Deranged Rhino Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 That wasn't the question. The OP's question was whether it was appropriate. While the salary cap spent for McCoy is appropriate, hs 2015 production needs significant improvement to become "worth it". <insert picture of Bugs Bunny splitting hares> Totally fair. And I agree his 2015 season did not live up to the expectations. He needs to stay on the field this year and produce. No question about that. Though, in the spirit of Bugs splitting hares, I am a firm believer that he's not injury prone (his career demonstrates this) and last year's hammy was more a product of the style of camp the Bills were running than any sort of indication he's hit a physical wall. Continuity is the buzz word around here, for better and worse, but in McCoy's case I have to believe having a full year of Roman's system under his belt and (hopefully) a healthy camp this year with no QB controversy or need to double the reps will only help his production. I expect Shady to have a statement year. The Bills need him to if they want to get into the playoffs. Barring injury? How is that not pertinent.....he finished the season on IR. Where did I say it wasn't pertinent. I'm acknowledging the league is violent and career changing injuries can happen to anyone on any play regardless of injury history. I do not believe he's injury prone, but won't just blindly say he'll be on this team in 2017 no matter what because injuries happen. Here's the bet, if Shady finishes the 2017 roster as a Bill, you have to change your screen name to BADOL LOVES SHADY MCCOY and keep it that way for a full season. Deal?
Deranged Rhino Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 And now you're just calling people "vag." Keep up the great work. It's a tough board for tough people I got nothing against BADOL, we disagree on this player/topic, but he can call me a vag if he wants.
Malazan Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 His ability to play in all situations is an incredible boon. His ability to block, run and catch provides an element that you can't duplicate with any other back on the roster. However, that ability is only helpful if he is actually playing in the game.
Deranged Rhino Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 I thought this topic ended a page and an hour ago? Not when I'm procrastinating from a deadline it won't! I'll keep this sucker alive as long as I can to avoid work.
nucci Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 The Panthers are paying Jonathan Stewart more. You actually do pay running backs that kind of money. Shady is no ordinary running back. The offense's production with him in and out of games is starkly different. and Karlos was less effective as No.1 when McCoy was out
dave mcbride Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) Just putting a little meat on the bones regarding RBs who have played for Whaley and Rex: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/ParkWi00.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MendRa00.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JoneTh00.htm(Thomas Jones, dumped after his first season under Rex; 31 at the time) http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TomlLa00.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GreeSh00.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SpilC.00.htm Historically at least, Whaley and Ryan's teams have cycled through RBs fairly quickly. The one exception is Bettis, who had transformed into more of a role player when Whaley joined the Steelers at the bottom level ( http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BettJe00.htm). I don't know if he fits given that Whaley was in a pretty lowly position in the early 2000s and had virtually no say. Fred Jackson lasted for a while, but I don't think Whaley was much of a fan. Would I say that this suggests a philosophy? Not necessarily. It could be merely coincidence. But it does seem to be the case that a) younger starting RBs don't last long in their regimes and b) vet RBs last even less long. Having said this, if McCoy stays healthy and if his quickness doesn't disappear, I have hard time not seeing him on the Bills in 2017. If the quickness does fade though ... well, don't be surprised if the Bills bite the bullet and let him go. After all, Williams, who is coming off a serious injury but should return to 100 percent eventually, was drafted for a reason, and it wasn't for this season. By all accounts, he's a pretty talented back. If he pans out, 2017 could well be his year to shine. And the disappearance of quickness for quickness-reliant backs does happen, and it tends to happen in the late 20s years. Edited May 3, 2016 by dave mcbride
The Big Cat Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Not when I'm procrastinating from a deadline it won't! I'll keep this sucker alive as long as I can to avoid work. I want to revisit the issue of numbers. You sign a guy expecting him to play 16 games. You pay him to play 16 games. You always know there's an opportunity for injury, but these guys are signing 16 game contracts. Agents wouldn't accept negotiations any other way. So, McCoy's value of 4.88% is assuming he plays 16 games. Some funny math here, but stay with me. His yards from scrimmage, extrapolated to 16 games is 1,519.36. We can assume there would have been a bump in the team's total yards. So if we factor in his difference (a feature back @ 94.96 yards from scrimmage/game) in the four games he missed in their entirety, the team's total yards for year would have been 145.84 yards higher or 5920.84 yards. Which means, extrapolated over 16 games, McCoy would have been paid 4.88% to account for 25.6% of the team's total yards from scrimmage. Is THAT worth it? (on what planet is it not?)
Dorkington Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Vags take a lot of abuse and punishment, and keep on functioning. Personally, if you're going to infer someone is weak by comparing them to genitalia, one should call them 'balls'. Get tapped on the balls, and we're all taking a 5 minute breather
FireChan Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 (edited) I want to revisit the issue of numbers. You sign a guy expecting him to play 16 games. You pay him to play 16 games. You always know there's an opportunity for injury, but these guys are signing 16 game contracts. Agents wouldn't accept negotiations any other way. So, McCoy's value of 4.88% is assuming he plays 16 games. Some funny math here, but stay with me. His yards from scrimmage, extrapolated to 16 games is 1,519.36. We can assume there would have been a bump in the team's total yards. So if we factor in his difference (a feature back @ 94.96 yards from scrimmage/game) in the four games he missed in their entirety, the team's total yards for year would have been 145.84 yards higher or 5920.84 yards. Which means, extrapolated over 16 games, McCoy would have been paid 4.88% to account for 25.6% of the team's total yards from scrimmage. Is THAT worth it? (on what planet is it not?) But he didn't play 16 games. And he's paid whether he plays or not. This topic must have been reanimated. Edited May 3, 2016 by FireChan
Webster Guy Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 honestly, my biggest concern is that we put a fun team to watch out there. it's nice to win, but I care more about having fun watching my team execute, so I like players that have amazing "how did he do it?!" plays (to quote the Murph) that's why I love guys like Shady, Sammy, TT, Hughes etc. (previous players like Spiller, Roscoe, Lee Evans, Moulds, etc) They do some amazing things on the field that very few athletes in the world can do. Didn't know much about Shady until we got him, but watching the guy play is awesome. Running backs can be effective and boring at the same time, but he's definitely not boring. The first time I saw him carrying the ball with his trademark one hand hook, I was like "how is this guy not fumbling a dozen times per game?" but somehow he doesn't. Love the guy.
3rdand12 Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 One of Shady's assets is that Defenses truly have to account for him. That was Whaleys thing last year with the Offense. Play makers, respected ones at that. Shady can score with the run or pass and he can block in PP very nicely. The additions Bills made with K. Williams, the mnemonic Kid, and now Wilder and and J Williams make the Offense look a bit more stable in the RB stable. Shady will remain the primary runner next year barring year because he is the best player. When he is gone, or injured i am not overly concerned though. and besides that we are stuck with him another year or two. Might as well accept it and root for him But he didn't play 16 games. And he's paid whether he plays or not. This topic must have been reanimated. same as all the RBs though? honestly, my biggest concern is that we put a fun team to watch out there. it's nice to win, but I care more about having fun watching my team execute, so I like players that have amazing "how did he do it?!" plays (to quote the Murph) that's why I love guys like Shady, Sammy, TT, Hughes etc. (previous players like Spiller, Roscoe, Lee Evans, Moulds, etc) They do some amazing things on the field that very few athletes in the world can do. Didn't know much about Shady until we got him, but watching the guy play is awesome. Running backs can be effective and boring at the same time, but he's definitely not boring. The first time I saw him carrying the ball with his trademark one hand hook, I was like "how is this guy not fumbling a dozen times per game?" but somehow he doesn't. Love the guy. not on point, like mine, but good post!
FireChan Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 One of Shady's assets is that Defenses truly have to account for him. That was Whaleys thing last year with the Offense. Play makers, respected ones at that. Shady can score with the run or pass and he can block in PP very nicely. The additions Bills made with K. Williams, the mnemonic Kid, and now Wilder and and J Williams make the Offense look a bit more stable in the RB stable. Shady will remain the primary runner next year barring year because he is the best player. When he is gone, or injured i am not overly concerned though. and besides that we are stuck with him another year or two. Might as well accept it and root for him same as all the RBs though? not on point, like mine, but good post! It is, but I'd be hardpressed to give any player credit for production that's "extrapolated" AKA "didn't happen." We could extrapolate Goodwin's production from his 1st year and claim he's underpaid for his "production."
3rdand12 Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 It is, but I'd be hardpressed to give any player credit for production that's "extrapolated" AKA "didn't happen." We could extrapolate Goodwin's production from his 1st year and claim he's underpaid for his "production." agree 100 %. I was mostly referring that all the players get banged up and many are out a game or two if not more. Actual production is what matters to the Coaches i would suggest.
The Big Cat Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 It is, but I'd be hardpressed to give any player credit for production that's "extrapolated" AKA "didn't happen." We could extrapolate Goodwin's production from his 1st year and claim he's underpaid for his "production." It's not about giving him credit. It's about determining his value. Let's rewind to about 14 months ago: if someone were to ask you how you'd feel if Shady were signed to less than 5% of the cap to gain more than a quarter of our yards from scrimmage, would you take that deal? Would you take that deal at 20%? These are a yes or no questions, just like eball's. To answer them is to provide one of two words: yes or no. Would you pay Shady less than 5% of the cap for more than 25% of yards from scrimmage? Would you pay Shady less than 5% of the cap for more than 20% of yards from scrimmage?
Deranged Rhino Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 RB is a devalued position in today's NFL. Sure, but it's not a worthless position in the NFL. And there's a giant difference between JAG running backs who are devalued and elite backs who are not. Shady's elite. He makes the team better, as evidenced by the times he wasn't on the field and the RBBC thing failed to generate much of anything.
FireChan Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 It's not about giving him credit. It's about determining his value. Let's rewind to about 14 months ago: if someone were to ask you how you'd feel if Shady were signed to less than 5% of the cap to gain more than a quarter of our yards from scrimmage, would you take that deal? Would you take that deal at 20%? These are a yes or no questions, just like eball's. To answer them is to provide one of two words: yes or no. Would you pay Shady less than 5% of the cap for more than 25% of yards from scrimmage? Would you pay Shady less than 5% of the cap for more than 20% of yards from scrimmage? Is he on a 1 year deal? There's a basic flaw in your argument. Let's take a look at the top 10 players with the most yards from scrimmage and see how they compare in salary cap percentage.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 Earliest we can get rid of him is probably 2018. If we decided to do that - itd be post June 1 to split the cap charge with 2019. The next 2 years require a ton more dead money so it isn't worth it. Other than that - this is a non-issue. He isn't going anywhere.
The Big Cat Posted May 3, 2016 Posted May 3, 2016 That was Shadys best game in my opinion. He came to play against a great defense. We didn't get enough of those performance from a supposive elite RB Yes the Jets did a great job of shutting down the run in Week 17 without Shady and Karlos. The week before, without Shady, the Bills rushed for over 220 yards against Dallas. The week before that? When Shady went down against Washington, the Bills still rushed for over 200 yards and Shady had the most carries and the least amount of yards. What data? You gave one example where MG was a non factor and simply unfairly compared yardage statistics with Shady's who played in more games and got more carries. Again, my point is perhaps the Bills would be better served going with a RB by committe(as most teams do) and using Shadys funds to improve the team elsewhere. (RT, #2 WR) RB is a devalued position in today's NFL. RB's like Shady are not devalued. Agree to disagree. I don't think it's even remotely fair to say that any combination of RB's on the Bills roster were as effective as Shady was. The Bills ran all over Dallas. This is true. 67 of those yards came from their QB and another 76 came on two plays which leaves 90 yards on 24 carries. Gillislee ripped a 60 yarder against Washington. Okay, sure, he did that in two consecutive games. But in the game in which he had to be the feature back, he averaged less than 2 yards per carry on more than 20 carries. Also, it cannot be refuted, that the Bills' two worst offensive performances--by A MILE--came in the two games Shady missed earlier in the year. They do not have a "replacement" for him in the run game, IMO. I cannot be convinced otherwise, and there are many who feel the same way I do. Sure, but it's not a worthless position in the NFL. And there's a giant difference between JAG running backs who are devalued and elite backs who are not. Shady's elite. He makes the team better, as evidenced by the times he wasn't on the field and the RBBC thing failed to generate much of anything. Yes. This.
Recommended Posts