ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 06-09-2019, 10:50 PM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlwaysSunnyinIndy View Post
I think Ballard will have discussions with several of the agents before the start of this season. He already extended Sanchez.

I would be surprised if he didn't extend one of the TE's on the roster.

The only TE's under contract beyond this season are Billy Brown (who was signed last December and carried on the practice squad) and undrafted free agent rookie Hale Hentges.

I know that there are some potential issues with extending each of the TE's that have received the majority of playing time but I would expect that one of Ebron, Doyle or Alie-Cox to be extended before the season starts.

Moe Allie Cox has been tearing it up in OTA's apparently.
Reply With Quote
  #202  
Old 06-09-2019, 11:31 PM
AlwaysSunnyinIndy AlwaysSunnyinIndy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 2,083
Thanks: 640
Thanked 2,568 Times in 1,147 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm View Post
Good point on the TEs, although Alie-Cox will be an ERFA so in all likelihood he'll be back at least 1 if not 2 years.

Nice catch. I was in a hurry writing my earlier post and just quickly scanned the roster looking at the end date of the current contracts. So it is not quite as dire, but it would be nice to extend Ebron or Doyle considering how much Reich likes to incorporate the position in the offense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
Moe Allie Cox has been tearing it up in OTA's apparently.
Yeah, I read that, too. He will at least get some extra practice with the first unit while Ebron and Doyle recover / rehab from their surgeries.
Reply With Quote
  #203  
Old 06-10-2019, 01:09 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
No, by “business decision” I’m referring to prioritizing getting the best return for dollar spent over the end product on the field. You don’t get extra points in playoff games because you have a really efficient roster and a ton of unused cap space. What actually happens is your weakness at WR and your lack of a pass rush get exposed. The NFL is highly competitive and the margins for error are so thin that always prioritizing the future is going to almost always have you coming up short.



This is an asinine argument. The casino industry is built on proven mathematical statistics. I can point you to the house’s statistical advantage for any table game in the casino. In the long term the math will always win out. Please show me where any such thing exists for NFL roster building. I know 32 teams who would love to have that knowledge. And don’t even bring up “Moneyball” BS or I’ll point out the differences between its applicability to baseball and football and the fact it’s storied inventor never won a title with it.



To me the biggest thing you (and Ballard) are wrong about is the idea that Ballard is going to draft so well that he is going to create a long term dynasty that wins multiple championships over the long term. To me it’s simply a fools errand. The NFL rules are setup to specifically stop that. From free agency, to the salary cap, to the draft, to even the small variation in scheduling, the NFL is setup to bring teams back to the pack. The only modern day “dynasty” has been NE and they don’t operate at all how you advocate. Ballard will have to prove himself to be head and shoulders better at the draft than any GM in NFL history for it to work. Otherwise I see the limit as being the Polian Colts and Ted Thompson Packers. That isn’t all bad certainly. But I think most would agree that those teams should have more than one title each.
So I guess it’s just business as usual then? Don’t try to innovate or try any different approaches? We’ll just draft and play our games, and if we get lucky win a few games and maybe a Super Bowl because it’s pointless to try and do anything differently. Everything’s already been tried, the margins are too thin, and you can’t out think anyone?

That’s ridiculous. There’s plenty of room for innovating everywhere, the NFL included. You’ve already been proven wrong after you argued last year that Ballard’s approach would lead us into 2-3 years of obscurity. So we had a few holes or weaknesses – what team doesn’t, particularly coming from where we did the year before? I notice you didn’t bring up the OL or the DBs – areas that I’m guessing (but can't recall specifically as I sit here) you were critical of last offseason.

Regarding my casino analogy and the “Moneyball BS”, it’s obvious you don’t fully grasp those examples. Because “mathematical statistics” were involved in those examples, you think the underlying principles don’t have any application here. The more important lesson is that a seemingly slight advantage can make a big difference, and can be all that is needed to turn a loser into a winner. And if you maintain that slight advantage over a long period of time, you will continue to win for a long time as well.

As for the purported hopelessness of trying to become a long term winner in the NFL, despite your suggestion otherwise teams have been doing that since the outset of the league. But you don’t do that by acting like every other team – you need to find inefficiencies and exploit them. That’s what the Colts are trying to do. I don't recall if you were one of the many who were critical of Ballard's 2018 draft, but so far he's proving your current theory wrong there as well.
Reply With Quote
  #204  
Old 06-10-2019, 01:13 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehorse View Post
Opposite extreme from Omaha
You've got that right. I don't have his gift of brevity, sorry.

Last edited by Chaka; 06-10-2019 at 01:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #205  
Old 06-10-2019, 01:20 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyNorm View Post
Houston did get a nice chuck of upfront money, but what makes his deal reasonable IMO is that his 2nd year only has $1M guaranteed. So if he doesn't produce in year 1 we can release him with no long term implications.

With Funchess I don't disagree with bringing him in, but we definitely overpaid for a 1 year rental. Especially on a player with below average production who really regressed this last year. If we had signed him to a similar contract to Ebron's then that would have made a lot more sense.
Those are all fair and reasonable points. I’m still not sure about Houston’s guarantees, however. According to Spotrac, he’s guaranteed $18.5M over two years, with a total contract of $23M. Included within this are the so-called “roster bonuses” of $13M for 2019 and $1M for 2020.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianap...-houston-7789/

Dam had it out with me a month or two ago about these bonuses (specifically the $1M bonus in 2020) and whether it is actually guaranteed, but other than the fact that it’s labeled “roster bonus” I don’t see anywhere to suggest that this isn’t fully guaranteed. I realize the term "roster bonus" implies otherwise, but according to Spotrac, his contract would have a dead cap value of $18.5 million if we cut him, so that appears to include both the 2020 roster bonus and the $3.5 million of the 2020 contract.

Ultimately, we'd have to see the actual contract to resolve this dispute, but until then I'll go with Spotrac.
Reply With Quote
  #206  
Old 06-10-2019, 07:10 AM
Colt Classic Colt Classic is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,681
Thanks: 200
Thanked 448 Times in 282 Posts
Default

It doesn't make sense to extend Doyle either since he's going to be over the hill.

More seriously along with that--any injury/concussion this season would make extending him possibly not in line value-wise with what the extension would be, based on his age.
Reply With Quote
  #207  
Old 06-10-2019, 07:14 AM
JAFF JAFF is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Indiana
Posts: 5,059
Thanks: 2,388
Thanked 2,514 Times in 1,415 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic View Post
It doesn't make sense to extend Doyle either since he's going to be over the hill.

More seriously along with that--any injury/concussion this season would make extending him possibly not in line value-wise with what the extension would be, based on his age.
29 is now the new 60?
Reply With Quote
  #208  
Old 06-10-2019, 08:32 AM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic View Post
It doesn't make sense to extend Doyle either since he's going to be over the hill.

More seriously along with that--any injury/concussion this season would make extending him possibly not in line value-wise with what the extension would be, based on his age.
Not if Ballard signs him again. Then it will be ok because he knows him.

Doyle is the more important TE IMO, and the more difficult to replace. He does a lot of the little things that make the offense go. Kind of like a Rodman on the Bulls, just more likable. However, with his injury history resigning him would be a pretty big risk. I can see a draft pick replacement for him, also depending on how Cox’s blocking looks by the end of the season.

Last edited by Chromeburn; 06-10-2019 at 10:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Chromeburn For This Useful Post:
apballin (06-10-2019)
  #209  
Old 06-10-2019, 10:28 AM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
No, by “business decision” I’m referring to prioritizing getting the best return for dollar spent over the end product on the field. You don’t get extra points in playoff games because you have a really efficient roster and a ton of unused cap space. What actually happens is your weakness at WR and your lack of a pass rush get exposed. The NFL is highly competitive and the margins for error are so thin that always prioritizing the future is going to almost always have you coming up short.

This is an asinine argument. The casino industry is built on proven mathematical statistics. I can point you to the house’s statistical advantage for any table game in the casino. In the long term the math will always win out. Please show me where any such thing exists for NFL roster building. I know 32 teams who would love to have that knowledge. And don’t even bring up “Moneyball” BS or I’ll point out the differences between its applicability to baseball and football and the fact it’s storied inventor never won a title with it.

To me the biggest thing you (and Ballard) are wrong about is the idea that Ballard is going to draft so well that he is going to create a long term dynasty that wins multiple championships over the long term. To me it’s simply a fools errand. The NFL rules are setup to specifically stop that. From free agency, to the salary cap, to the draft, to even the small variation in scheduling, the NFL is setup to bring teams back to the pack. The only modern day “dynasty” has been NE and they don’t operate at all how you advocate. Ballard will have to prove himself to be head and shoulders better at the draft than any GM in NFL history for it to work. Otherwise I see the limit as being the Polian Colts and Ted Thompson Packers. That isn’t all bad certainly. But I think most would agree that those teams should have more than one title each.
You see RM, you obviously can’t grasp what he is trying to say or process the difficult concepts he extols. You should re-read his posts in order to understand them. Once you do understand you will obviously agree with him because he is right.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Chromeburn For This Useful Post:
rm1369 (06-10-2019)
  #210  
Old 06-10-2019, 11:15 AM
Butter's Avatar
Butter Butter is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 6,200
Thanks: 991
Thanked 2,234 Times in 1,167 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
Doesn’t help much this year. Just a waste really
Considering I am referring to cap space and the cash floor it has nothing to do with this year since the space rolls over and nothing is lost if spent next season.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.