Potential FA's on OL next offseason

[BProland85]

If C Stefan Wiesnewski or OG Mike Iupati make it to free agency, I hope Grigson will look hard into acquiring one of them to improve this OL. RT Cherilus could stand to be upgraded as well.

 

Thornton isn't in my opinion showing his mauler mentality in the run game that I thought he had coming out of college, and Holmes is still unproven so we could be looking at potentially replacing 2 interior O linemen.

[NewColtsFan]

I'm all for upgrading the interior line with a quality veteran player....

 

But my hope is that all three guys (Mewhort, Holmes and Thornton) work out and so the veteran guy we grab is a high quality back-up guy as Donald Thomas was for NE for a number of years.

 

If, after this season,  the staff feels like one of them (or two of them) are not going to work out,  then we need to invest in a veteran starter.     Hoping to solve the OL problem with rookies is OK for the long term, but much more problematic in the short term.    We would need a veteran who can step in and deliver quality snaps from jump street.

 

I'd prefer not to use a high or mid-round draft pick next year on an o-lineman.    I'd like to settle this and get things right with a high quality veteran(s) so everyone can feel good about what the Colts are doing.

[Bluefire4]

Yep. And they better hit too. Because Thomas and Cherilus apparently suck.. so they better make sure whoever they get is perfect through psychic ability.

[Valpo2004]

Let's just see how the line pans out this season.  

 

All we need is an average line that can let Luck and all of his offensive weapons do their thing.

 

I mean having one of the best lines in football sounds great but that usually means you have to invest heavily into that one area and it means ignoring other areas.  

 

We have a star QB with some pretty good weapons this season.  If the line works out to be just average then we focus on keeping the nucleus of the offense in town while improving the defense.  

[Superman]

I think, barring unforeseen occurrences, like major injury, we have our starters for the next two or three years. Only replacement we need is at RT, and I think that guy will come through the draft.

 

Veteran depth will be on the menu, I'm sure.

[Valpo2004]

I think, barring unforeseen occurrences, like major injury, we have our starters for the next two or three years. Only replacement we need is at RT, and I think that guy will come through the draft.

 

Veteran depth will be on the menu, I'm sure.

 

You don't think Cherilus is here for the next 2 or 3 years?

 

You know we can't even save cap space by cutting him until 2016.  

[Superman]

You don't think Cherilus is here for the next 2 or 3 years?

 

He probably is, but he's the oldest, has the least upside, and is paid the most. If he doesn't have a good year this season, I think he'll be a cut candidate. There's a lot of dead money, but it's still a plus for the team. Most likely, he stays here at least through 2015.

 

I was only saying that, if we're targeting a replacement, we're probably looking for Cherilus' replacement, and it's probably coming through the draft.

[Valpo2004]

He probably is, but he's the oldest, has the least upside, and is paid the most. If he doesn't have a good year this season, I think he'll be a cut candidate. There's a lot of dead money, but it's still a plus for the team. Most likely, he stays here at least through 2015.

 

I was only saying that, if we're targeting a replacement, we're probably looking for Cherilus' replacement, and it's probably coming through the draft.

 

Ehh given his contract I think it would be silly to even think about doing so until the 2016 draft.  

 

We're kind of stuck with his cap hit for a little while at least and since we are we might as well expend our energies into drafting better defensive players.  

 

He's not bad enough to where it's like "we need a replacement now!"  Last year he was the 2nd best player on our line.  

[Superman]

Ehh given his contract I think it would be silly to even think about doing so until the 2016 draft.  

 

We're kind of stuck with his cap hit for a little while at least and since we are we might as well expend our energies into drafting better defensive players.  

 

If he stinks, it's best to get rid of him before his base salaries increase drastically. It's not a huge deal, but it would make sense. And the 2016 draft is after the 2015 season, which is when I think a decision like this would most likely be made. At that point, it would save the team $4.1m against the cap, and $14.5m cash in 2016 and 2017 combined.

[Valpo2004]

If he stinks, it's best to get rid of him before his base salaries increase drastically. It's not a huge deal, but it would make sense. And the 2016 draft is after the 2015 season, which is when I think a decision like this would most likely be made. At that point, it would save the team $4.1m against the cap, and $14.5m cash in 2016 and 2017 combined.

 

You'd have to hold him for another year to make sure that his drafted replacement is ready to play.

[Superman]

You'd have to hold him for another year to make sure that his drafted replacement is ready to play.

 

You could draft someone in 2015.

[NewColtsFan]

If he stinks, it's best to get rid of him before his base salaries increase drastically. It's not a huge deal, but it would make sense. And the 2016 draft is after the 2015 season, which is when I think a decision like this would most likely be made. At that point, it would save the team $4.1m against the cap, and $14.5m cash in 2016 and 2017 combined.

 

If Cherilous' salaries for '16 and '17 are $9.9 Mill as we've discussed,  then how is the cash saved just $14.5 Mill?

 

Why isn't the cash saved $19.8 Mill?    9.9 x 2 = 19.8.

 

I'm sure there's some NFL book keeping going on here,  but I was wondering if you could explain...?

[Valpo2004]

You could draft someone in 2015.

 

Pretty much would have to draft them in the first or second rounds considering the premium put on tackles.  

 

I'd rather spend that on a need on defense then an attempt to save cap space on offense.  

 

Honestly I would love to see an Iowa guy like Brandon Schreff on the Colts, but as a strategy I think it makes more sense to spent our top picks on the best defensive players available.

[Valpo2004]

If Cherilous' salaries for '16 and '17 are $9.9 Mill as we've discussed,  then how is the cash saved just $14.5 Mill?

 

Why isn't the cash saved $19.8 Mill?    9.9 x 2 = 19.8.

 

I'm sure there's some NFL book keeping going on here,  but I was wondering if you could explain...?

 

He's flipping between cap and cash which is somewhat confusing.

 

Basically Cherilus's salary for 2016 is 7 m and 7.5 M for 2017 hence 14.5 M in cash that could be saved.

 

However both of those years he has a 2.9 M pro-rated cap charge.  That money has already been spent as his signing bonus.

 

His cap charge for 2016 is thus 9.9 M and 10.4 M for 2017. 

 

Clear as mud?

 

http://overthecap.com/player/gosder-cherilus/1008

[Superman]

If Cherilous' salaries for '16 and '17 are $9.9 Mill as we've discussed,  then how is the cash saved just $14.5 Mill?

 

Why isn't the cash saved $19.8 Mill?    9.9 x 2 = 19.8.

 

I'm sure there's some NFL book keeping going on here,  but I was wondering if you could explain...?

 

Cherilus' salaries for '16 and '17 aren't $9.9m. His cap hits are. (Actually, his cap hits are reported differently by different sites, so I'm not sure which is correct. It's either $9.9 each, or $9.9 in '16 and $10.4 in '17.) His salaries are $7m each (or $7m and $7.5m, depending on which is correct). That's where the cash savings comes from.

[Superman]

He's flipping between cap and cash which is somewhat confusing.

 

Basically Cherilus's salary for 2016 is 7 m and 7.5 M for 2017 hence 14.5 M in cash that could be saved.

 

However both of those years he has a 2.9 M pro-rated cap charge.  That money has already been spent as his signing bonus.

 

His cap charge for 2016 is thus 9.9 M and 10.4 M for 2017. 

 

Clear as mud?

 

http://overthecap.com/player/gosder-cherilus/1008

 

I said cap and cash, because I was talking about cap and cash. Some people, including media, use these terms and others interchangeably, so it can be confusing. I try to use the proper term to specify what I'm talking about.

[NewColtsFan]

Thanks to both Valpo and Superman for explaining it to me.

 

Appreciate it!    

[Superman]

Pretty much would have to draft them in the first or second rounds considering the premium put on tackles.  

 

I'd rather spend that on a need on defense then an attempt to save cap space on offense.  

 

Honestly I would love to see an Iowa guy like Brandon Schreff on the Colts, but as a strategy I think it makes more sense to spent our top picks on the best defensive players available.

 

I'd like to see us add some premium prospects on defense as well. But as we all know, every good offensive lineman isn't a first or second round draft pick. If you got a guy in mid rounds and let him sit for a year, he'd be a legitimate option in 2016.

[Valpo2004]

I said cap and cash, because I was talking about cap and cash. Some people, including media, use these terms and others interchangeably, so it can be confusing. I try to use the proper term to specify what I'm talking about.

 

True but only the weirdo's who spend a ton of time on overthecap like us will actually know the difference. :-P

 

The media over simplifies EVERYTHING.  

[Valpo2004]

I'd like to see us add some premium prospects on defense as well. But as we all know, every good offensive lineman isn't a first or second round draft pick. If you got a guy in mid rounds and let him sit for a year, he'd be a legitimate option in 2016.

 

That may be true at center or guard but I doubt that's true at tackle.  Guys who have the feet to handle NFL speed rushers on a consistent basis are harder to find and they end up going pretty early.  

[Superman]

That may be true at center or guard but I doubt that's true at tackle.  Guys who have the feet to handle NFL speed rushers on a consistent basis are harder to find and they end up going pretty early.  

 

Things are changing, I think. Next year's draft has a lot of highly rated skill guys, including QBs, who cost less to sign than they did in previous years. I think that's why guys like Morgan Moses and Billy Turner dropped to the third round. I think you can get quality guys in later rounds, and there are many of them who started at tackle over the last couple years.

 

Or we could wait until 2016 and start a first rounder.

 

I'm not itching to replace Cherilus. I'm just saying that he has to play really well to justify his contract, and if he doesn't, given his age and some significant injuries in the past that might hasten his decline, his position would be a target for a replacement. I'm looking two years down the line, and his situation stands out the most. It doesn't help that he's been sloppy and looked slow in preseason.

[Valpo2004]

Things are changing, I think. Next year's draft has a lot of highly rated skill guys, including QBs, who cost less to sign than they did in previous years. I think that's why guys like Morgan Moses and Billy Turner dropped to the third round. I think you can get quality guys in later rounds, and there are many of them who started at tackle over the last couple years.

 

Or we could wait until 2016 and start a first rounder.

 

I'm not itching to replace Cherilus. I'm just saying that he has to play really well to justify his contract, and if he doesn't, given his age and some significant injuries in the past that might hasten his decline, his position would be a target for a replacement. I'm looking two years down the line, and his situation stands out the most. It doesn't help that he's been sloppy and looked slow in preseason.

 

I think that's on Grigs for handing him an bloated contract in the first place.  

 

However I think the reason he did that was we had plenty of cap space but little talent and he had to make sure that when a FA came in the door they didn't leave without a contract.

 

Honestly I think we overpaid for a lot of guys during the 2013 off season.  But I also think that was a strategy.  

[Superman]

I think that's on Grigs for handing him an bloated contract in the first place.  

 

However I think the reason he did that was we had plenty of cap space but little talent and he had to make sure that when a FA came in the door they didn't leave without a contract.

 

Honestly I think we overpaid for a lot of guys during the 2013 off season.  But I also think that was a strategy.  

 

If we overpaid anyone, it wasn't by much. I think making Cherilus the highest paid RT by a little bit was appropriate. They wanted him, and went and got him.

 

What makes his contract bloated in later years is the error that forced the team to restructure the contract with extra prorated bonus. Made it backloaded. But $7m/year for a high quality RT isn't anything to be upset over, I don't think.

[Valpo2004]

If we overpaid anyone, it wasn't by much. I think making Cherilus the highest paid RT by a little bit was appropriate. They wanted him, and went and got him.

 

What makes his contract bloated in later years is the error that forced the team to restructure the contract with extra prorated bonus. Made it backloaded. But $7m/year for a high quality RT isn't anything to be upset over, I don't think.

 

Even without that error you are still looking at 9 million in the later years of the contract though.  

 

It was bloated due in part to his age.  You don't generally want to be committed to a lot of dead money for a player after they turn 30.  

[Superman]

Even without that error you are still looking at 9 million in the later years of the contract though.  

 

It was bloated due in part to his age.  You don't generally want to be committed to a lot of dead money for a player after they turn 30.  

 

Backloaded salary is fine, kind of preferable. That way, if you want to cut him later on, you save more money (and that's still true in Cherilus' case). But coupled with a larger than usual signing bonus (for Grigson), and additional prorated bonus, you have a higher net savings threshold in later years, making it harder to pull the trigger on a release because there's less net cap savings from doing so.

 

To me, the key is looking at cap space as a year-to-year issue, not one year at a time. Once you pay money, it's spent, so if you save $7m, you save $7m, even if the savings aren't realized on this year's cap. Bonus money is already gone, and already on the cap. Can't change it. But if you can realize net savings, or if you're okay with no net savings because the player isn't performing and you're saving a lot of cash (which will eventually be cap savings), then make a move.

 

So despite the nature of the contract, if Cherilus isn't performing in 2014 and 2015, I doubt he's here in 2016. With or without a highly rated replacement.

[Track Guy]

I'm all for upgrading the interior line with a quality veteran player....

 

But my hope is that all three guys (Mewhort, Holmes and Thornton) work out and so the veteran guy we grab is a high quality back-up guy as Donald Thomas was for NE for a number of years.

 

If, after this season,  the staff feels like one of them (or two of them) are not going to work out,  then we need to invest in a veteran starter.     Hoping to solve the OL problem with rookies is OK for the long term, but much more problematic in the short term.    We would need a veteran who can step in and deliver quality snaps from jump street.

 

I'd prefer not to use a high or mid-round draft pick next year on an o-lineman.    I'd like to settle this and get things right with a high quality veteran(s) so everyone can feel good about what the Colts are doing.

 

Mostly agree. But assuming our 3 starters now are all doing ok, I still think investing in another O-lineman fairly early in the draft next year might be smart, even if the guy doesn't start immediately.

[Manning1887]

Too much money to sign those two. I would rather draft an offensive lineman in the 4th or 5th round. 

[ztboiler]

Backloaded salary is fine, kind of preferable. That way, if you want to cut him later on, you save more money (and that's still true in Cherilus' case). But coupled with a larger than usual signing bonus (for Grigson), and additional prorated bonus, you have a higher net savings threshold in later years, making it harder to pull the trigger on a release because there's less net cap savings from doing so.

 

To me, the key is looking at cap space as a year-to-year issue, not one year at a time. Once you pay money, it's spent, so if you save $7m, you save $7m, even if the savings aren't realized on this year's cap. Bonus money is already gone, and already on the cap. Can't change it. But if you can realize net savings, or if you're okay with no net savings because the player isn't performing and you're saving a lot of cash (which will eventually be cap savings), then make a move.

 

So despite the nature of the contract, if Cherilus isn't performing in 2014 and 2015, I doubt he's here in 2016. With or without a highly rated replacement.

Bingo.  Most are overlooking what a good situation we are in with GC's contract overall and that the "error" is a zero sum game in the end and has no effect on our cap situation in future years because we haven't used up the cap savings we gained through the error.

 

We have all sorts of options:

A - Cut GC 2015 = 2 yrs/$16.5M or $8.25M per yr.

B - Cut GC 2016 = 3 yrs./$20.5M or$6.83M per yr.

C - Reduce 2016/17 salaries to $4M/yr. = 5yr/$28.5M or $5.7M per yr.

 

About the only option not on the table is paying him $7M and $7.5M bases in 16/17.  Not even GC believes he'll ever see that.

 

It's in our best interest to draft a developmental tackle prospect in 2015 (Rd. 3,4,5 or 6) and hope to start him at RT in 2016.