Colts first UFA WR Devin Funchess

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Sure you did. .

Dude, I hesitate to engage on such a dumb topic, but check out my other posts on free agents and you'll see I refer only to their opening day age. Using their offseason age is pointless and usually only is used to push an agenda - i.e. those who wanted us to sign Antonio Brown or Le'Veon Bell will invariably say they are 30 and 26, when they'll be 31 and 27 on opening day (Bell actually just turned 27 late last month). Tying to cut past all that BS, but thanks for bringing it up.

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Nope. If he had leverage he would have gotten a multi-year deal. You have to overpay for 1-year deals. Here is how it went since you need everything spelled out for you.

Ballard: Hi Devin, we want to sign you
Agent: Cool, I want 12 million a year for three years.
Ballard: We were thinking more 8 million for one year
Agent: Uhh for one yeah it would need to be more.
Ballard: Ok, I am reasonable. How about 10 million with incentives.
Agent: 3 million in incentives. Let me talk to my client. (In private to Devin) Colts want to sign you to a one year deal.
Devin: One year?! I want a multi-year deal. What else is out there.
Agent: (crickets) Well... we could try the CFL...
Devin: I'll take it.


Boom negotiation son! We gots ourselves a slow 6'4 receiver with bad hands.

You're joking, right? Is this really how you think these things are negotiated? You have a very simplistic way of looking at things.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

Holder said that Funchess had a 2 year deal on the table from another team, but wanted a chance to do well in year 1 and hit the market again after next season. Funchess wasn't going to sign a deal with an option in it.

Wonder who the team and QB was. Probably not much of an option. 1 year with Luck>2 years with average QB

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Yep, agreed on the option - I'm surprised there weren't option years attached. That would have made a lot more sense to me. So, while I'm hopeful about this signing, I can't deny that it's puzzling.

As far as your Ebron comparison, I don't think it's really fair. Ballard hasn't really been faced with losing a star player (and yes I'll call Ebron a star - he's high profile, productive and likeable) during his Colts tenure, so we don't know how he'll treat the situation. He's emphasized that he wants to "keep our own" players, and certainly there are less unknowns when you sign one of your own players to an extension rather than bringing in an outside free agent on a big deal. So I think there's reason to think he'd do his best to keep such players around if they are a good fit.

I suppose you could point to Desir, but we don't know what kind of money he was asking for - if it's another Rashaan Melvin situation, it would be hard to fault Ballard in my view.

I think when it comes time to pay top dollar for players that are proven performers on this roster and were drafted by the Colts he will pay to retain them. I’m not 100% convinced he will pay top dollar to retain a non home grown talent, but that remains to be seen. I am however extremely skeptical that he will pay top dollar to retain a player after only one year of high production. Even if that one years was in a Colts uniform. Does one year of production make someone proven to you? Would you make Ebron the highest paid TE in the league right now? I wouldn’t, but if he was on the market there’s a very real possibility that someone would offer it. Plenty of players have outlier years where everything falls into place. It’s a lot harder to sustain high level play. That 2nd year is huge in making sure the production isn’t a fluke. Personally I expect Ebrons number to drop some this year. If Doyle is back healthy, the WR group is improved, and Hines gets used more in his 2nd year those numbers have to come from some where and Ebrons outlier season is a likely victim.

So as conservative as Ballard is with money I doubt Ballard would have retained Ebron this year if he signed a one year contract and I doubt he re-signs Funchess next year if he has a similar break out. We will see I guess.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by rm1369

That tells me Funchess is trying to max out his value. Are you confident if he blows up and Washington, Buffalo, Oakland, etc start throwing money at him that Ballard will pay the necessary premium to keep him after only one year of that production?

Who knows. I will say that's the glass half empty* view, though. There's also a chance he could enjoy the Colts locker room, winning, playing with Luck, etc., so much that he comes back on a reasonable contract. Or the Colts could tag him. Or the Colts could get a comp pick like the Patriots did with Trent Brown.

There are so many benefits to the one year deal that it's silly to get hung up on there not being an option.

*edit

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I think when it comes time to pay top dollar for players that are proven performers on this roster and were drafted by the Colts he will pay to retain them. I’m not 100% convinced he will pay top dollar to retain a non home grown talent, but that remains to be seen. I am however extremely skeptical that he will pay top dollar to retain a player after only one year of high production. Even if that one years was in a Colts uniform. Does one year of production make someone proven to you? Would you make Ebron the highest paid TE in the league right now? I wouldn’t, but if he was on the market there’s a very real possibility that someone would offer it. Plenty of players have outlier years where everything falls into place. It’s a lot harder to sustain high level play. That 2nd year is huge in making sure the production isn’t a fluke. Personally I expect Ebrons number to drop some this year. If Doyle is back healthy, the WR group is improved, and Hines gets used more in his 2nd year those numbers have to come from some where and Ebrons outlier season is a likely victim.

So as conservative as Ballard is with money I doubt Ballard would have retained Ebron this year if he signed a one year contract and I doubt he re-signs Funchess next year if he has a similar break out. We will see I guess.

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. Now is not the ideal time to negotiate with Ebron on a new contract or extension. I’m just guessing that part of Ballard’s reluctance to sign high priced free agents is his concern that they might not fit (either on the field or culture wise), and that it’s a real gamble to commit to huge dollars to them under those circumstances. These kind of concerns could be put to rest even after a single season in a Colts uniform, so he might feel more comfortable loosening the purse strings a little, though you're certainly correct that questions would remain about the player’s ability to sustain the same level of play. And second year of elite performance would certainly help, so I'm glad we have Ebron under contract for another year and don't have to make a decision on him this year. We won't have the luxury with Funchess.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Wonder who the team and QB was. Probably not much of an option. 1 year with Luck>2 years with average QB

Holder said the total value of the deal was higher, so it was probably something like 2/$18MM from a team like the Bills or Dolphins.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by rm1369

I think when it comes time to pay top dollar for players that are proven performers on this roster and were drafted by the Colts he will pay to retain them. I’m not 100% convinced he will pay top dollar to retain a non home grown talent, but that remains to be seen. I am however extremely skeptical that he will pay top dollar to retain a player after only one year of high production. Even if that one years was in a Colts uniform. Does one year of production make someone proven to you? Would you make Ebron the highest paid TE in the league right now? I wouldn’t, but if he was on the market there’s a very real possibility that someone would offer it. Plenty of players have outlier years where everything falls into place. It’s a lot harder to sustain high level play. That 2nd year is huge in making sure the production isn’t a fluke. Personally I expect Ebrons number to drop some this year. If Doyle is back healthy, the WR group is improved, and Hines gets used more in his 2nd year those numbers have to come from some where and Ebrons outlier season is a likely victim.

So as conservative as Ballard is with money I doubt Ballard would have retained Ebron this year if he signed a one year contract and I doubt he re-signs Funchess next year if he has a similar break out. We will see I guess.

If the market price is too high, then you get a 3rd round comp pick, save the money for true A talent, and find a replacement.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Dude, I hesitate to engage on such a dumb topic, but check out my other posts on free agents and you'll see I refer only to their opening day age. Using their offseason age is pointless and usually only is used to push an agenda - i.e. those who wanted us to sign Antonio Brown or Le'Veon Bell will invariably say they are 30 and 26, when they'll be 31 and 27 on opening day (Bell actually just turned 27 late last month). Tying to cut past all that BS, but thanks for bringing it up.

Uh huh.

Originally Posted by Chaka

You're joking, right? Is this really how you think these things are negotiated? You have a very simplistic way of looking at things.

I think this is literally what they said word for word. This isn't a joke at all.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

Holder said the total value of the deal was higher, so it was probably something like 2/$18MM from a team like the Bills or Dolphins.

Tampa Bay? Same division, lost two receivers, know him well. Likely a team with QB issues. Was that from the Athletic?

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Tampa Bay? Same division, lost two receivers, know him well. Likely a team with QB issues. Was that from the Athletic?

Wait a minute...I thought his only options were the Colts or the CFL?

And of course it must have been a team with "QB issues" because otherwise it would further undermine your position.