Colts first UFA WR Devin Funchess

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

The money is high, but i agree, was probably the only way he would take the deal.

I don't understand why someone like Funchess would have any leverage.

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme as long as signings like this don't become a habit. It seems like a bad contract to me. If he sucks, or even if he's OK but not great, then we just paid $10M+ for yet another disappointing/trash WR2. If he plays well, then Ballard has put himself in a bad position to re-sign him.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by FatDT

I don't understand why someone like Funchess would have any leverage.

It's not a big deal in the grand scheme as long as signings like this don't become a habit. It seems like a bad contract to me. If he sucks, or even if he's OK but not great, then we just paid $10M+ for yet another disappointing/trash WR2. If he plays well, then Ballard has put himself in a bad position to re-sign him.

He doesn’t have any leverage, and it is a bad contract. I would say he is worth half that. He is a stopgap till our own draft picks develop. I bet they draft a big WR in the draft now. He could probably get a multi year deal somewhere else for less money if he waited. He should put up better numbers fitting a niche in our offense for certain routes. Unless he absolutely dominates, I doubt we have any intention of resigning him.

We aren’t going to spend much money again. We tried for Amos and Smith and got outbid again. So 10 million is nothing this year.

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

We aren’t going to spend much money again. We tried for Amos and Smith and got outbid again. So 10 million is nothing this year.

I agree it is nothing. It just seems really inconsistent with Ballard's approach. I don't see much upside. The floor is a D+/C- and the ceiling is maybe a B- or B.

If Desir goes to another team for a "reasonable" overpay this move will look that much dumber.

[rcubed]

Originally Posted by FatDT

I agree it is nothing. It just seems really inconsistent with Ballard's approach. I don't see much upside. The floor is a D+/C- and the ceiling is maybe a B- or B.

If Desir goes to another team for a "reasonable" overpay this move will look that much dumber.

how does one affect the other?

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

He doesn’t have any leverage, and it is a bad contract. I would say he is worth half that. He is a stopgap till our own draft picks develop. I bet they draft a big WR in the draft now. He could probably get a multi year deal somewhere else for less money if he waited. He should put up better numbers fitting a niche in our offense for certain routes. Unless he absolutely dominates, I doubt we have any intention of resigning him.

We aren’t going to spend much money again. We tried for Amos and Smith and got outbid again. So 10 million is nothing this year.

He reached an agreement on the first day, so it's fair to say he was probably overpaid. That said, the truth is that you have no idea how much leverage he had in these negotiations. First, you don't know what other teams might have been pursuing him. Second, he agreed to sign a one-year deal on the first day, so he'll need to be paid for that. Third, he's 25 years old, has elite size, and is a former 2nd round pick who started for a playoff team - most of the other free agent WRs are much older and on the downside of their careers. He's not perfect, but he's got value.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Coltsalr

Actually, particularly with Humphries, I thought that his quick twitch ability to get open quickly would fit well with Reich’s hope or quick release passes.

It’d be nice if Funchess could do what you’re saying, but I’m skeptical to say the least.

Based on what?

[Coltsalr]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

Based on what?

That I’m skeptical that Funchess’ numbers will elevate? The fact that he’s never done it before.

[Oldcolt]

I totally understand why people would be skeptical. My optimism is not based on Funchess himself. Yes he has great physical attributes. He hasn't turned himself into a player to match those attributes so far. My faith is not in him but in Reich and the coaching staff. They seem to be able to put players in position to due whatever it is that that particular player is best at. They also show patience in working things out. Remember the offensive play calling the first part of last year. It evolved as the team began to come together. Even though they were losing, no panic. I really believe this is a damn good coaching staff and that fuels my optimism about this signing.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

I totally understand why people would be skeptical. My optimism is not based on Funchess himself. Yes he has great physical attributes. He hasn't turned himself into a player to match those attributes so far. My faith is not in him but in Reich and the coaching staff. They seem to be able to put players in position to due whatever it is that that particular player is best at. They also show patience in working things out. Remember the offensive play calling the first part of last year. It evolved as the team began to come together. Even though they were losing, no panic. I really believe this is a damn good coaching staff and that fuels my optimism about this signing.

I would put it this way: Funchess has physical abilities that I trust Reich to maximize and use to great effect.

[rm1369]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Understood, those are some reasonable points, and I’ll admit that I don’t feel I completely understand this signing. On the one hand, I don’t see it as a “placeholder” type signing as you described it, because (1) Funchess was signed on the first negotiating day, so we obviously targeted him, (2) the dollar amount of the contract is high, and (3) he fills a specific position of need (big bodied outside receiver)

On the other hand, it’s also curious because we haven’t committed to him long term, and we didn’t get any option years, so those items support your argument. The lack of option years is notable in particular and unusual for Ballard except, as I’m sure you’ll point out, for Grant last year (and Slauson if I recall). However, neither of those deals was nearly as high profile as this signing, and both of those players were signed deep in the free agent period when the Colts had much more leverage. This might also be the only one-year deal announced yesterday, so it's unusual in that sense as well.

So I can’t quite figure it out. My best guess is that the Colts are suspicious of free agent wide receivers, having been burned by several over the last few years (Grant, Andre Johnson, Kamar Aiken, etc) and thus feel that it would be better to bring someone in for one year to see if they fit before making a long term commitment. If they do, it will end up costing them a bit more, but if it doesn’t work out they don’t get stuck in a large, long term, unproductive contract. However, this one year strategy wouldn’t be appealing to the uppermost tier of free agents who have the leverage to secure a long term guaranteed deal, but might be attractive to a slightly lesser free agent like Funchess who could have the hope of getting a big time deal next year with a productive 2019.

So, while all of this is just a guess of course, it really doesn’t feel like a placeholder-type signing to me. And I’ll admit that it is a little perplexing. Regardless, I’m still excited about this signing following the relative success of last year’s free agent crop. Funchess is a big-bodied 25 year old receiver who is heading into (rather than out of) his prime years, and Ballard has proven to be a strong talent evaluator – both in the draft and free agency. So I think there’s reasonable grounds to expect Funchess to play well and prove to be an asset to our team.

If they want to evaluate the fit that’s fine, but they should have required a 2nd year team option. Yes, I get that Funchess may not want that, but if he wouldn’t agree to a 2nd year at $13m that tells me he’s looking to get paid. That’s fine, but it doesn’t bode well for him being retained long term. Yes I admit it’s possible. However seeing the money being thrown around by teams how confident are you that if Ebron was on a one year deal that he would be retained after the season he had? After the things he went thru in Detroit he seems to be appreciate what he has here, but would he turn down being the highest paid TE in the league. It’s certainly possible he’d get that kind of offer. If not highest paid, then certainly top 3. Would Ballard be willing to commit that kind of money to Ebron after one year? I doubt it. The 2nd year on Ebron’s contract is huge right now.

Ballard should have required a 2nd year team option. If they are that high on him then they should have bought the 2nd year with more money this year or a partial gaurentee next year. This is a great deal for Funchess, but is very very likely a one year rental for the Colts.