Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array title="Fire Goodell has a reputation beyond repute"> Fire Goodell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Gender
    Posts
    6,039

    Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    What helps you win more?

    Let's take this example for instance. Antonio Brown's contract is worth on average 16.7M / yr.
    - Steven Nelson - 8.5M
    - Mark Barron - 6M
    - Donte Moncrief - 4.5M

    Ok, a little more expensive here, but 19M is still in the range of near 17M.

    Pay AB and there's no denying you get superstar production. Good for 1400 yds, and 8TD's let's say on average.

    Now scenario 2, you get 3 serviceable players. We add 2 players on defense, who aren't superstar status, but both should become instant starters at need positions (CB, Mack ILB). This defense has had a reputation for not allowing many yards, but being able to force any turnovers. We bring in 2 players that both have a knack for forcing turnovers. Win on defense for sure. Moncrief put up 668 yds and 3TD's last season with Blake Bortles as his QB. His production should be higher with Ben throwing to him. Let's say having Ben increases his production 15%. He should be our #2 or #3 WR (depending on Washington's development) and get us 768yds and 3-4 TDs. Possibly higher, this is just a conservative estimate.

    So I guess the point I'm making, is what helps you actually win games? Paying the superstar in this case, will without a doubt give you the offensive production. However, the cap space from this one player alone, leaves holes at important positions that can, and will, be exploited by a good offense or coach. In scenario 2, you don't have that dynamic home-run hitter like AB, but you have an overall more balanced team with less weaknesses overall.

    Anyway this is more of a rant, but does anyone really think we're that much worse off without AB or Bell and their big contracts? I think this team can be surprisingly good next year if our FA pickups live up to their billing and become starters. Moncrief preferably being a #3 because I want Washington to succeed, but in today's NFL, a #3 WR is considered to be a starter.

  2. #2
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    20,177

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    It all depends. I think it is the drop-off from "superstar" to "decent" that is really hard to identify.

    AB tilted coverages and altered the defensive approach of all 11 players just by walking onto the field. He was a cheat code in real life. Now we have to see what defenses do when you can throw pretty good options at them rather than 1 AMAZING + 2-3 pretty good. At some point, there has to be a drop-off.

    Juju will see 2-3 defenders until Moncrief, Washington, and Rogers can put enough down on tape that demonstrates they will consistently make teams pay a steep price for ignoring them. And I am not certain they can.

    In a more general sense, talent matters a great deal. There is a ton of talk every year this time about cap space, who won the contract negotiations, who get over-paid, and locker-room distractions. But the bottom line is that this isn't a Disney movie. At the end of the day, usually the team with the most impactful talent wins.

    But you make a good point about spreading that talent over the roster rather than lumping it all in one place? Or maybe it was the Steelers have been held back because the defense never had a Bell or an AB? Just a collection of decent guys...

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array title="Fire Goodell has a reputation beyond repute"> Fire Goodell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Gender
    Posts
    6,039

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Good points, and yeah having AB is as close to getting a cheat code as you can get. I do feel though he's not the same player he was a few years ago? I don't remember seeing him making catches over the middle much last year compared to years past, as if he's still hearing footsteps from that Burfict hit. Regardless, hell of a big play threat whenever he's on the field.

    I do think Juju can succeed though, and get identical to AB's production. Moncrief is that big, fast WR that can't be allowed to just run free.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    20,177

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Goodell View Post
    Good points, and yeah having AB is as close to getting a cheat code as you can get. I do feel though he's not the same player he was a few years ago? I don't remember seeing him making catches over the middle much last year compared to years past, as if he's still hearing footsteps from that Burfict hit. Regardless, hell of a big play threat whenever he's on the field.

    I do think Juju can succeed though, and get identical to AB's production. Moncrief is basically a Martavis Bryant clone that will have to be accounted for.
    I really like Juju and think he will have a long and highly successful NFL career. But he is only about half the WR talent that AB is. It is just not possible, in my opinion, to overstate how amazing AB is at route running, finding holes in coverage, contested catches, and then there is the whole sideline toe tap thing.

    I hope Juju can equal AB's production, but I just don't see him as being able to one man show it as much. But like I said, I can and will be wrong. Hope I am here!

  5. #5
    Senior Member Array title="steelreserve has a reputation beyond repute"> steelreserve's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Old Mexico
    Gender
    Posts
    13,413

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Depends what position you're talking about.

    Some (WR, QB, OLB) depend on the skill CEILING of your best player, who can help make other players better as well.

    Others (OL, DB) depend on the skill FLOOR of your worst player, e.g., not having any weak links where a bad player can waste the efforts of two (soon to be former) All-Pros.

    Then others (RB, ILB, maybe DL) are somewhere in between.

    That's why I do think that a slightly above-average player at one of the second types of positions can be just as impactful as a star player at one of the first types of positions. Also why paying Pouncey $11M is stupid if you don't also have Foster. Or paying Haden doesn't work if your other CB is Artie Burns.

    Basically, Nelson could have star-level impact if he is just decent, Barron could help a little but I am not expecting a ton, and Moncrief may be the best player of the group, but his impact is mostly damage control.
    See you Space Cowboy ...

  6. #6
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    20,177

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by steelreserve View Post
    Depends what position you're talking about.

    Some (WR, QB, OLB) depend on the skill CEILING of your best player, who can help make other players better as well.

    Others (OL, DB) depend on the skill FLOOR of your worst player, e.g., not having any weak links where a bad player can waste the efforts of two (soon to be former) All-Pros.

    Then others (RB, ILB, maybe DL) are somewhere in between.

    That's why I do think that a slightly above-average player at one of the second types of positions can be just as impactful as a star player at one of the first types of positions. Also why paying Pouncey $11M is stupid if you don't also have Foster. Or paying Haden doesn't work if your other CB is Artie Burns.

    Basically, Nelson could have star-level impact if he is just decent, Barron could help a little but I am not expecting a ton, and Moncrief may be the best player of the group, but his impact is mostly damage control.
    That is one of the clearest ways I have ever seen that laid out. Like, after reading it, how could I not have realized that was the answer?

    I'm on board.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array title="TD's & Beer has a brilliant future"> TD's & Beer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Gender
    Posts
    1,719

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    As long as the Steelers continue to beef up their OL Ben will have time to get the ball to whomever he wants. It's pretty obvious that's how this offense works.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Array title="st33lersguy has a reputation beyond repute">

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    15,230

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    you really some of both, a combination of at least a couple star players and solid depth, combine that with cohesion and solid coaching. Though I would rather have a few decent-good players because then you have more depth. One star player and nothing else does dick for you (see OJ Simpson era Bills, Barry Sanders era Lions)

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array title="Fire Goodell has a reputation beyond repute"> Fire Goodell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Gender
    Posts
    6,039

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by st33lersguy View Post
    you really some of both, a combination of at least a couple star players and solid depth, combine that with cohesion and solid coaching. Though I would rather have a few decent-good players because then you have more depth. One star player and nothing else does dick for you (see OJ Simpson era Bills, Barry Sanders era Lions)
    Yep. In this case, would we be able to make upgrades to the defense if we're paying Bell and AB? Likely not. It seems the Patriots use the formula of creating an overall strong / balanced roster without paying superstars. I mean who are the stars on the Patriots squad? Brady, Gronk? I can't think of anyone else. However, their roster is pretty much top to bottom solid without any glaring weaknesses. And some good players that aren't necessarily stars (Edelman, Gilmore)

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array title="teegre has a reputation beyond repute"> teegre's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Posts
    15,076

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    It mostly depends on having a franchise QB.

    Having that QB in a cheap, rookie deal allows you to surround him with more talent (Ben from 2004-2008; Russell Wilson from 2012-2016) which makes things a whole lot easier.

    But, even after those rookie deals are done, the QB is the main factor in Lombardis won. Look at Joe Flacco. He had one great season (probably the BEST post-season ever) and won a ring. Likewise, the Eagles rode the arm of “career season” of Nick Foles. Aside from the 2015 Broncos, the last sixteen championships were won by outstanding QBs.

    Brady
    Brady
    Ben
    Peyton
    Eli
    Ben
    Brees
    Rodgers
    Eli
    Flacco
    Wilson
    Brady
    *Peyton
    Brady
    Foles
    Brady

  11. #11
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    I definitely go for plenty of decent-good players over a few superstars. Better depth and smaller egos.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  12. #12
    Senior Member Array title="Fire Goodell has a reputation beyond repute"> Fire Goodell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Gender
    Posts
    6,039

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by teegre View Post
    It mostly depends on having a franchise QB.

    Having that QB in a cheap, rookie deal allows you to surround him with more talent (Ben from 2004-2008; Russell Wilson from 2012-2016) which makes things a whole lot easier.

    But, even after those rookie deals are done, the QB is the main factor in Lombardis won. Look at Joe Flacco. He had one great season (probably the BEST post-season ever) and won a ring. Likewise, the Eagles rode the arm of “career season” of Nick Foles. Aside from the 2015 Broncos, the last sixteen championships were won by outstanding QBs.

    Brady
    Brady
    Ben
    Peyton
    Eli
    Ben
    Brees
    Rodgers
    Eli
    Flacco
    Wilson
    Brady
    *Peyton
    Brady
    Foles
    Brady
    *cough cough*

    Sorry but I'm never going to call Flacco great, the most he ever was, was good. That Ravens defense (both of their championship years) had all-world defenses. Flacco is on that Andy Dalton level, good QB but I wouldn't call them great or elite. I don't know what to think of Eli Manning also, honestly. He's that guy who's streaky in the regular season but plays lights out when it counts. Giants were one of those teams that would barely squeak in at 9-7, then all of a sudden play like a 14-2 team.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Array title="teegre has a reputation beyond repute"> teegre's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Posts
    15,076

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Goodell View Post
    *cough cough*

    Sorry but I'm never going to call Flacco great, the most he ever was, was good. That Ravens defense (both of their championship years) had all-world defenses. Flacco is on that Andy Dalton level, good QB but I wouldn't call them great or elite. I don't know what to think of Eli Manning also, honestly. He's that guy who's streaky in the regular season but plays lights out when it counts. Giants were one of those teams that would barely squeak in at 9-7, then all of a sudden play like a 14-2 team.
    Joe Flacco’s 2012 postseason is one of the greatest ever. Aside from that four-game stretch, Yes, he’s been Dalton-esque.

    Same goes with Eli. His regular seasons have been very average, but in two of his post seasons he has been great (not that he has the numbers, but in that he beat Belichick).

  14. #14
    Senior Member Array title="DesertSteel has a reputation beyond repute"> DesertSteel's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Arizona
    Gender
    Posts
    10,484

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    I predict that Juju’s next three years will be better than AB’s next three. Same for Conner over Bell. I’m good with them using #20 on a WR/TE to spread the talent and keep defenses honest.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Array title="pczach has a reputation beyond repute"> pczach's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Gender
    Posts
    8,848

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Superstar players are difference makers on the field, but it's hard to keep them long-term.

    The best strategy is to draft a lot of very good players, with a few that turn into great players. Then trade those great players before they hit the FA market.....and replace them with another very good player.

    Wash..rinse….repeat.

    Generally, there are only a couple star players that you are able to keep for a long time. The salary cap structure makes it impossible to keep all your talent. Teams need to be smart about the couple stars they pay and keep on the roster. They need to be good teammates, and players that lead by example and represent what the team requires. Everyone else is expendable. The only exception is the quarterback position because they are so hard to find.

  16. #16
    Senior Member Array title="teegre has a reputation beyond repute"> teegre's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Posts
    15,076

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by DesertSteel View Post
    I predict that Juju’s next three years will be better than AB’s next three. Same for Conner over Bell. I’m good with them using #20 on a WR/TE to spread the talent and keep defenses honest.
    JuJu & Conner will definitely have less suspensions and/or controversy.

    And, Yes, as much as this team needs defense, I could see a TE or WR at 20.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    20,177

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by pczach View Post
    Superstar players are difference makers on the field, but it's hard to keep them long-term.

    The best strategy is to draft a lot of very good players, with a few that turn into great players. Then trade those great players before they hit the FA market.....and replace them with another very good player.

    Wash..rinse….repeat.

    Generally, there are only a couple star players that you are able to keep for a long time. The salary cap structure makes it impossible to keep all your talent. Teams need to be smart about the couple stars they pay and keep on the roster. They need to be good teammates, and players that lead by example and represent what the team requires. Everyone else is expendable. The only exception is the quarterback position because they are so hard to find.
    Which, oddly enough, is exactly how the Steelers got to this point. Basically, in summary, they were attempting to do exactly what you are describing. The money and salary structure that pushed towards Bell and AB was the source of all the rest.

    The Steelers tried to do what every single NFL team with "triplets" has tried to do before: pay the QB, then the WR, and then the RB. Unfortunately for them, 2 out of the 3 decided to tell them to stick their deal where the sign don't shine and push their way to the open market. There the lunacy of the NFL marketplace got them what they wanted - more guaranteed money. Or at least the ability to claim they got that!

  18. #18
    Senior Member Array title="Fire Goodell has a reputation beyond repute"> Fire Goodell's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Gender
    Posts
    6,039

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    I'm not sure we can say Bell got what he wanted. Of course he'll say that now to save face, but I bet he's kicking himself now for not taking the Steelers' offer. He thought he was worth 4m/yr more than he actually was.

    I'm sure AB will be happy until another receiver gets a higher contract, then he'll pull the same crap again. He's the type of dude that needs to be the big man on campus

  19. #19
    Senior Member Array title="Mojouw has a reputation beyond repute"> Mojouw's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Gender
    Posts
    20,177

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Goodell View Post
    I'm not sure we can say Bell got what he wanted. Of course he'll say that now to save face, but I bet he's kicking himself now for not taking the Steelers' offer. He thought he was worth 4m/yr more than he actually was.

    I'm sure AB will be happy until another receiver gets a higher contract, then he'll pull the same crap again. He's the type of dude that needs to be the big man on campus
    Yup. I totally agree - even if my posting didn't make that clear. The more this plays out and the more those two geniuses attempt to explain their thoughts, the more I believe that the Steelers couldn't have ever come out of this ahead.

  20. #20
    Senior Member Array title="Steelerchad is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    201

    Re: Paying superstars vs a collection of decent-good players

    The only position you must have a Super Star at is QB. Trying to win it all with an avg. QB is very difficult.
    As for the rest, you need a star or 2 additionally on both sides of the ball, but if you can get better than avg. guys all over the field you can compete for a title. The key is to limit your weaknesses.
    I like 3 good RB's, vs. one star.
    I like 3 good WR's vs. one star.
    A top 5 O line and D line.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •