How the Colts can sign Mo Wilkerson in 2017

[Superman]

I'm assuming that Von Miller gets a long term deal from the Broncos, and Wilkerson does not get a deal from the Jets. That's the way things look right now. I'm also assuming that the Jets won't franchise tag him twice in a row. That makes Wilkerson the best potential free agent in 2017, by far. He's great against the run and he's an excellent pass rusher, and he'll be 27 next offseason. I want him, bring him to me.

 

Here's how the Colts can make this work. Some further assumptions: The Colts release D'Qwell Jackson, Arthur Jones and Frank Gore after the 2016 season, saving over $12m in 2017 cap space. Luck is extended, and his cap hit for 2017 is ~$22m (with averages through 2021 of $24m/year). Luck also has cash due in 2017 of $30m (figuring his base salary and an option bonus). The only free agents the Colts would might consider high priorities would be Mathis, Thornton and Moore, and I'm being bullish on all three at this point. Other mention-worthy free agents include, Cole, Adams, Walden, Butler, and Doyle; none of them are essential. Before free agency, the Colts would have cap commitments of about $110m, with cash due of about $120m. The NFL salary cap should be ~$166m, conservatively. Yes, I'm suggesting the Colts will have $55m+ in cap space going into 2017, based on those moves.

 

Two other assumptions: Re-sign Moncrief and Mewhort while they have one year remaining. Let's say that adds ~$15m to the cap, and $30m to cash output. The Colts still would have plenty of cap space, but their cash would be at $150m in 2017, which is a lot, especially given the assumption that with Luck's new deal they'll be above $150m in cash in 2016.

 

Now I'm going to ask Irsay to spend another $43m in cash on Wilkerson. Total contract offer will be five years, $95m, with $61m effectively guaranteed. Signing bonus is $15m, Year 1 salary is $13m, for a cap hit of $16m. Year 2 and Year 3 cap hits are $18m and $21m, with cash of $15m and $18m, for total cash through three years of $61m. I'd stagger his Year 2 and 3 salary guarantees, and I'd include guaranteed roster bonuses to secure his cash while reducing the amount of escrow cash needed at signing. Year 4 and Year 5 are not guaranteed, and the cap hits are $22.5m each year. Wilkerson would be the second highest paid non-QB, behind only Ndamukong Suh, and only slightly, with more effectively guaranteed. If you want to add on a 6th year to make him a $105m guy, fine, but structurally, the contract basically remains the same.

 

The 2015 draft class are eligible for new contracts in 2018, the following season, but are not free agents until 2019. Still a long way to go before they need to be paid. The Colts could lay low on big contracts in 2018, maybe preemptively locking up Dorsett and Anderson, if it makes sense.

 

Prior to any other free agency signings, re-signing their own players, or signing draft picks, after signing Wilkerson, the Colts would be at ~$141m in 2017, with a salary cap of ~$166m. Still $25m to sign picks, and retain Mathis, Moore and Thornton, if needed.

 

This probably has a less than 1% chance of happening, because a) free agents go where they want to go, and b) the cash flow / guarantees would be difficult and risky. But it's still doable, and this is basically how it would have to be done. Probably an exercise in futility, but I wanted to share my thinking, so when you hear me saying 'the Colts CAN afford Mo Wilkerson,' you'll understand why.

[The Peytonator]

I like that we're looking to be in pretty good shape as far as the cap next year. I'd also be okay with cutting Langford. Not because he's bad, he'll just be 31 with a lot of snaps played, and he seemed to be someone that slows down significantly as the games go on. That will only get worse after another year. Wilkerson/Anderson would be amazing, and we'd have our very own 'Sons of Anarchy'. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Not going to happen. It's not in colts DNA to sign Big $ free agents, espcecially on defense. 

[BOTT]

14 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

Not going to happen. It's not in colts DNA to sign Big $ free agents, espcecially on defense. 

And you know this how?  Guys of Wilkerson's caliber and age are rarely available....I have no idea what Grigson will do.  Polian, yes.  Grigson no.

[crazycolt1]

14 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

Not going to happen. It's not in colts DNA to sign Big $ free agents, espcecially on defense. 

The Polian DNA has been quite a while now.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Very well thought out and reasoned write up Supe....I especially like/agree with extending Moncrief and Mewhort regardless of going after Mo or not.

[jameszeigler834]

19 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

I like that we're looking to be in pretty good shape as far as the cap next year. I'd also be okay with cutting Langford. Not because he's bad, he'll just be 31 with a lot of snaps played, and he seemed to be someone that slows down significantly as the games go on. That will only get worse after another year. Wilkerson/Anderson would be amazing, and we'd have our very own 'Sons of Anarchy'. 

I would keep him he was really good I think he has 3-5 more really good years in him.

[Superman]

19 hours ago, The Peytonator said:

I like that we're looking to be in pretty good shape as far as the cap next year. I'd also be okay with cutting Langford. Not because he's bad, he'll just be 31 with a lot of snaps played, and he seemed to be someone that slows down significantly as the games go on. That will only get worse after another year. Wilkerson/Anderson would be amazing, and we'd have our very own 'Sons of Anarchy'. 

 

Adding Wilkerson reduces Langford's reps. He's making moderate money and will have cap hits of ~$4.5m/year, but I think he'd be even better in a reduced role. I wouldn't be in a rush to get rid of him, and as outlined above, it's not a necessity. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

Very well thought out and reasoned write up Supe....I especially like/agree with extending Moncrief and Mewhort regardless of going after Mo or not.

 

Yeah I figure the Colts will continue to follow the Castonzo/Hilton program for quality draft picks. Exercise the fifth year option for first rounders and extend them after four years, extend later picks after three years. Of course, based on their worthiness. Assume Mewhort and Moncrief start in 2016 and produce well, I'd expect them both to get new deals next offseason.

[Narcosys]

Idk what to really say right now,  you blew my mind.

[Track Guy]

I imagine it's not the most likely scenario, but it would be easy to get excited about getting a player that good.  

[ReMeDy]

On 6/17/2016 at 10:05 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

Not going to happen. It's not in colts DNA to sign Big $ free agents, espcecially on defense. 

 

In the Polian days I would agree to this, but nowadays, you're talking about Grigson and the kind of cash he threw out for some defensive acquisitions that were heavily scrutinized by us at the time. We're also talking about the guy who traded a 1st round pick for a HB.

[RockThatBlue]

On 6/17/2016 at 10:05 PM, LJpalmbeacher said:

Not going to happen. It's not in colts DNA to sign Big $ free agents, espcecially on defense. 

Were you in a coma last offseason?

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, RockThatBlue said:

Were you in a coma last offseason?

 

No I wasn't,were you?

Are you comparing the last season's signings to what Superman was talking about?

All of last year's signings were peanuts compared to what it will take to sign Wilkerson. All of them were cap friendly and easy to get out of and don't compare to the talent that Wilkerson has. You really comparing the signings of Gore, Johnson, Trent Cole to someone like Wilkerson?

[rock8591]

16 hours ago, BOTT said:

And you know this how?  Guys of Wilkerson's caliber and age are rarely available....I have no idea what Grigson will do.  Polian, yes.  Grigson no.

 

Agreed 100,000%.

 

Every time I think about Polian and how he wasted away Peyton's years with the likes of 260-270 lbs DTs on defense, refusing to sign defensive players, amongst other things makes my blood boil. The entire culture of neglecting defense while favoring skill players on offense made us a joke in the playoffs.

 

Grigson is already 100x the GM that Polian was, and that's all I have to say on the matter. He has completely changed the culture and DNA of the team, made us a lot more risk-taking and unpredictable.

[akcolt]

I have been wishing we bring in Wilkerson since before the draft. He's a sure fire way of getting pressure on the QB. He'd solidify the DL and make the D better right now.  

 

The monster would finally have some teeth. There's not a better place to spend money than in the trenches. 

 

We make this move grab a couple of OLB's maybe a CB in next years draft. All of a sudden the D is looking pretty good. 

[TheRustonRifle#7]

18 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah I figure the Colts will continue to follow the Castonzo/Hilton program for quality draft picks. Exercise the fifth year option for first rounders and extend them after four years, extend later picks after three years. Of course, based on their worthiness. Assume Mewhort and Moncrief start in 2016 and produce well, I'd expect them both to get new deals next offseason.

It is definitely the most prudent approach, imo. 

[Superman]

12 hours ago, rock8591 said:

 

Agreed 100,000%.

 

Every time I think about Polian and how he wasted away Peyton's years with the likes of 260-270 lbs DTs on defense, refusing to sign defensive players, amongst other things makes my blood boil. The entire culture of neglecting defense while favoring skill players on offense made us a joke in the playoffs.

 

Grigson is already 100x the GM that Polian was, and that's all I have to say on the matter. He has completely changed the culture and DNA of the team, made us a lot more risk-taking and unpredictable.

 

Small defensive tackles was Dungy's deal, not Polian's. 

 

Bill Polian has a MUCH better resume than Grigson. I totally disagree with you there.

[Superman]

14 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 

No I wasn't,were you?

Are you comparing the last season's signings to what Superman was talking about?

All of last year's signings were peanuts compared to what it will take to sign Wilkerson. All of them were cap friendly and easy to get out of and don't compare to the talent that Wilkerson has. You really comparing the signings of Gore, Johnson, Trent Cole to someone like Wilkerson?

 

You're right to an extent. It's not Colts-like to spend huge money on one player in free agency, on either side of the ball. The spending sprees, if you want to call them that, have included multiple players on flexible structure contracts. 

 

However, I'm not talking about the Colts changing their method of operation. I'm talking about a one-off for a great player who fits the scheme. I'd rather have one star level guy for $19m/year than three decent players for $6m/year. If the Colts did break their own mold to sign Wilkerson to a huge contract -- which I do not expect -- they wouldn't do anything like this again for several years, I'm sure. Especially if the Wilkerson deal turned out to be anything other than a smashing success. 

 

Again, this isn't likely to happen. These are just my thoughts.

[OffensivelyPC]

On 6/18/2016 at 8:49 PM, Narcosys said:

Idk what to really say right now,  you blew my mind.

Still oen of the best GIFs ever to grace the internet.  

 

FUNNY.  EVERY.  TIME.

[OffensivelyPC]

If Wilkerson has any interest here at all, I would probably expect Grigson to try to make it happen.  I've always said that they (Grigs and Pags) have 2 years to really do something before their contracts are under "further evaluation."  We've seen it time and time again, GMs or GM/Coaches who are basically on the hot seat go balls out and make unusual spends hoping ot put together a team to gets him retained.  Sometime it works, sometimes it doesn't, and perhaps other times, the owner reigns in the spending in the name of preserving the future.  A spend for Wilkerson, if it's feasible at all on Wilkerson's side makes a ton of sense on Grigson's side as well.

[Valpo2004]

I'd rather not do that personally.  A lot of other holes on this team we could use that money to fill.  

 

And honestly the paying big money for stars from other teams doesn't seem to have the greatest track record right now.  

 

We should get stars from the draft. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Valpo2004 said:

A lot of other holes on this team we could use that money to fill.  

 

Like what, and how?

 

I personally don't think this team has a lot of holes. It just has a couple of holes at very important positions, most notably pass rusher. We'll see what happens at safety and corner, but the team has invested draft picks at both positions and appears to have nice competition across all DB spots right now. Surely you're not suggesting spending money on a RB... So where are these holes, specifically holes that signing Wilkerson would NOT address? And don't forget that he is a pass rusher, with two double digit sack seasons in the last three years...

 

And if you want an edge rusher, who are you looking at in 2017 free agency? Look at next year's pending FA class. There's no one -- besides Von Miller, and I started off saying I don't think he hits free agency no matter what -- who would address the pass rush, unless you're holding out for a one year flash in 2016. 

 

We should absolutely get stars from the draft. But I don't agree with turning your nose up at great players who fit your scheme when you have the cap space needed.

[Valpo2004]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Like what, and how?

 

I personally don't think this team has a lot of holes. It just has a couple of holes at very important positions, most notably pass rusher. We'll see what happens at safety and corner, but the team has invested draft picks at both positions and appears to have nice competition across all DB spots right now. Surely you're not suggesting spending money on a RB... So where are these holes, specifically holes that signing Wilkerson would NOT address? And don't forget that he is a pass rusher, with two double digit sack seasons in the last three years...

 

And if you want an edge rusher, who are you looking at in 2017 free agency? Look at next year's pending FA class. There's no one -- besides Von Miller, and I started off saying I don't think he hits free agency no matter what -- who would address the pass rush, unless you're holding out for a one year flash in 2016. 

 

We should absolutely get stars from the draft. But I don't agree with turning your nose up at great players who fit your scheme when you have the cap space needed.

 

Ok for the sake of argument let's say that Green, Geathers, and Robinson all pan out.  That situation I would say would be ideal for signing a big name like Wilkerson.  But I don't really think you can expect that.

 

Still we havn't invested heavily in linebackers.  I mean you mentioned yourself about cutting De'Qwell.  Who we going to replace him with?  You plan on starting Irving and Moore back there at ILB?

 

Walden's contract is nearing it's end. . . What are we going to do at his spot?

 

Also I think we need to look at TE.  I'm not convinced we made the right call in keeping Allen because I don't think he's going to be much of a receiving threat.

 

And while I don't want to spend big money (over 5 mil APY) on a RB, I would not mind investing in one in FA.

 

I suppose if everything turns out sunny and every player works out great then yeah, I don't mind putting some money on a star.  But I just don't think that's going to happen and my experience is that most of Grigson's moves don't work out.   If they do then we are already SB contenders.  

 

 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Ok for the sake of argument let's say that Green, Geathers, and Robinson all pan out.  That situation I would say would be ideal for signing a big name like Wilkerson.  But I don't really think you can expect that.

 

Still we havn't invested heavily in linebackers.  I mean you mentioned yourself about cutting De'Qwell.  Who we going to replace him with?  You plan on starting Irving and Moore back there at ILB?

 

Walden's contract is nearing it's end. . . What are we going to do at his spot?

 

Also I think we need to look at TE.  I'm not convinced we made the right call in keeping Allen because I don't think he's going to be much of a receiving threat.

 

And while I don't want to spend big money (over 5 mil APY) on a RB, I would not mind investing in one in FA.

 

I suppose if everything turns out sunny and every player works out great then yeah, I don't mind putting some money on a star.  But I just don't think that's going to happen and my experience is that most of Grigson's moves don't work out.   If they do then we are already SB contenders.  

 

If we fast forward to the 2017 offseason, we'll have a much better idea on Geathers and Robinson. I don't expect Green to get a lot of reps this year, but at the same time that probably means the team isn't looking to sign a FA to take that spot. I think Green is the assumed starter going into 2017.

 

I personally think ILB can be okay, but that requires Moore and Irving to play well. There are a couple other young players who will get a chance as well -- Sylvestre, Herrera, Morrison. 

 

At ILB and OLB, let's say the players on the roster don't work out and there's a need to replace them. What are you looking at in free agency? What two players at ILB/OLB that are coming up for free agency in 2017 would have as much impact as Wilkerson? To me, those are the positions for which the draft will be critical. And even if you want to supplement with a vet, Sam backer isn't an expensive position to fill. A Courtney Upshaw kind of player on a low level contract would be ideal.

 

I'm not worried about TE, and even if Allen doesn't work out for whatever reason, they aren't about to spend money trying to fix that position. Same thing at RB. And keep in mind, in my scenario, the team still has cap space.

 

A lot can change in a year, obviously. But if the Colts look to have a good secondary and viable players at ILB, then I don't see anyone in FA that would have the impact that Wilkerson could have for the Colts. He immediately upgrades your front in both phases, and I don't think anything is more important than that.

 

Grigson might not be the greatest, but he's not reckless, especially with cap spending. While he's made some splashes, he hasn't thrown big money at any one player, and that's mostly because, like you said, free agency is risky. But there are a few players over the last few years that have made a big difference for their new team -- Revis, Talib, Ware, Maclin, McPhee, etc. To me, this is the proper circumstance, and I don't think the timing could be any better. 

[loudnproudcolt]

Put me in the category of one who would love to see Wilkerson. I think the DL is very promising after last years draft, and Hassan Ridgeway could be a great pick, but need a year to adjust. Wilkerson would make our DL one of the best if we keep progressing. I agree the Jets are not going to sign him to big money. I believe they have decided on Sheldon Williams, and then Leonard Williams in a couple of years to resign.

 

The two problems I foresee. The Jets could put a second tag on him even at 120%. He would make around 19M, but this is becoming close to the norm for great Defensive players. Think of all the players this year who have got big money. The second tag on him would be expensive, but I believe the Jets would do it more from a trading standpoint.They would have traded him before or during the draft for a first rounder.

Wilkerson is worth a first, but first round picks are so valuable due to getting great talent for 5 years on the cheap. I would still be willing to give up a second for him, but not a first.

 

The second problem I think would be a problem is the cash guarantee, and Sup. you mentioned our cash levels already are high. With you look at guarantees, especially for DL, they are climbing at a fast clip. I think it is a matter of salaries catching up with the cap also. Look at Dareus guaranteed, and now look at Fletcher Cox. He has just over 55M in guaranteed money. Wilkerson is going to want more. If you get him at 43M, great, but each one of the DL keep setting the bar higher, and Vonn Miller believes he should be the highest paid, and I agree with him. Suh was an outlier, but I believe Miller is going to make guaranteed money go up again, which is the biggest impediment to signing someone like Mo. I would really love to have him. I love our offense, especially if the new OL is good, but I would really like a defense which is nasty, and you can count on. For all the years the Colts have been good, it has always been the offense carrying the water for the most part. I would love to have a great defense, and not be worried every time the other team has the ball. Plus I would love to see Tom Brady crushed!

[Superman]

3 hours ago, loudnproudcolt said:

The two problems I foresee. The Jets could put a second tag on him even at 120%. He would make around 19M, but this is becoming close to the norm for great Defensive players. Think of all the players this year who have got big money. The second tag on him would be expensive, but I believe the Jets would do it more from a trading standpoint.They would have traded him before or during the draft for a first rounder.

 

I don't see them tagging him a second time. They're already up against the cap, with no QB. They have $150m committed in 2017 as of right now, so they'd have to do some serious pruning to even have the cap space available to tag Wilkerson again. If they were going to get a good trade offer for him, they'd be getting it right now. Anything is possible, but I don't see it happening. 

 

Quote

Look at Dareus guaranteed, and now look at Fletcher Cox. He has just over 55M in guaranteed money. Wilkerson is going to want more. If you get him at 43M, great, but each one of the DL keep setting the bar higher,

 

I probably confused you with my contract structure, and I didn't offer all the details. Cox's guaranteed at signing is actually $36m, with effective guarantees of $55m, and once the staggered guarantees all fall in line, it's $63m. My offer to Wilkerson could beat all of those benchmarks. I would basically use roster bonuses and salaries in tandem to meet the guarantee and payout numbers, and I would stagger them to so as to avoid having to fund the guarantees at signing.

 

Click the tag for an example:

 

Year 1:

Signing bonus $15m, salary $13m

Year 2: Roster bonus $5m, salary $10m, cap hit $18m, dead money $22m

Year 3: Roster bonus $5m, salary $13m, cap hit $21m, dead money $22m (by virtue of $5m of the Year 3 salary going guaranteed in Year 2)

Year 4: cap hit $20m, dead money $6m

Year 5: cap hit $20m, dead money $3m (my original cap hits for Years 4 and 5 were off)

 

The bolded amounts are fully guaranteed at signing, total of $38m, which goes in escrow right away. They also function to keep the dead money in each of the first three years higher than the cap hit, protecting the player from being released prior to Year 3. In Year 2, an additional $5m goes into escrow for guaranteed Year 3 salary. Yearly cash flow for the team is $38m, $15m, $8m. For the player, yearly cash flow is $28m, $15m, $18m, total three year payout of $61m. With an option bonus, I could increase that total payout to $65m+ if necessary, especially if we make it a six year deal. Cap hits and dead money would be a little different, but the same basic structure would be in place.

 

Long story short, my offer would be better than the Cox deal, both in yearly average, effective guarantee, and three year payout. It would also be easier for the team to fund, year by year, and the final two years would be pay as you go with minimal dead money for such a big contract.

[Chucklez]

On 6/20/2016 at 2:59 PM, OffensivelyPC said:

If Wilkerson has any interest here at all, I would probably expect Grigson to try to make it happen.  I've always said that they (Grigs and Pags) have 2 years to really do something before their contracts are under "further evaluation."  We've seen it time and time again, GMs or GM/Coaches who are basically on the hot seat go balls out and make unusual spends hoping ot put together a team to gets him retained.  Sometime it works, sometimes it doesn't, and perhaps other times, the owner reigns in the spending in the name of preserving the future.  A spend for Wilkerson, if it's feasible at all on Wilkerson's side makes a ton of sense on Grigson's side as well.

We just dont have the funds to bring in someone like Wilkerson, sign Andrew, Moncrief and Mewhort next offseason AND fill all our other holes on defense. It just cant be done because Wilkerson wants a big payday which we cannot afford... and rightly so on his part, he deserves it.

[OffensivelyPC]

7 hours ago, Chucklez said:

We just dont have the funds to bring in someone like Wilkerson, sign Andrew, Moncrief and Mewhort next offseason AND fill all our other holes on defense. It just cant be done because Wilkerson wants a big payday which we cannot afford... and rightly so on his part, he deserves it.

Well, it might put a lot of strain on the cap, but I mean, you make things infinitely easier on yourself when you draft well.  If we were to pick up Mo and hit on an edge rusher in teh draft next year, it would transform our defense dramatically.  We can make some concessions, but the point of the cap is to use it.  I'm all for getting cheap talent in the draft or free agency, but the reality is, most pass rushing lineman, inside or outside, are more difficult to come by once you get toward the end of the 1st round where we usually draft and they usually don't hit the free agent market.  If there's one in free agency, even if it means paying them a bigger chunk of the cap, I think it's not exactly a bad trade losing someone like Mewhort when you get Wilkerson and filling in the gap with with affordable FAs or the draft.  It's easier to find a guy like Mewhort than it is Wilkerson.

[Superman]

9 hours ago, Chucklez said:

We just dont have the funds to bring in someone like Wilkerson, sign Andrew, Moncrief and Mewhort next offseason AND fill all our other holes on defense. It just cant be done because Wilkerson wants a big payday which we cannot afford... and rightly so on his part, he deserves it.

 

One of the objectives of my post is to debunk this kind of statement. It's not true.

[crazycolt1]

10 hours ago, Chucklez said:

We just dont have the funds to bring in someone like Wilkerson, sign Andrew, Moncrief and Mewhort next offseason AND fill all our other holes on defense. It just cant be done because Wilkerson wants a big payday which we cannot afford... and rightly so on his part, he deserves it.

I think if Grigson can work a workable contract Wilkerson could become a Colt. I don't see a problem with paying a player of his talent the money as long it is team friendly. So far Grigson has done a good job at being smart with cap money so I don't see that changing.

[Superman]

Now that the biggest piece of the puzzle is in place -- Luck's contract -- I'm just as confident as I was before that the Colts can handle a big contract in 2017.

[dgambill]

19 hours ago, Superman said:

Now that the biggest piece of the puzzle is in place -- Luck's contract -- I'm just as confident as I was before that the Colts can handle a big contract in 2017.

At this point I think NY wants to keep him. They aren't likely to get much more than a 2nd and maybe a 4th for him because another team will have to pay him a long term contract....and the thing is even if they let him walk after this season he will net them probably a 3rd rd compensatory pick likely. I just don't see much incentive to trade the guy. If they bring back Fitz and with how the offense is set up at wr their best chance would be to make a run at it this year then rebuild under a new qb next year. To me he is worth more to them then what anybody could give them...and I don't think we would offer our 1...at least I hope not. I don't think we gain much (other than controlling him this year) because he likely will still want to test free agency next summer and then we could be out the picks minus what we get in compensatory. There is likely to be some big names hit the market next year and I think we likely to have a great shot at a pass rusher then with our cap space we roll over.

[Superman]

22 minutes ago, dgambill said:

At this point I think NY wants to keep him. They aren't likely to get much more than a 2nd and maybe a 4th for him because another team will have to pay him a long term contract....and the thing is even if they let him walk after this season he will net them probably a 3rd rd compensatory pick likely. I just don't see much incentive to trade the guy. If they bring back Fitz and with how the offense is set up at wr their best chance would be to make a run at it this year then rebuild under a new qb next year. To me he is worth more to them then what anybody could give them...and I don't think we would offer our 1...at least I hope not. I don't think we gain much (other than controlling him this year) because he likely will still want to test free agency next summer and then we could be out the picks minus what we get in compensatory. There is likely to be some big names hit the market next year and I think we likely to have a great shot at a pass rusher then with our cap space we roll over.

 

My scenario involves signing him in 2017, not trading for him in 2016. But even if we did trade for him, the transaction would include a new contract being in place.

[richard pallo]

They can afford Wilkerson today.  It's not just me saying this but other reporters who are closer to this than us are saying this.  Now that Luck is signed Grigson can go after Moe now. Why wait a year when he could be playing for us this year.  Only a few  teams can afford him right now.  We are one of them.  Next year it's wide open again.  The Jets tried to trade him this year before the draft.  They need cap space.  I am sure if we are interested there is a way to make it happen.  This would be a win win trade for both sides.  A talent like this available when we have the inside track is an unbelievable stroke of luck.  We have to pounce now.  I think Polian would jump at this opportunity, I only hope Jim and Ryan see it as well. 

[Superman]

18 hours ago, richard pallo said:

They can afford Wilkerson today.  It's not just me saying this but other reporters who are closer to this than us are saying this.  Now that Luck is signed Grigson can go after Moe now. Why wait a year when he could be playing for us this year.  Only a few  teams can afford him right now.  We are one of them.  Next year it's wide open again.  The Jets tried to trade him this year before the draft.  They need cap space.  I am sure if we are interested there is a way to make it happen.  This would be a win win trade for both sides.  A talent like this available when we have the inside track is an unbelievable stroke of luck.  We have to pounce now.  I think Polian would jump at this opportunity, I only hope Jim and Ryan see it as well. 

 

LOL at the bolded part. The one time Polian did anything like this was the Corey Simon deal, and that bit him so hard he never even considered a deal like that again.

 

The Colts can technically afford to grab Wilkerson now. They have enough cap space / flexibility to make the numbers work.

 

I think you're ignoring the cash, though. I posted in the other thread where we were discussing this, the Colts are at ~$180m in cash this season, with a cap number of ~$150m. That's $30m in commitments that are already being pushed into future years (a lot of it for Luck, so that's fine). To get Wilkerson under contract will cost at least $30m in Year 1, so you're putting the Colts at $210m in cash, at least.

 

You also have to give up a high pick, probably a first rounder. Even if it's a second, that's a significant price, especially in tandem with a $17-19m/year contract.

 

Answer/explain for me: Does adding Wilkerson in 2016 make the Colts a serious SB contender? 

[ColtsBlueFL]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

LOL at the bolded part. The one time Polian did anything like this was the Corey Simon deal, and that bit him so hard he never even considered a deal like that again.

 

^^^  Re-quoted for "Truth"!  ^^^

 

Except I (we) give Polian credit to not trade for him, for he waited for the Eagles to drop the Franchise tag and plain outright cut Simon.  Then he made his worst FA signing ever.  OTOH, he did trade with the Bucs for Booger McFarland the during next season (2006, after Simon hurt his knee, and was later placed on non-football injury list) to help secure the front 7 in our Super Bowl run... which should have been totally unnecessary if Simon had panned out.

 

Then the next year, Booger injures his knee, misses the season, then fails a physical the following year and retires.  That domino effect sealed Bill's stance on his FA status from then on.  At least Booger came on and knew the system (Tampa 2, Kiffin/Dungy) and helped in the SB run before he quickly flamed out like Simon.

[ColtsBlueFL]

If I remember, Simon/NFLPA and the Colts were in a dispute about pay (Colts stopped paying Simon) and return of signing bonus money (Simon still had it) etc...

 

I wonder if it was ever disclosed how that fiasco finally turned out?

I could try to Google it, I guess...

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

If I remember, Simon/NFLPA and the Colts were in a dispute about pay (Colts stopped paying Simon) and return of signing bonus money (Simon still had it) etc...

 

I wonder if it was ever disclosed how that fiasco finally turned out?

I could try to Google it, I guess...

 

I don't remember the resolution either. 

 

I also never saw/heard how the Richardson grievance turned out...

[ColtsBlueFL]

19 hours ago, richard pallo said:

 I think Polian would jump at this opportunity, I only hope Jim and Ryan see it as well. 

 

Sup (as usual) is on the money.  See this article:

 

http://www.ocala.com/news/20070401/for-polian-indianapolis-repair-work-an-inside-job

 

Quote:

 

Why so little (FA) activity? The fiery Polian is quick with the answer.

"Mainly because we've made some big mistakes in the past, Corey Simon being the most obvious one," he said. "We've had a modicum of success in it, but not a lot. We just feel the odds are very much against you. It's not a criticism of anyone who does it, but just the way we do things. We're not good at it, so we stay away from things we're not good at."

 

AV signing was a success, I'd venture.  {Money!}