Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
gianmarco

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

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

What is the chance, on a per-game basis, that a starting running back will suffer an injury that affects his future earnings? ACL tears don't seem to have a long-term effect anymore. It would have to be a torn Achilles (and even that's not as bad as it once was) or a compound fracture or dislocated ankle or a life-changing concussion or something along those lines.

There are 512 RB starts each season. How often does a running back suffer an injury so bad that it affects his future earnings? It happened to Robert Edwards 20 years ago, but that wasn't even during an NFL game. It happened to Napolean McCallum 25 years ago. Off the top of my head, I can't think of other injuries to RBs that have been career-ending (since ACL reconstructions have become routine). If we expand to non-RBs, Alex Smith counts, as does Joe Theismann. Darryl Stingley, Dennis Byrd... (But expanding to non-RBs makes the denominator grow as well.)

I'm sure I'm missing some, but let's say there have been 10 examples in the last 20 years. That's about a 0.1% chance per game.

So skipping a game for $330,000 would be worthwhile if Gordon had a 0.1% chance of having his future earnings reduced by ... $330 million.

Even if we bump it up to a 0.5% chance per game, the risk to his future earnings would have to be over $60 million to justify sitting out.

I don't think that's realistic. In purely monetary terms, I think it's pretty clearly -EV to miss games for $330,000 each.

I agree with your overall idea, but it's more than just "career ending" injuries that he's taking into account here.  It's also season ending ones, too.  If he were to report today and play the next few games and have an ACL or similar injury in week 8 and miss the rest of the season - sure he'd still likely find work next year, but at no where near the guaranteed money that he'd receive if he goes into the offseason fully healthy and not recovering from something. 

I'm sure not great examples of this, but at least a few recent ones:

Bilal Powell made over $7m on the Jets the past two seasons.  Was put on IR with a neck issue last year (not career ending) and ended up resigning with the Jets for pretty much vet minimum. 

Crowell set a single game rushing record for the Jets last year, and I believe made $4m for one season of work - had toe injury late in year and had a very small market this past offseason (and then got hurt again)

Ajayi had an ACL last year, couldn't even find work the following year.

Jeremy Hill was the Pats power back last year.  ACL in week 1, can't find work the following year.

Even Adrian Peterson saw a much different market after the 2016 season than he would have had he not had a meniscus injury.  Had it not happened, the Vikings may have exercised their 2017 ($18m) option.  Instead he goes to New Orleans and the Cardinals (where in his first game he had 134 yards and 2 TDs) and then had a 1,000+ yard season on yet another team - so he obviously wasn't done as a player, but the injury (which he did come back from) cost him millions. 

 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Maybe there are a lot of new Ekeler owners in this thread.  Sure, he looks good in 1 game.  Do you think Ekeler is going to make it through the full season getting that amount of carries?  I dont.  He is a great change of pace guy, but he is no Gordon.  If he isn't hurt, Gordon is much better than either of his backups.  Maybe not 10 million better, and that is the issue.

12 carries per game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon gets a full 3 down workload though. Ekeler doesn’t or at least hasn’t yet. One game he had 15 carries through 2.5 quarters. Then he got hurt. The other games without Gordon have been 12, 13, and 12 carries. 

Share this post


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

Do you think Ekeler is going to make it through the full season getting that amount of carries?  I dont.  He is a great change of pace guy, but he is no Gordon.

Well, first of all, Gordon has only made it through a full season in 1 of 4 seasons to date, and we know he won't this season since he already missed a game. Ekeler played a full season in 2017 and missed 2 games last season.

Aside from that, while Ekeler played college football at Western State, clearly far removed from NFL level competition, it is still noteworthy that in 40 games he had 939 rushing attempts (23.5 per game) and 115 receptions (2.9 per game). It is also well known that he is regarded as the strongest player on the Chargers, pound for pound.

So your implication that he can't handle the workload is off base IMO.

Edited by Just Win Baby
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Gordon gets a full 3 down workload though. Ekeler doesn’t or at least hasn’t yet. One game he had 15 carries through 2.5 quarters. Then he got hurt. The other games without Gordon have been 12, 13, and 12 carries. 

Gordon has averaged 19.6 touches per game in his career. Ekeler just had 18 touches in week 1. I don't see a big difference.

There is no way to prove Ekeler can hold up. We will have to see. But there is no real basis to believe he can't hold up just as well as Gordon or better.

Share this post


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

I don't see any reason to believe that Ekeler is less durable than Gordon.

Here's a really good article about Ekeler. It's a great read. I recommend it.

Great article. I'm definitely rooting for the guy and he seems very likeable.  

Share this post


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

Well, first of all, Gordon has only made it through a full season in 1 of 4 seasons to date, and we know he won't this season since he already missed a game. Ekeler played a full season in 2017 and missed 2 games last season.

Aside from that, while Ekeler played college football at Western State, clearly far removed from NFL level competition, it is still noteworthy that in 40 games he had 939 rushing attempts (23.5 per game) and 115 receptions (2.9 per game). It is also well known that he is regarded as the strongest player on the Chargers, pound for pound.

So your implication that he can't handle the workload is off base IMO.

Well, it's all opinions isn't it? I have mine, and you have yours.  Agree to disagree. I stated my thoughts. and I read the article.(which was great, btw) I dont think Ekeler will last with a large workload.  I already stated earlier that this opinion was totally based on my own thoughts from watching film.  

Fantasy wise, I have Gordon (redraft. Bought cheap (auction $4) and do not depend on him. I'd like for him to come back so maybe I can trade him or play him. It wont matter that much though.   Hell be back eventually, and fresh for the playoff hopefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JoeJoe88 said:

How many full seasons has Gordon made it through again? 

Full seasons = 16 games?  If so, more than Zeke (the current highest paid RB) or Fournette (the 8th highest paid RB), and the same as Gurley (the 2nd highest paid RB) and Bell (the 3rd highest paid RB) and Freeman (the 5th highest paid RB) and Barkley (the 6th highest paid RB) and McKinnon (the 7th highest paid RB, currently on the IR).

Share this post


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

Gordon has averaged 19.6 touches per game in his career. Ekeler just had 18 touches in week 1. I don't see a big difference.

There is no way to prove Ekeler can hold up. We will have to see. But there is no real basis to believe he can't hold up just as well as Gordon or better.

Come on man. First off you’re including every game Melvin has played including his rookie year as he worked up to speed, the games he left early with injury, games he was being worked back in from injury, and all kinds of game scripts. You’re comparing that to a one game sample which happened to be a home game as a touchdown favorite that the Chargers led the whole time and went to OT. Ekeler had 15 touches in regulation (9 carries). Second I’m at least comparing Ekeler’s 3 down usage to Melvin’s and the difference is that Melvin gets way more carries. Melvin averaged 17.4 carries per game the past 3 years. I could trump that up even higher by going into that sample and removing games he left for injury/games he got less than his usual work as he worked back from injury but I really don’t need to. We only have 4 games as a starter to use for Ekeler but again he’s had 12, 15, (injured), 13, and 9 (12 if you want to think every game will go to OT). Gordon’s and Ekeler’s usage hasn’t been the same and probably won’t be so asking how many seasons Melvin has made it through really doesn’t make sense.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Cobbler1 said:

Come on man. First off you’re including every game Melvin has played including his rookie year as he worked up to speed, the games he left early with injury, games he was being worked back in from injury, and all kinds of game scripts. You’re comparing that to a one game sample which happened to be a home game as a touchdown favorite that the Chargers led the whole time and went to OT. Ekeler had 15 touches in regulation (9 carries). Second I’m at least comparing Ekeler’s 3 down usage to Melvin’s and the difference is that Melvin gets way more carries. Melvin averaged 17.4 carries per game the past 3 years. I could trump that up even higher by going into that sample and removing games he left for injury/games he got less than his usual work as he worked back from injury but I really don’t need to. We only have 4 games as a starter to use for Ekeler but again he’s had 12, 15, (injured), 13, and 9 (12 if you want to think every game will go to OT). Gordon’s and Ekeler’s usage hasn’t been the same and probably won’t be so asking how many seasons Melvin has made it through really doesn’t make sense.

Ekeler is not Gordon. They have different strengths. It stands to reason that the team will use Ekeler differently than they used Gordon. I think touches are more representative of workload than rushing attempts. YMMV.

The point of this tangent of conversation is whether or not Ekeler can hold up to the primary RB workload the Chargers will give him. Some people think he can't. I disagree. We'll have to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take: I've followed the Chargers for a long time. Gordon is not that special--he's a good kid, but it seems he's always needed volume and a ton of TDs to produce his fantasy value. Football-wise? I think the Chargers are making the correct decision and hold all of the cards. They like Ekeler and Jackson in a committee-situation. Ekeler is not a bell-cow back; but he doesn't need to be one to produce RB2 with RB1 upside numbers. He's very dynamic in the passing game and provides a good change of pace when running out of the backfield. I picked up both as a hedge, in case they preserve Ekeler (which in the past, he seems to produce better with fewer touches) or he gets knocked out a game or two because of injury. Jackson will no doubt get some 1st/2nd down looks and goal line work so he has some flex value alongside his value as a good handcuff.

Lastly, knowing the Chargers, they do not respond well to holdouts or demands from players. Outside of Rivers and Gates, they do not take care of their players (see Vincent Jackson and Eric Weddle as prime examples, but they also unceremoniously unloaded LT). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ekeler is not Gordon. They have different strengths. It stands to reason that the team will use Ekeler differently than they used Gordon. I think touches are more representative of workload than rushing attempts. YMMV.

The point of this tangent of conversation is whether or not Ekeler can hold up to the primary RB workload the Chargers will give him. Some people think he can't. I disagree. We'll have to see.

Agree to disagree with your first paragraph about all touches being the same but that’s fine. The post of mine in this convo was a response to someone throwing shade about Melvin not playing full seasons. To me it apples to oranges because their use is different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Weebs210 said:

A teams wr2 who just threw the ball 10 times total week 1. Hard pass.

Who knows what you’ll get from Gordon this year and he will be 27 at the start of next year.   His value was always tenuous and he would likely be a depreciating asset moving forward.   Diggs’ value should hold over the next handful of years 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Skeletore Eh said:

Who knows what you’ll get from Gordon this year and he will be 27 at the start of next year.   His value was always tenuous and he would likely be a depreciating asset moving forward.   Diggs’ value should hold over the next handful of years 

As a dynasty Gordon owner, I like that deal for you.

WR’s age much better than RB’s. We know that. Gordon has maybe 1-2 more years of top production left in him. 

Good deal for you considering the weather 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jeremy fowler aka. capt obvious... reporting gordon will return this season.... 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27608301/source-gordon-holdout-not-leveon-situation

 

edit, gordon pushing back on twitter for some reason https://twitter.com/Melvingordon25/status/1172611939954040833

Quote

Stop listening to sources you don’t hear it quoted by me !!! It ain’t me

 

Edited by iamkoza
  • Laughing 1

Share this post


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

jeremy fowler aka. capt obvious... reporting gordon will return this season.... 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27608301/source-gordon-holdout-not-leveon-situation

edit, gordon pushing back on twitter for some reason https://twitter.com/Melvingordon25/status/1172611939954040833

Do you think he's pushing back against Fowler's article in particular? If so, what makes you think so? (Just timing?)

I think Gordon could be saying basically anything:

  • Don't listen to people who say I'll be back in Week 6-8, because I could be back in Week 3.
  • Don't listen to people who say I won't be back this season.
  • Don't listen to people who say I won't play for less than $13 million.
  • Don't listen to people who say I won't give full effort when I come back.
  • Don't listen to people who say Ekeler can squat more than me.

...among a thousand other possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr. Peterson said:

Lets say Melvin got dropped in a 12 man league with short benches.  

How much of your faab would you place on him?  :) 

All

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

San Diego can recoup a 3rd round pick if and when Gordon walks...they can also make life hell for Gordon and slap a franchise tag on him I think...but I do put a lot of the blame on San Diego and I despise that they are in Year 4/5 of Gordon who is now 26 and they are kind of not interested in getting Gordon set for Years 5-10 or however long he last in the NFL. It's unfortunate but many teams including San Diego takes great delight in milking players on rookie contracts as long as possible and creates a climate where guys like Gordon shake their head. 

It's unfortunate but I can't really justify overpaying him either, he's good but he is not elite IMO. I also think Gordon needs to be in an offense similar to what he does in San Diego. I like what Seattle has at RB but imagine Gordon in that offense to open things up instead of the plodding power running they tend to implement, it would be great if they could switch to that mode in the 2nd half once they build a lead. Just my .02

But getting back to the 3 rd compensatory pick for the Bolts...they can ask for a first, a 2nd and a 3rd but in the end they really just need to get a little better deal than what they will get by letting him walk...that's why I think a 2nd and a 4th/5th should get it done and you have ot be ready to try and meet his contract demands. If it is somewhere in the $12-$13M range like Bell and Gurley, Gordon needs to lower his asking price. 

Gordon also should have thought about he easy it would have been to lengthen his career when he had talent behind him and not asked to shoulder all the touches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

San Diego can recoup a 3rd round pick if and when Gordon walks...they can also make life hell for Gordon and slap a franchise tag on him I think...but I do put a lot of the blame on San Diego and I despise that they are in Year 4/5 of Gordon who is now 26 and they are kind of not interested in getting Gordon set for Years 5-10 or however long he last in the NFL. It's unfortunate but many teams including San Diego takes great delight in milking players on rookie contracts as long as possible and creates a climate where guys like Gordon shake their head. 

It's unfortunate but I can't really justify overpaying him either, he's good but he is not elite IMO. I also think Gordon needs to be in an offense similar to what he does in San Diego. I like what Seattle has at RB but imagine Gordon in that offense to open things up instead of the plodding power running they tend to implement, it would be great if they could switch to that mode in the 2nd half once they build a lead. Just my .02

But getting back to the 3 rd compensatory pick for the Bolts...they can ask for a first, a 2nd and a 3rd but in the end they really just need to get a little better deal than what they will get by letting him walk...that's why I think a 2nd and a 4th/5th should get it done and you have ot be ready to try and meet his contract demands. If it is somewhere in the $12-$13M range like Bell and Gurley, Gordon needs to lower his asking price. 

Gordon also should have thought about he easy it would have been to lengthen his career when he had talent behind him and not asked to shoulder all the touches.

kind of tough to make it a given that if you "outperform" your rookie contract you immediately should expect to be renegotiated with several years left on it...teams have to be able to have a map/gameplan for the direction they are going.... the whole concept of a salary cap is built around having bargains and hitting on players that outperform their cost for a while....SEA was able to "milk" Wilson and load up their money on defense during their run....and there are other examples.....it works....the Zeke thing kind of sets a bad precedent for the league IMO....I may be on an island, but I don't feel teams should feel "pressured" into redoing deals sooner than they need too....although it happens....

Edited by Stinkin Ref
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

San Diego can recoup a 3rd round pick if and when Gordon walks...they can also make life hell for Gordon and slap a franchise tag on him I think...but I do put a lot of the blame on San Diego and I despise that they are in Year 4/5 of Gordon who is now 26 and they are kind of not interested in getting Gordon set for Years 5-10 or however long he last in the NFL. It's unfortunate but many teams including San Diego takes great delight in milking players on rookie contracts as long as possible and creates a climate where guys like Gordon shake their head. 

It's unfortunate but I can't really justify overpaying him either, he's good but he is not elite IMO. I also think Gordon needs to be in an offense similar to what he does in San Diego. I like what Seattle has at RB but imagine Gordon in that offense to open things up instead of the plodding power running they tend to implement, it would be great if they could switch to that mode in the 2nd half once they build a lead. Just my .02

But getting back to the 3 rd compensatory pick for the Bolts...they can ask for a first, a 2nd and a 3rd but in the end they really just need to get a little better deal than what they will get by letting him walk...that's why I think a 2nd and a 4th/5th should get it done and you have ot be ready to try and meet his contract demands. If it is somewhere in the $12-$13M range like Bell and Gurley, Gordon needs to lower his asking price. 

Gordon also should have thought about he easy it would have been to lengthen his career when he had talent behind him and not asked to shoulder all the touches.

Sure, for $12.5M and tie up the one and only tag they have.  Not happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Stinkin Ref

I can't blame Gordon for wanting to get out in Year 5 with a team that doesn't want to truly pay him what he feels he is worth. Chargers are being sticks in the mud when they have 2 guys behind him that seem perfectly capable of handling the load. 

Chargers fans should be irate, they know Gordon is not going to be there and San Diego wants totally unreasonable payment for him with draft picks. 2 1st round picks? Have they seen the way Miami has been wheeling and dealing? They know RBs are not going to get that high of a trade offer. They are cutting their nose off to spite their face, that's how I feel. 

I go back to Eli not wanting anything to do with them and San Diego's overall handling of their players and I don't think it helps them to get over the hump or cash in on a HoF QB that will never sniff a Super Bowl. San Diego doesn't make a lot of deep deep runs in the playoffs and I think some of it has to do with their organizational philosophy and I'll stop there. 

Teams can redo deals for their star players by the end of Year 3...Gordon already went into 2018 and played the whole year when the Chargers could have gotten it done. It's clear that San Diego was going to milk Gordon all the way thru his 5th year on the rookie deal, might even franchise tag him year 6 and then he makes a little money but is worthless as a FA at 27/28...I think Gordon can easily as a 2 way threat keep it going until 30. 

A lot of teams could benefit immensely with a Mel Gordon on their roster.  

Several years left on contract? Gordon is in Year 5, they've had 18 months to get him extended. 

Edited by Ministry of Pain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

A lot of teams could benefit immensely with a Mel Gordon on their roster.  

Then call up the Chargers and offer them a 2nd.  Then offer Gordon the $13m or so a year he wants.  Still a net benefit?

There are 4 or 5 very good RBs coming out in next year's draft you could have for much less money, the same draft capital, and who are much younger.

Edited by matttyl
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, matttyl said:

Sure, for $12.5M and tie up the one and only tag they have.  Not happening. 

$12.5 for one year beats $50M like the Jets coughed up. 

I agree with you mostly however they still hold that card and if injuries suddenly depleted a very full backfield, they might want to exercise that option. Gordon cannot truly control what San Diego does to him. He hopes he can come in middle of the season and walk at the end of the year...all he is doing is cutting his salary in half and has just as much risk of getting injured...it's a 2 way street here. 

I'm saying I understand why Gordon wants out but I think he should understand his market isn't what Zeke or Bell is, he is level 2. $8 Million-$10 Million for maybe a 3-4 year deal seems about right...he is making $5.6M this year, it's not like he is paid $500k. The problem is he has no assurances going into 2020. These types of situations have an impact and take their toll. San Diego appears stingy to me and has a hard time working the cap. They don't seem eager to run in and redo rookie deals after year 3 while other teams seem to be able to prevent these situations from rising. 

2nd and a 5th, that's what he warrants in a trade IMO. Plenty of teams I think would pony up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

$12.5 for one year beats $50M like the Jets coughed up. 

I agree with you mostly however they still hold that card and if injuries suddenly depleted a very full backfield, they might want to exercise that option. Gordon cannot truly control what San Diego does to him. He hopes he can come in middle of the season and walk at the end of the year...all he is doing is cutting his salary in half and has just as much risk of getting injured...it's a 2 way street here. 

I'm saying I understand why Gordon wants out but I think he should understand his market isn't what Zeke or Bell is, he is level 2. $8 Million-$10 Million for maybe a 3-4 year deal seems about right...he is making $5.6M this year, it's not like he is paid $500k. The problem is he has no assurances going into 2020. These types of situations have an impact and take their toll. San Diego appears stingy to me and has a hard time working the cap. They don't seem eager to run in and redo rookie deals after year 3 while other teams seem to be able to prevent these situations from rising. 

2nd and a 5th, that's what he warrants in a trade IMO. Plenty of teams I think would pony up.

2nd and a 5th....and $13m a year?  Why would he take $8-10m from another team when he wouldn't for LA (not San Diego). 

Also, the $50m the Jets coughed up is really only $19m over 2 years, with an $8m signing bonus as best as I can tell.  So $27m for two years - instead of $12.5m for one.  The rest of that deal is funny money (not guaranteed) on the end.  And Bell is a better overall RB, and has a better history. 

Share this post


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

2nd and a 5th....and $13m a year?  Why would he take $8-10m from another team when he wouldn't for LA (not San Diego). 

Also, the $50m the Jets coughed up is really only $19m over 2 years, with an $8m signing bonus as best as I can tell.  So $27m for two years - instead of $12.5m for one.  The rest of that deal is funny money (not guaranteed) on the end.  And Bell is a better overall RB, and has a better history. 

Different discussion but it seems so unfair that QBs get to play for 10-15 years, have a ton of signing and guaranteed money, meanwhile the RB who touches it 20+ times a game many weeks and if he is really good is like having an extra WR line up on pass situations, they have to grovel for what essentially is less than what a QB makes in one season. 

I feel that teams who push guys into Year 5 on rookie deals are taking advantage of the system. RBs should have their deals redone the fastest because they have the shortest shelf life of the skill positions. It's OK after Year 3 which is legal as the rules are written but then it gets pushed and teams rely on the fact they can play games with even their good players. 

If San Diego wants to just move forward with the other 2 RBs, fantastic. Now go trade Gordon for an asset or future assets to help your team. Nobody is paying two 1st round picks, to me that was signal they were not serious. Just because a team asks for ridiculous trade compensation doesn't make them good negotiators. You never hear about the Patriots in advance of any moves they do. It's announced after the fact usually. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Different discussion but it seems so unfair that QBs get to play for 10-15 years, have a ton of signing and guaranteed money, meanwhile the RB who touches it 20+ times a game many weeks and if he is really good is like having an extra WR line up on pass situations, they have to grovel for what essentially is less than what a QB makes in one season. 

I feel that teams who push guys into Year 5 on rookie deals are taking advantage of the system. RBs should have their deals redone the fastest because they have the shortest shelf life of the skill positions. It's OK after Year 3 which is legal as the rules are written but then it gets pushed and teams rely on the fact they can play games with even their good players. 

If San Diego wants to just move forward with the other 2 RBs, fantastic. Now go trade Gordon for an asset or future assets to help your team. Nobody is paying two 1st round picks, to me that was signal they were not serious. Just because a team asks for ridiculous trade compensation doesn't make them good negotiators. You never hear about the Patriots in advance of any moves they do. It's announced after the fact usually. 

Having Gordon under contract helps them - at least for the second half of the season, which is when he should be back on the field.  Also, I can't see anyone paying more than the third that LA is going to get anyway from him leaving, as well as the ~$13m a year that Gordon wants.  Why give up any picks if he's just going to be a FA next year?  Why give up that much for any RB in the first place, much less one that's already been in the league for 4+ years?

I'm not saying you're wrong in this, I see both sides of it.  Gordon from a personal side, and LA from a business perspective.  Neither is wrong with how they are approaching this.  Honestly, I feel that if LA did offer him $10m a year (with some solid guarantees in it), that was very fair and he should have taken it.  If what they offered was only about $8m a year with relatively small guarantees, I can understand what he's doing. 

Edited by matttyl
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ministry of Pain said:

San Diego can recoup a 3rd round pick if and when Gordon walks...

Not sure if you read what I posted in here a few weeks ago, but IMO not all draft picks are created equal and while everyone is eager to just simply award the Chargers "a 3rd round pick," there is more to it than that.

Quote

The best third round compensatory pick is essentially an early 4th round pick (the best one comes after all the 3rd round picks have been made). Given the exploding salaries of free agents of late at other positions, Gordon might only qualify for a 4th round compensatory pick (which is essentially an early 5th round pick).

The other issue is that compensatory picks would be for two drafts away. Most teams look at picks from future drafts beyond the next one at a discount. The team would have to wait to be able to use it, and those future picks usually get valued as one round later than they actually are. So what you call a 3rd round compensatory, which is really an early 4th round pick, would be considered essentially an early 5th round pick in terms of trade value.

If Gordon were to fall to the 4th round compensatory pick level (not that crazy . . . he would have barely qualified as one of the last 3rd round compensatory picks this year), that would essentially be worth an early 6th round pick in trade value. And if the Chargers signed a high priced free agent with a similar average annual contract value next off season, they would not get anything for Gordon as far as compensatory picks go. Any signings of eligible free agents would get applied to the compensatory pick formula, 

That's how NFL GM's look at things. So IMO, an offer of a 3rd round pick in the upcoming 2020 draft carries far more trade capital than a chance at a 3rd round compensatory pick in the 2021 draft (if they even earn one for Gordon).

Bottom line, if the Chargers were offered what could end up being an early to mid round 3rd round pick in the 2020 draft (one that might fall in the 65 to 80 pick range) when they might only get a 4th round compensatory pick in the 2021 draft (that could be in the 135 to 138 range), they would be crazy not to consider it. Even if the Chargers did not sign any eligible free agents and got allocated a 3rd round compensatory pick for Gordon, they'd be looking at a pick in the 100-102 range in 2021.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

Different discussion but it seems so unfair that QBs get to play for 10-15 years, have a ton of signing and guaranteed money, meanwhile the RB who touches it 20+ times a game many weeks and if he is really good is like having an extra WR line up on pass situations, they have to grovel for what essentially is less than what a QB makes in one season. 

I feel that teams who push guys into Year 5 on rookie deals are taking advantage of the system. RBs should have their deals redone the fastest because they have the shortest shelf life of the skill positions. It's OK after Year 3 which is legal as the rules are written but then it gets pushed and teams rely on the fact they can play games with even their good players. 

If San Diego wants to just move forward with the other 2 RBs, fantastic. Now go trade Gordon for an asset or future assets to help your team. Nobody is paying two 1st round picks, to me that was signal they were not serious. Just because a team asks for ridiculous trade compensation doesn't make them good negotiators. You never hear about the Patriots in advance of any moves they do. It's announced after the fact usually. 

I don't think that is unfair at all. QB's require a ton more skill, have 10X the pressure on them, and obviously are 10X more important. 

RB's don't deserve special treatment just because they have a shorter shelf life. The biggest issue for RB's, is the supply far outweighs the demand. The opposite is true at positions like QB, CB, WR, and OT, and that is a big reason why those guys get bigger and better deals. They play more important positions, and there are less quality players at them.

I fully believe LA would deal Gordon for a 2nd round pick, but nobody is offering it. Trading him for anything less is essentially just giving him away, since like you said earlier they expect to get a 3 if/when he leaves.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

Not sure if you read what I posted in here a few weeks ago, but IMO not all draft picks are created equal and while everyone is eager to just simply award the Chargers "a 3rd round pick," there is more to it than that.

Bottom line, if the Chargers were offered what could end up being an early to mid round 3rd round pick in the 2020 draft (one that might fall in the 65 to 80 pick range) when they might only get a 4th round compensatory pick in the 2021 draft (that could be in the 135 to 138 range), they would be crazy not to consider it. Even if the Chargers did not sign any eligible free agents and got allocated a 3rd round compensatory pick for Gordon, they'd be looking at a pick in the 100-102 range in 2021.

We're on the same page here, in fact I'm shocked he hasn't been moved to a team for a 3rd that has a good chance of being a top 10-3rd round pick...65-75 range like you say. You could at least take that and leverage it to move up or back in the 1st and 2nd. That's why I'm harsh on San Diego. They have a good team and draft pretty well, good talent evaluators but the Patriots run laps around them and most teams in the rest of it in terms of managing players and contracts/cap.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Gordon is an idiot.  He is massively overestimating his market value.

Gordon is an idiot to want to secure his personal future? Was Minkah Fitz an idiot? Jalen Ramsey? Hmmmm, I can understand your opinion on miscalculating his market value perhaps but he's not an idiot, he has very few options with the Chargers. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ministry of Pain said:

Gordon is an idiot to want to secure his personal future? Was Minkah Fitz an idiot? Jalen Ramsey? Hmmmm, I can understand your opinion on miscalculating his market value perhaps but he's not an idiot, he has very few options with the Chargers. 

Yes.  Idiot.  

I’ve been a Gordon fan since his UW days (my alma Mayer), but he wants to be paid like he’s special - and he isn’t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

We're on the same page here, in fact I'm shocked he hasn't been moved to a team for a 3rd that has a good chance of being a top 10-3rd round pick...65-75 range like you say. You could at least take that and leverage it to move up or back in the 1st and 2nd. That's why I'm harsh on San Diego. They have a good team and draft pretty well, good talent evaluators but the Patriots run laps around them and most teams in the rest of it in terms of managing players and contracts/cap.  

Why would a bottom third team in the league send a 3rd for either a 1 year rental, or overpay for a RB the 4 years of tread gone from his tires?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I don't think that is unfair at all. QB's require a ton more skill, have 10X the pressure on them, and obviously are 10X more important. 

RB's don't deserve special treatment just because they have a shorter shelf life. The biggest issue for RB's, is the supply far outweighs the demand. The opposite is true at positions like QB, CB, WR, and OT, and that is a big reason why those guys get bigger and better deals. They play more important positions, and there are less quality players at them.

I fully believe LA would deal Gordon for a 2nd round pick, but nobody is offering it. Trading him for anything less is essentially just giving him away, since like you said earlier they expect to get a 3 if/when he leaves.

 

We're not going to agree. They take a lot of abuse absorbing tackles and shots and things go on underneath those piles you don't want to think about. I think it's horrific the way they are squeezing all th ebest of the RBs and some teams have opted not to pay them. They'll shell out $30M for a QB that hasn't won many playoff games or reached a Super Bowl but they have to squeeze RBs to the point of where Lev Bell felt he had to go. 

A RB running in the last year of his contract in the NFL is a huge risk for any player. An ACL pop and career $$$ contract is over. Big Ben was given $45M this year...your witness council 😉

I'm not wanting to pick a fight, we can feel differently but I don't really side with owners of these teams on ANYTHING, but I understand to enjoy the NFL at its best you have to mentally think the owners are good guys...they're NOT!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ministry of Pain said:

The Patriots run laps around them and most teams in the rest of it in terms of managing players and contracts/cap.  

Not the appropriate thread for this, but NE does a great job finding guys that can fit certain roles in their system, may get them to take on a secondary role (safety AND slot corner . . . adding them to special teams . . . edge defender AND zone pass coverage, etc.). Since the players aren't 3 down players or other teams didn't realize their full potential, NE can sign them for very low dollars. They can get them to be way bigger contributors, and then they get a compensatory pick when another team overpays and thinks they can use that guy the same way NE did and expect the same results. If nothing else, NE is usually good at identifying that they need a square peg for a square hole while other teams constantly try to fit a square peg in a round hole.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s more about preserving his health for when he does hit free agency.  If the chargers aren’t going to give him the money he wants, then it makes sense to hold out, play 6 games vs 16, and hit free agency healthy 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Why would a bottom third team in the league send a 3rd for either a 1 year rental, or overpay for a RB the 4 years of tread gone from his tires?

Because some picks from bottom feeder teams may have already been traded to contending teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eckeler is certainly making Gordon look irrelevant. Gordon’s a heck of a back, but he’s badly misplayed this. 

Go to work, put up numbers, get paid. Then maybe get paid next year by someone else. 

Can’t see how he’s possibly helping his value right now other than health, and if he’s that fragile maybe other teams won’t want him regardless. 

He had very little leverage with SD & IMO he’s hurting his cause. 

I understand why he’s doing it. Doesn’t make it a smart move. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anarchy99 said:

Because some picks from bottom feeder teams may have already been traded to contending teams.

Who fits that bill this year and needs a RB to get them over the hump?  Team wise only GB really seems like they could really upgrade by trading for Gordon, but I don't see Gordon playing without a new contract, at least not until he has to, and is GB willing to pony up long term money?

Share this post


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

Who fits that bill this year and needs a RB to get them over the hump?  Team wise only GB really seems like they could really upgrade by trading for Gordon, but I don't see Gordon playing without a new contract, at least not until he has to, and is GB willing to pony up long term money?

No team should ever pay a RB what these guys (Gordon, Bell, Elliot, Gurley) are asking.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Foosball God said:

Who fits that bill this year and needs a RB to get them over the hump?  Team wise only GB really seems like they could really upgrade by trading for Gordon, but I don't see Gordon playing without a new contract, at least not until he has to, and is GB willing to pony up long term money?

I agree that there aren't many potential landing spots for Gordon (which pains me because I need him on my fantasy team due to having no RBs). That was discussed pages and pages ago. But teams may end up in contention that we may not have considered (BUF? SF? TB?). Other contending teams could also have their guy go down with a season ending injury. It's unlikely a trade gets made but at this stage there is still at least a chance.

Share this post


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

Yes.  Idiot.  

I’ve been a Gordon fan since his UW days (my alma Mayer), but he wants to be paid like he’s special - and he isn’t.

Doesn't make him an idiot for trying to get every last dollar.  Missing a few games isn't going to negatively impact him financially as much as tearing an ACL would in the last year of his deal.  Makes him smart actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tjnc09 said:

No team should ever pay a RB what these guys (Gordon, Bell, Elliot, Gurley) are asking.   

What's funny is this is where I would normally post that BB would never pay that much for a RB and they are always contenders. However, in 2019, the Patriots are paying their corps of running backs more than any other team in the league. So while they aren't paying one player big money, they are pretty heavily invested in the RB position from a monetary perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tjnc09 said:

No team should ever pay a RB what these guys (Gordon, Bell, Elliot, Gurley) are asking.   

Disagree a bit here.  There are some special backs, and especially within a team's system.  Elliot and Gurley (arthritis not withstanding) are elite backs that perfectly fit their team's systems.  Paying for that isn't a horrible idea.  Paying a ton of money for someone else's RBs is a bad idea imo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Skeletore Eh said:

I think it’s more about preserving his health for when he does hit free agency.  If the chargers aren’t going to give him the money he wants, then it makes sense to hold out, play 6 games vs 16, and hit free agency healthy 

This exactly.  Doesn't make him an idiot at all.  He's just trying to minimize his injury risk as that's the biggest factor on his earnings over the next 4-6 years.  A little short term pain for long term gain.

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.