Ballard deal with Chiefs?

[Colts1974]

Could Ballard be thinking of deals to make with Chiefs? I have heard and read that Chiefs don't have room for 10 picks. I hope one day Ballard has the Colts in this predicament.

[Coltfreak]

57 minutes ago, hoosierhysteria said:

Could Ballard be thinking of deals to make with Chiefs? I have heard and read that Chiefs don't have room for 10 picks. I hope one day Ballard has the Colts in this predicament.

How does a team not have room for draft picks?

[CR91]

wouldnt surprise me. something tells me chiefs want patrick mahomes

[Colts1974]

10 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

How does a team not have room for draft picks?

Good question, I find it hard to believe myself. Read they don't have that many needs.

[backshoulderfade]

3 hours ago, hoosierhysteria said:

Good question, I find it hard to believe myself. Read they don't have that many needs.

Cap room.

[BlueShoe]

3 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

How does a team not have room for draft picks?

 

Ask Raheem Brock.

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

How does a team not have room for draft picks?

 

Up against it on the Salary Cap.      You have to have room to pay all your picks.

 

Teams can still trim away players, or restructure current contracts to free up money.

 

But this is the road block that teams face from time to time....

 

[lollygagger8]

Deal with the Chefs! 

 

 

Great googley moogley 

 

[Colts1974]

10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Up against it on the Salary Cap.      You have to have room to pay all your picks.

 

Teams can still trim away players, or restructure current contracts to free up money.

 

But this is the road block that teams face from time to time....

 

Draft picks that don't make the 53 man roster, either cut or signed to practice squad do they still get paid and does it go against the Salary Cap?

[funktacious2]

Yeah, they're in pretty rough cap space. And 10 picks is quite a bit. Things can be done, but it is a fair speculation that they may be down for shipping some picks away and focusing on talent over quantity. They have a good roster but have some key needs like future QB they could be focused on. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, hoosierhysteria said:

Draft picks that don't make the 53 man roster, either cut or signed to practice squad do they still get paid and does it go against the Salary Cap?

 

 

Good questions....

 

If they're cut, and completely released,  then all that counts if their signing bonus.    Their salary would not count.

 

If they're cut,  but then re-claimed for the Practice squad,  then their signing bonus would count and their practice squad salary would also count.      A PS salary is much smaller than the salary of a player on the 53 man roster.

 

I think it's approx. 120K per year.     I'm likely off a little,  but perhaps not very much.     Hope this helps.

 

For future reference,  the person who knows all this the best, is, of course,  Superman!

 

 

[Colts1974]

23 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

Good questions....

 

If they're cut, and completely released,  then all that counts if their signing bonus.    Their salary would not count.

 

If they're cut,  but then re-claimed for the Practice squad,  then their signing bonus would count and their practice squad salary would also count.      A PS salary is much smaller than the salary of a player on the 53 man roster.

 

I think it's approx. 120K per year.     I'm likely off a little,  but perhaps not very much.     Hope this helps.

 

For future reference,  the person who knows all this the best, is, of course,  Superman!

 

 

Yes this helps a lot.

 

All the contract and salary cap stuff gets confusing to me.

I just found it strange that articles say Chiefs don't have room for 10 draft picks. Chiefs claim to want some upgrades but no urgent needs. I asked myself. What team wouldn't want that many picks since there are so many hit and misses on drafted players?

 

So everything you have posted is making since of why they might not need the 10 picks.

Thanks for your posts.

[dgambill]

On 4/8/2017 at 1:56 PM, hoosierhysteria said:

Yes this helps a lot.

 

All the contract and salary cap stuff gets confusing to me.

I just found it strange that articles say Chiefs don't have room for 10 draft picks. Chiefs claim to want some upgrades but no urgent needs. I asked myself. What team wouldn't want that many picks since there are so many hit and misses on drafted players?

 

So everything you have posted is making since of why they might not need the 10 picks.

Thanks for your posts.

I agree it doesn't make sense. Draft picks are fairly cheap vs veterans. I mean they can't sign impactful free agents so the only way to get better is to draft well. You have to turn over your roster every 5-6 years and the best way to do that is to draft well and cut those expensive free agents. So why would you want to trade away cheap controllable talent if your in a cap bind?

[ztboiler]

Gone are the days where teams don't have cap room for draft picks.  

 

TJ Green carried a cap hit of 750K last year as a second rounder.  

 

LeRaven Clark was about 630K as a third.  

 

The 53rd man on your roster makes at least rookie minimum of 465K.  Money isn't the reason the Chiefs wouldn't want 10 picks.

 

[Colts1974]

On 4/9/2017 at 5:04 PM, dgambill said:

I agree it doesn't make sense. Draft picks are fairly cheap vs veterans. I mean they can't sign impactful free agents so the only way to get better is to draft well. You have to turn over your roster every 5-6 years and the best way to do that is to draft well and cut those expensive free agents. So why would you want to trade away cheap controllable talent if your in a cap bind?

Sorry I don't know the answer to your question. But like NewColtsFan posted above against salary cap. Maybe they don't want to cut away a lot of players they already have and restructure enough contracts for 10 picks. Just my guess.

 

[mahagga73]

On 4/7/2017 at 7:34 AM, lollygagger8 said:

Deal with the Chefs! 

 

 

Great googley moogley 

 

Late 90s . The Chefs.

[CanuckColt]

The problem is that KC has a lot of crappy low picks and only a couple of good ones...27, 59, 91, 104, 132, 170,180, 216, 218, 245.

The Colts already have 15, 46, 80, 121, 137, 144, 158.

To move down from 15 to 27 would cost KC their 27 and 59 and more
Ballard should just use the picks on players and pick wisely...if anything move UP using one 4th rounder.

And I hope we don't get talked into taking picks in next year's draft.

[Colts1974]

On 4/16/2017 at 0:00 AM, CanuckColt said:

The problem is that KC has a lot of crappy low picks and only a couple of good ones...27, 59, 91, 104, 132, 170,180, 216, 218, 245.

The Colts already have 15, 46, 80, 121, 137, 144, 158.

To move down from 15 to 27 would cost KC their 27 and 59 and more
Ballard should just use the picks on players and pick wisely...if anything move UP using one 4th rounder.

And I hope we don't get talked into taking picks in next year's draft.

I was in the dark over this KC thing when I posted this thread. Didn't realize the cap situation they were in and what crappy draft picks they had. Bonehead post by me. But I did learn a few things by the post and found out why they might be worried about 10 picks. Appreciate all the comments.

 

I am not to sure about the moving up though. Do you think this draft might be a little pricey to move up in?