uphold the fines, especially since if Gordon returns, they will want him to have as positive an attitude as possible given the situation in order to make a strong contribution to a possible deep playoff run.

I can see where he thinks sitting out for a deal is better because paying fines would be worth it if he gets some guaranteed money with a new contract. Bell got $25m. he’s hoping for the same or more. 

He forgot that he’s negotiating with the Chargers though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did a $250 FFPC best ball draft a couple days back, ended up taking Gordon at 40 overall and RB22, felt like it was worth it at that point. Someone sniped Ekeler from me at 60 overall though, so I didn't get handcuff him.

Edited by mcintyre1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, mcintyre1 said:

Did a $250 FFPC best ball draft a couple days back, ended up taking Gordon at 40 overall and RB22, felt like it was worth it at that point. Someone sniped Ekeler from me at 60 overall though, so I didn't get handcuff him.

In a $250 BB draft right now and he's still on the board at 4.09. He's gonna be there a while.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Melvin is getting poor career advice

I disagree.  The violent way he runs and his injury history he's not going to have a long NFL career.  Putting off his big deal another year only hurts him imo.  The current CBA is terrible for RB's who generally have short shelf lives.  They shouldn't be under their rookie deal for essentially 5 years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pipes said:

I disagree.  The violent way he runs and his injury history he's not going to have a long NFL career.  Putting off his big deal another year only hurts him imo.  The current CBA is terrible for RB's who generally have short shelf lives.  They shouldn't be under their rookie deal for essentially 5 years. 

He still has to play games this year, and nobody is giving him big money next year.   His best bet was to show that he’s invaluable to this team and get them to either a) pick up his 5th year option or b) extend him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

He still has to play games this year, and nobody is giving him big money next year.   His best bet was to show that he’s invaluable to this team and get them to either a) pick up his 5th year option or b) extend him.

They did that.  May of 2018.  He then went out and got 1,375 yards from scrimmage and 14 TDs in 12 games.  That's why he's holding out. 

Edited by matttyl
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

He still has to play games this year, and nobody is giving him big money next year.   His best bet was to show that he’s invaluable to this team and get them to either a) pick up his 5th year option or b) extend him.

How do you know this?  I know he won't get Leveon Bell money but someone will likely pay him at least a decent contract as long as he doesn't tear an acl or some other catastrophic injury...hench the holdout.  He'll report halfway through the season to get his 5th year unlike Leveon did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Alex P Keaton said:

He still has to play games this year, and nobody is giving him big money next year.   His best bet was to show that he’s invaluable to this team and get them to either a) pick up his 5th year option or b) extend him.

I agree with this.  Dude is a good back, but he is just not in the same league as Bell, Gurley, Saquon, etc.  I think LAC understands this, and know they can perform really well with J Jax and Ekeler (undefeated in 4 games last year).

First, while I agree that there is no doubt that the CBA is unkind to rookie RBs, it is still the governing contract.  Second, the value of a player is determined by the market.  Unfortunately for Gordon, he is entering his 5th year with an injury history and rightly or wrongly many perceive a at least a portion of his value as the LAC system and offense.  Not hearing much in the way of interest in a trade opportunity from the daily news.  Seriously, who is going to guarantee Melvin $13 Million a year + give up a meaningful draft pick?  HOU just took Duke for $3 Million in guaranteed 2019 money.  Not saying Duke is Melvin, but Duke is a good back and man that is a HUGE spread.  Miller is costing them $7M in 2019 cap space.  So Duke + Miller = Melvin offer on the table.  Plus LAC has JJAX and Ekeler, who they have for $1.3M combined.  Third, since he won't be a UFA if he sits the entire year, they can toll his contract and he will basically be in the same position next year if he doesn't play.  That's a horrible position to be in; LAC could totally screw him if he comes back in like Week 10 (see next point).  Fourth, as has been pointed out, the opportunity cost of forgone salary at $10 Million / year + the fines he is accruing is gut wrenching (at least to me).  $10 Million is a lot of money and I think squarely puts him compensation wise in that "extremely-good-but-not-elite" tier.  

So, yeah, I see LAC as having all the leverage, this stunt costing Melvin a ton of money - and he is getting some really bad advice.  I think he is back sooner rather than later, so I will take him in the 4th round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he really was offered a deal better than Freeman as reported, and declined it, then yes - he is getting bad advice.  If it's a crap deal and doesn't have the guaranteed money, I can't argue with what he's doing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RB's basically get only 1 big contract in their entire career - their second contract.  By the time the third rolls around, they are usually toast.  MG is simply playing the odds that he can stay healthy for the second half of 2019.  If he can, SOMEONE will pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chargers have demonstrated commitment to Gordon at least 4 times:

  1. By trading up to draft him with their 2015 first round pick and giving up 2 additional picks to do so.
  2. Sticking with him as their primary RB after a disastrous rookie season, in which he averaged 3.5 ypc and 5.8 ypr, scored 0 TDs, had 6 fumbles, and missed 2 games.
  3. Picking up his 5th year option in May 2018 despite the fact that his career ypc was 3.8, he had only played every game in 1 of 3 seasons, and he had a history of multiple knee injuries, including microfracture surgery in the 2016 offseason.
  4. Reportedly offering him a contract this offseason that would pay him an average of $10M per season.

#2 may not mean much since he was only 1 year removed from being their first round draft pick.

To the extent that "only" earning $5.6M in a football season can be viewed as unfortunate, it is unfortunate for Gordon that he chose to play the RB position and that the NFLPA agreed to the rules that are currently in place relating to salary cap, 5th year options, etc. But those are realities of his chosen profession.

It has been reported that:

  • The Chargers have offered a deal a bit better than Freeman's contract: 5 years, $41.25M, $15M signing bonus, $22M guaranteed.
  • Gordon wants a contract like David Johnson's: 3 years, $39M, $12M signing bonus, $31.9M guaranteed. 
  • The Chargers have offered an average of $10M per year.
  • The Chargers and Gordon are $2M to $3M apart.

So one might speculate that the Chargers have offered him something like 4 years, $40M, $12M signing bonus, $22M guaranteed, where the guarantee would cover 2019 and 2020 salary plus signing bonus, meaning the team could get out after 2020 with a $6M dead cap hit or after 2021 with a $3M cap hit.

If that is close to what they have offered, IMO the best choice for Gordon would be to take the Chargers' offer. I suspect he will get more total money and more total guaranteed money if he does that rather than holding out for some number of regular season games this year and then hitting the free agent market next offseason.

As a Chargers fan, I hope he doesn't take it and walks after this season. The way the rules are structured, I don't want the Chargers to spend $10M per year on a single RB, especially not one with an extensive injury history. I'd much rather them draft another RB next year and re-sign Ekeler to a much lower deal.

Edited by Just Win Baby
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

That's a good article. It doesn't address the question of whether a player can miss more than half a season without tolling (an open question that hasn't precisely been litigated, which is perhaps why the article didn't offer an opinion), but I believe it's correct in everything it does address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What am I missing here?

Gordon subject to $30K in fines per day of missed camp. Plus a weeks worth of reg season pay for every preseason game missed. Making $5.6M, 1/16th of that is $350K. 

So 4 preseason games at $350K a pop and $30K for 28 days (I don’t actually know how many days camp is so I assumed 28) is $2,240,000. 

He has to play 1/2 the year so I’m assuming he will only make 1/2 his salary? That’s $2,800,000. So the difference is $560,000. 

Seems to me the best case scenario for the Chargers which is also the worst case for Melvin is that he reports 1/2 way through the season and they only have to pay him $560K. 

Is there additional fines for skipping reg season games?

If he doesn’t report at all, he owes them $2,240,000? Then will accumulate additional fines next preseason if he’s not reporting.

Chargers hold all the cards here. I’d be giving a deadline to sign the deal or it’s off the table. Melvin has to realize he can’t win.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Patrick the Pirate said:

What am I missing here?

Gordon subject to $30K in fines per day of missed camp. Plus a weeks worth of reg season pay for every preseason game missed. Making $5.6M, 1/16th of that is $350K. 

So 4 preseason games at $350K a pop and $30K for 28 days (I don’t actually know how many days camp is so I assumed 28) is $2,240,000. 

He has to play 1/2 the year so I’m assuming he will only make 1/2 his salary? That’s $2,800,000. So the difference is $560,000. 

Seems to me the best case scenario for the Chargers which is also the worst case for Melvin is that he reports 1/2 way through the season and they only have to pay him $560K. 

Is there additional fines for skipping reg season games?

If he doesn’t report at all, he owes them $2,240,000? Then will accumulate additional fines next preseason if he’s not reporting.

Chargers hold all the cards here. I’d be giving a deadline to sign the deal or it’s off the table. Melvin has to realize he can’t win.

 

That's if the Chargers actually enforce the fines.  Not many teams do that.  I'm hoping that Gordon actually signs the deal he was offered (or something close to it) before the regular season.  It would be a smart move, and immediately give him top 5 money at the position I believe. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, matttyl said:

That's if the Chargers actually enforce the fines.  Not many teams do that.  I'm hoping that Gordon actually signs the deal he was offered (or something close to it) before the regular season.  It would be a smart move, and immediately give him top 5 money at the position I believe. 

If he’s not going to sign their deal then why wouldn’t they enforce the fines? Use that as part of their bargaining. If you don’t sign this deal, show up for the last 8 games and we will run you into the ground for basically free. As stated above, this is the best case scenario for the Chargers. Melvin has to give his all those games because he’s auditioning for free agency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patrick the Pirate said:

If he’s not going to sign their deal then why wouldn’t they enforce the fines? Use that as part of their bargaining. If you don’t sign this deal, show up for the last 8 games and we will run you into the ground for basically free. As stated above, this is the best case scenario for the Chargers. Melvin has to give his all those games because he’s auditioning for free agency. 

Again, most teams show a sign of good faith and say that they won't enforce at least the training camp fines.  I think they have to, and will, enforce the regular season ones.  Not sure how preseason games work, that could be up to the team as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Patrick the Pirate said:

What am I missing here?

Gordon subject to $30K in fines per day of missed camp. Plus a weeks worth of reg season pay for every preseason game missed. Making $5.6M, 1/16th of that is $350K. 

So 4 preseason games at $350K a pop and $30K for 28 days (I don’t actually know how many days camp is so I assumed 28) is $2,240,000. 

He has to play 1/2 the year so I’m assuming he will only make 1/2 his salary? That’s $2,800,000. So the difference is $560,000. 

Seems to me the best case scenario for the Chargers which is also the worst case for Melvin is that he reports 1/2 way through the season and they only have to pay him $560K. 

Is there additional fines for skipping reg season games?

If he doesn’t report at all, he owes them $2,240,000? Then will accumulate additional fines next preseason if he’s not reporting.

Chargers hold all the cards here. I’d be giving a deadline to sign the deal or it’s off the table. Melvin has to realize he can’t win.

 

Agree Patrick.  This is why I am comfortable drafting him.  He has literally zero bargaining power.  Bad career advice from his agent.  The big ? in my mind is if the $10 Million is guaranteed or not.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.