Saints' RB Mike Bell to visit Philly today?
by JasonB on Mar 16, 2010 9:30 AM EDT
in News
63 comments
Ten days ago when we first relayed the news of the Eagles' interest in RB Mike Bell, I had a little primer on him for those unfamiliar with his body of work. The Eagles haven't confirmed that he'll be visiting yet(instead their web staff continue to play this stupid game where they pretend like they don't work for the Eagles and post rumors that other people report about free agent visits! Here's an idea, you're the official team site why not walk down the hall and find out whether the guy is coming in? Otherwise, don't post anything if it's not official!)
I digress....
With the RB reportedly scheduled to visit today, I thought it would be good to revisit our original primer.
Bell won a superbowl last year as third back for the Saints. He actually posted some decent numbers last year with 654 yards and 5 TDs and despite being third on the depth chart actually led the team in carries. He's 27 and has good size at 6 ft, 220lbs. Bell came into the league as undrafted free agent and had a promising rookie year in Denver, but barely played in the next few years until he enjoyed a resurgence with the Saints last year. He was rarely used in the passing game in New Orleans with Reggie Bush and Pierre Thomas being more obvious options, but he did show some pass catching ability in Denver.
If the Eagles are in the market for a backup veteran RB, Bell would seem to fit that role well. Bell is technically a restricted free agent, but he was tendered at the lowest possible level. Since he was an undrafted free agent, New Orleans would have a chance to match any offer but if they didn't the team he signs with would not have to surrender any picks.
Bell will be the second RB to visit within the last week and is a strong sign that the Eagles are looking to back up 2nd year man LeSean McCoy with an experienced veteran rather than a rookie.
0 recs |
63 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
The negatives...
- He was basically out of the league in 2008 when the Saints picked him up off the scrap heap. Had 19 total carries and 2 receptions in 2007 and 2008 combined.
- Only averaged 3.8 yards per carry on a ridiculous offense last season.
- Had only four catches last season, just 26 for his career.
- Has 4 fumbles in less than 350 career carries.
- Has 5 career tackles (which tells me he doesn’t even play special teams).
…and I just don’t see many positives.
I’ll be highly disappointed if this is the Eagles’ answer for our #2 back.
I agree
I would be disappointed too… he is an okay backup that, by most accounts, doesn’t fit this offense.
The only positive I see is he’s a physical N-S runner so he might help in short yardage and because of that he might be a good complement to McCoy. Other than that… MEH.
yards per carry
You have to take into account what his role was there.
by JasonB on Mar 16, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Also
I read somewhere that the Saints ran a ridiculous percentage of snaps when Bell was on the field as opposed to the other backs. In other words, when he was on the field it was obvious the Saints would run the ball. Not uncommon for a guy who worked as a short yardage & situational back.
You're right...
Just looked it up. He was on the field for 289 snaps this season, and he had 172 rushing attempts.
http://www.profootballfocus.com/cstats.php?tab=by_team&season=2009&teamid=20&stype=a&stats=o
So he got the ball 59.5% of the time he was in the game, which is a very high number.
While I agree that the offense was probably more predictable when Bell was in the game, it is still worth pointing out the difference in his yards per carry (3.8) compared to the other backs on the team… Bush (5.6) and Thomas (5.4)… is huge.
I don't like it either, but...
Dawk,
You’re pretty much posting the reasons the Birds WILL sign him. Grrrrrrr.
by Arkansas Fred on Mar 16, 2010 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Well
He was a backup on my fantasy roster last year and I have Sunday Ticket, and I’m a damn nerd when the Eagles aren’t on and a player on my roster is playing, so I saw him play a lot…my take is that he’s a physical runner, and at least one of the fumbles he had was a really bad call from the ref in that dude was down. I love Mike Bell, he just is not a premier starter. But as the #2, I think he would be really decent, depending on the contract.
Basically, he was a physical runner that gets the extra yard behind a finesse offense that liked to split wide, even in the red zone. He was just a fish out of water…And when you are the backup on that offense, you would not be the top four options behind the three stellar WR and the TE…oh, and Reggie Bush…He wasn’t really used as a starter after his injury early in the year…but if you look at his first few weeks of the season, when Pierre Thomas was injured and he was starting, you can see what he can do if given the carries…
True he is not a special teamer, but I like the guy as a backup that could step in to be a veteran physical runner if either Weaver or McCoy go down.
---AstrosFan (Austin Lawyer and Sports Fan)
I completely agree with Bye, Dawk
He’s nothing to get excited about, and not nearly versatile enough for this offense. Plus, UofA sucks!
He is serviceable
He is veteran who comes cheap (my bet is that his base is really close or right at the veteran league minimum of $750k with little/no bonus signing money) . That is about all the Eagles are looking for here.
I wouldn’t mind maybe seeing the Eagles draft a RB who might be able to return kicks/play or on special teams either but pretty apparent the Eagles are just looking for veteran roster fillers at a very cheap price at the offensive skill positions. Better hope that McCoy and the staring 3 WR stay healthy or it means alot of mediocrity on the field with Baskett & Bell.
I do find it kind of odd how you really supported signing Baskett yet you are completely against this signing.
I do find it kind of odd how you really supported signing Baskett yet you are completely against this signing.
A list of players likely to see more action (barring injury) in the passing game than Hank Baskett this season…
- DeSean Jackson
- Jeremy Maclin
- Jason Avant
- Brent Celek
- LeSean McCoy
That makes Baskett essentially our 6th option in the passing game, and that’s assuming all of the following…
- We don’t keep Kevin Curtis.
- Cornelius Ingram doesn’t become as a significant weapon next year.
- Another young WR doesn’t emerge as a player in camp.
However, if anything happens to LeSean McCoy (who may only touch the ball 15 times per game anyway), Mike Bell becomes the starter, which would be a disaster. Plus, Baskett contributes on special teams, whereas Bell does not. There’s a big difference between the Baskett signing and a possible Bell signing.
He is the No. 4 WR
Unless they draft someone else and he will be on the field a ton since the Eagles run a bunch of 3 WRs sets. (Note – I am assuming Curtis gets cut).
Let say the Eagles pass about 65% of the time. I would be willing to be that of that 65% that the Eagles run 3 WR sets at 60-70% of the time because they almost never use double TE spread and use a ton of 1-back set.
So you are probably talking about .65 * .60 or .70 or basically about 35-40% of their overall offense snaps if Baskett is the No. 4.
Definitely alot more
At the same time too – what are the greater odds:
That one the three players (Avant/Jackson/Maclin) gets hurt and forces Baskett onto the field or that McCoy gets hurt and forces Bell onto the field?
This argument is so dumb it’s not worth discussing.
Even if injuries occur and Baskett is our THIRD WR option, he’s still only the 5th most likely to be targeted via a pass, and would STILL get less touches than our SECOND RB.
I am the people's troll :3™
I've never been
that high on Bell.
If the Eagles sign him… it’ll be meh.
Personally, my choices would be:
1) Bring back Westy for less money in a reserve role (make it clear he’ll be the backup… like Pitt did with Bettis a few years back).
2) Draft a rookie to backup McCoy.
3) Sign Mike Bell and still draft a rookie.
4) Sign Bell and have Buckley or Mallett as the 3rd RB.
I dunno, I think Westbrook is done.
I’m ok with the idea of drafting a rookie, but I think it makes sense to have a veteran as well. Especially with Shady still a question mark as far as pass blocking ect. A rookie wouldn’t be reliable in that dept.
i think pass blocking
was where shady really faultered last year..
The Eagles WILL redeem themselves in the '10-'11 season, with a win at SuperBowl 45 in Dallas!
Sure, but that’s going to be something every rookie will have to learn. Especially any back who was any good in college, those guys are rarely asked to pass block.
nothing against shady, because i agree and i know that rookie RB’s can’t usually pass block, and he should have it down relatively soon. granted, we do need a veteran who CAN block. bell would be a decent add, it wouldn’t upset me like it would some philly fans.
The Eagles WILL redeem themselves in the '10-'11 season, with a win at SuperBowl 45 in Dallas!
i wouldnt be mad if we signed Bell..............
but i at this point id rather have Fargas although its pretty clear thats not gonna happen. Also its not like Mike Bell is sum long seasoned vet or sumtin whos gonna provide a ton of leadership, so why not look for a back in maybe the 3-5 rounds of the draft??????
by goldenbird09 on Mar 16, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions
he still has SOME experience
The Eagles WILL redeem themselves in the '10-'11 season, with a win at SuperBowl 45 in Dallas!
If I remember correctly
Shady was pretty good at picking up the blitz for a rookie wasn’t he?
"That's what I love so much about this team. We have some warriors here. We have some guys who go out there and fight. That's the best thing about this team. No matter what happens, we just keep fighting. You have to love that."
by chrisbeomsuh on Mar 16, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
he didn't do awful,
but i’d say it was his weakest part
The Eagles WILL redeem themselves in the '10-'11 season, with a win at SuperBowl 45 in Dallas!
I disagree
I really like this guy. I think he’s what the Eagles are (or at least should be) all about mentally, and he has a great work ethic. He’s not going to be a starter, he’s just going to give McCoy some rest for a few series per game. I like this guy a lot and I hope we bring him in.
I Am Better Than Jack Who Some Fool Thinks Is Better Than Asante (IABTJWSFTIBTA)
by DeSean10 on Mar 16, 2010 10:26 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
He had 20 catches his rookie year… that might be the one thing that caught the Eagles’ attention. But only averaging 3.8 yards per carry for the Saints (when Reggie Bush averaged 5.6 and Pierre Thomas averaged 5.4) raises a huge red flag for me. He had 25 more rushes than PT and 139 less rushing yards.
I am the people's troll :3™
True, but if you’re working as the short yardage back you’re going to have a lower YPC. He ran for 33 first downs last year.
by JasonB on Mar 16, 2010 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yep...
He was a short yardage back when he came back from injury and had lost his temporary starting gig…he was the full meal deal early in the season when Pierre Thomas was injured…he was the #3 back on a team that used all three for specific purposes…he was rarely in the game when it was not short yardage and in the middle of the field.
---AstrosFan (Austin Lawyer and Sports Fan)
He was also the "closer"
Much of his time was spent as the guy closing out games when they were ahead. So he was facing defenses stacked against him…
Granted he was facing defense with probably little hope of a win as well.
I don’t mind seeing him at that role to Shady doesn’t raqck-up the miles too quickly
by Smallbugger on Mar 16, 2010 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions
The thing is, the de facto “#2” RB on this team will probably be Leonard Weaver. That was the case last year and I suspect it won’t be any different this year. If they signed Mike Bell, I’d be surprised if he got any more than a 2 or 3 carries a game. He could get some extra snaps as a pass blocker or something, but the role for whoever that 3rd back is will be limited.
And that’s a good point as well. However, the signing of Bell could signal that the Eagles don’t plan on addressing the position in the draft. If our “#2” RB is Leonard Weaver and the Eagles aren’t envisioning a bigger role for a more traditional #2 RB, I’d much rather bring in a young RB with more upside than a retread that doesn’t excel at any aspect of the position, like Mike Bell.
He's probably taking Buckley's job and we'll still draft someone
He’d be our physical runner and I’d suspect the Eagles to draft a late round upside guy to be more like a Shady/Westbrook in style
by Smallbugger on Mar 16, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
I doubt we draft someone high enough to be the #2 definately
I’d image we get a guy that can catch and basically situationally use Weaver/Bell/Rookie depending on situation. Like we used Weaver/McCoy for most of last season
by Smallbugger on Mar 16, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Bell isn't going to get the ball
If you look at the offense the last 3 years, Reid has been pretty much dead even on 60/40 ration on pass/run:
2009: 975 plays, 384 runs (39%)
2008: 1056 plays, 427 runs (40%)
2007: 1047 plays, 421 runs (40%)
That is among bottom 1/3 of the league every year.
As for the No. 2 RB, Buckhalter had that job from 06-08 and here is what he ended up with in terms of touches:
2008: 102 touches (76 runs, 26 passes)
2007: 84 touches (62 runs, 12 passes)
2006: 107 touches (83 runs, 24 passes)
A large part of Buckhalter being used so much though was because the FB was almost completely nonexistent during that time period in Reid’s offense:
2008: 16 touches (4 runs, 12 passes)
2007: 23 touches (15 runs, 8 passes)
2006: 21 touches (5 runs, 16 passes)
Weaver changed that equation last year and was used alot:
2009: 85 touches (70 runs, 15 passes)
Basically Weaver replaced Buckhalter’s role in the offense last year and likely will do so again next year. Yeah if McCoy goes down the Eagles would be hard-placed to replace him but so would most NFL teams if they lose their starting back. Bell is a guy who is going to be used in short-yardage situations along with Weaver and as a change of pace guy. That’s it. Basically 2/3 touches a game and likely around 40 touches on the season if McCoy/Weaver stay relatively healthy.
So are you still arguing the Eagles should use one of their higher draft picks (1st-3rd rounds) on a RB?
I don’t understand why a lot of people wanted to sign Justin Fargas but not Bell since everybody is making a big deal about the 3.8ypc that is exactly what Fargas averaged and Bell is healthy unlike Fargas.
Also if we do sign Bell we will still probably draft a RB to battle it out with Buckley for the 3rd spot.
The difference of the offensive lines between the two teams is enormous.
"That's what I love so much about this team. We have some warriors here. We have some guys who go out there and fight. That's the best thing about this team. No matter what happens, we just keep fighting. You have to love that."
by chrisbeomsuh on Mar 16, 2010 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions
and even less pumped thinking about Fargas
by andyreidswaistline on Mar 16, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Some whispers
We may be after Raiders’ power back Michael Bush.
Also, we were in the mix for Browns pass rusher Kamerion wimbley.
by birds'n'raiders on Mar 16, 2010 1:48 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Which is exactly why it will happen!
Let the beasting begin.
by TransplantedFan on Mar 16, 2010 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I would like this signing
I’ve kept a little bit of an eye on him. Even though his numbers don’t seem impressive, I remember him looking very tough when he played us. We couldn’t bring him down. So i’d definitely wouldn’t mind him as the #2/3 option at RB.
Is it possible...
That the Eagles also signed Chad Hall to be a backup RB? Or is he essentially going out for the WR position?
Brent Celek > Chuck Norris
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bleeding Green Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
