Colts signing Justin Houston

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by Chaka

I'm glad to hear you say that. I want to like this signing, but I just get an uneasy feeling about it. If Washington had made this signing, would it deserve as much praise? I suppose I'll reserve judgment until I see the contract terms.

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?

Exactly. Its all monopoly money.

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by JAFF

Exactly. Its all monopoly money.

Shut up

[apballin]

Love this move

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Why the fuck do the contract terms matter at this point?

Since you asked so nicely, I’ll tell you. The terms of the contract matter because we have a salary cap, and a good general manager needs to consider cap implications no matter how much cap space is presently available. I suspect you’ll say that we have so much cap space that we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s the same logic that drives lottery winners bankrupt a few years after winning. You ALWAYS have to consider the cap when evaluating a contract. While it is nice to have lots of cap space, a few bad deals and you’re back struggling against the cap like everyone else. I’ve explained this in detail in other threads, and won’t repeat it here, but essentially, the playing field is level as everyone has the same salary cap. It’s how you spend your allotted money that makes all the difference (and please don’t tell me that it’s all about drafting well or having a good QB – those are simply the other side of the same coin).

It seems to me that Houston is a risky signing. The degree of risk is in large part a function of the contract price. The guy is past his prime, he’s been plagued by injuries over the last few years, and he’s now changing teams and being asked to change his position. Not saying that it’s not a risk worth taking, given his history, but the risk is much greater if, for instance, his contract is fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins-style contract. If the Colts have the option of exiting after the first year (like with Hankins) then the risk is reduced.

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

[Oldcolt]

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

I think signing Houston makes sense:

1 it addresses a need and there are few unknowns
2 maybe ballard is concerned about what DE will fall to them in the draft.
3 they take a De in the first round. Depth with ability cant hurt
4 hand up or doesnt matter, he knows how to play. Even freeney didnt start a game immedately.
5 it puts pressure on the young guys to step it up or get less playing time

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

Chaka I appreciate your concern but do not share it. Yes Houston has some red flags. I'm assuming everyone in free agency does. His are not that large and even though he is changing position he has played quite a bit with his hand in the dirt. He should be a big help on pass rush. As far as Ballard changing his approach with this I'm not so sure. Everything I've read about Houston says he is great in the locker room. It is a two year deal that does nothing to hinder the build for this team. He helps out in one of our greatest needs. He does't fix it but he helps. It seems like a good signing.

No problem Oldcolt. I really don’t mean to rain on everyone’s parade, but I’ve seen a lot of backslapping but very little commentary on the issues I’ve mentioned. I understand what you’re saying and I agree to a certain extent. I am excited to see what a great pass rusher can do in our defense. I’m just concerned about seeing us make this type of move – signing high-priced veterans who are on the downside of their careers is generally a bad practice and usually the type of thing I expect from Washington or the Raiders (sorry to keep using them as an example, but they are such easy targets).

I’ve tried to be clear that this may be an understandable exception given Ballard’s presumed “inside” knowledge of Houston and our obvious need at the position, but I certainly don’t want to see the Colts make a habit of this type of signing because I think such an approach will ultimately blow up in their face. Nobody here has been a bigger supporter of Ballard’s approach than me, but I don’t blindly follow him. What I’ve liked (and continue to like) is his very businesslike practical approach to running the Colts, and I think we can reach the goal he has set (long term dominance) if he stays the course. This move is a little different than what I was expecting, that’s all.

[Chromeburn]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Since you asked so nicely, I’ll tell you. The terms of the contract matter because we have a salary cap, and a good general manager needs to consider cap implications no matter how much cap space is presently available. I suspect you’ll say that we have so much cap space that we shouldn’t worry about it. It’s the same logic that drives lottery winners bankrupt a few years after winning. You ALWAYS have to consider the cap when evaluating a contract. While it is nice to have lots of cap space, a few bad deals and you’re back struggling against the cap like everyone else. I’ve explained this in detail in other threads, and won’t repeat it here, but essentially, the playing field is level as everyone has the same salary cap. It’s how you spend your allotted money that makes all the difference (and please don’t tell me that it’s all about drafting well or having a good QB – those are simply the other side of the same coin).

It seems to me that Houston is a risky signing. The degree of risk is in large part a function of the contract price. The guy is past his prime, he’s been plagued by injuries over the last few years, and he’s now changing teams and being asked to change his position. Not saying that it’s not a risk worth taking, given his history, but the risk is much greater if, for instance, his contract is fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins-style contract. If the Colts have the option of exiting after the first year (like with Hankins) then the risk is reduced.

This is not the type of signing that Ballard has made in the past. While he has brought in some veterans, they’ve mostly been low cost, serviceable role players. Ballard has emphasized youth and development. So it also concerns me that this is a departure from what I thought was his gameplan. Now, I realize he has a history with Houston, and that 30 is not over-the-hill for a pass rusher, so I remain hopeful. It also might be that Ballard is not satisfied with Turay’s development progress, and doesn’t foresee getting anyone in the draft who can immediately help. I don’t know. It’s just a striking departure from Ballard’s past strategy, so I expressed some concern.

Are you an accountant/money manager?

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by Chromeburn

Are you an accountant/money manager?

No I am not.