Hankins visited Colts today (merge)

[Jackie Daytona]

1 minute ago, Tmoney said:

Bennie would've been Nice:(

Any of those scenarios could've happened but more then likely it was much simpler. There's no formula to building a team, its not a cookie cutter process. Every team does it there own way, many have success building through the draft and then just keeping there own. When your GM shizz the bed with 3 1st round picks in a row its really hard to just rely on building through the draft. The money is there because we have no young players getting max contracts and none on the horizon coming up. Hankins hasn't been very productive as a pass rusher the past 2 years I'll give u that, 2014 had 7 sacks which is very impressive. 

we have max contracts now?

[throwing BBZ]

58 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

So disappointed in CB with this one. We get it you dont want to over spend or get trapped in long term contracts, but for F sakes man you dont build your castle with sticks and mud!!! Stop penny saving and nickle and diming and improve this dam roster. Who knows what FA is going to look like next year, who knows who we could even bring in for a visit. We had a chance to sign one of the better FAs for a more then reasonable deal I'm sure but CBs too worried about not repeating Ryan Grigsons mistakes. Terrible NT class in the draft, this will be a huge problem next year. God another year of David Parry getting punked hahaha

 

 At Hankins age and skill set IMO the only contract Ballard would be interested in IS a long term deal.
 And at a reasonable price.
 Their is no rush to build our roster. To many holes.

[Jackie Daytona]

heck just bring in Jerel Worthy for cheap after the draft if there are no better options, can't fix everything in one year, even with Draft and FA

[richard pallo]

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.  We don't know what happened but I think there is more to this report about a potential deal falling apart than we know, if it actually has fallen apart.  I can't see Chris bringing him in after all this time without having working parameters in place.  His agent has a pretty bad reputation so I wouldn't rule out a so called "misunderstanding" tactic.  If that's the case I would bet Chris is pretty upset with this guy.  If not then this could still be more posturing.  As far as I know he didn't go running back to the Giants and sign today.  So it's still us the Dolphins or the Giants.  Until he signs elsewhere we are still in the hunt IMO.

[Jackie Daytona]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 At Hankins age and skill set IMO the only contract Ballard would be interested in IS a long term deal.
 And at a reasonable price.
 Their is no rush to build our roster. To many holes.

That's what I'm thinking, Ballard probably wanted 3 years, and Hankins wants 1 and then a chance to cash in next year, same scenario we had with Poe.....

[throwing BBZ]

42 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

Idk how this is encouraging. Forget the fact that the guy would've helped our football Team, it shows how tight CB really is with this money. I'm hoping that he's just playing it safe his 1st year, but he crapped the bed with this one. We knew Hankins asking price, we brought him in for a visit, and we still low ball? 

 

 Funny Tsizzle, we also know (rumours) what the super low ball Giant offer is. Get a grip.
 

[Tmoney]

7 minutes ago, Finball said:

 

I'm pretty sure we can add Harrison to that list soon but so far he's had only 1 (really) good year. Not worth the money yet though he'll likely be that.

 

As Superman said, every penny can be rolled over. But by the time season is over, it will probably be closer to 15M than 30M.

Hmmm, interesting..... that would give us alot of cash for next year. But who knows what FA will look like next Year, still want Hankins

[bananabucket]

And the Ballard apologists rush to defend him yet again.

 

Yes maybe he'll turn the team around eventually but it will be DESPITE this joke of an offseason.  He better knock the draft out of the freakin park,

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

Bennie would've been Nice:(

Any of those scenarios could've happened but more then likely it was much simpler. There's no formula to building a team, its not a cookie cutter process. Every team does it there own way, many have success building through the draft and then just keeping there own. When your GM shizz the bed with 3 1st round picks in a row its really hard to just rely on building through the draft. The money is there because we have no young players getting max contracts and none on the horizon coming up. Hankins hasn't been very productive as a pass rusher the past 2 years I'll give u that, 2014 had 7 sacks which is very impressive. 

 

Every good team does it through the draft, with respect to the proven process of building and maintaining a good roster. There absolutely is a formula, and it's held true over the last 25 years. There are no exceptions to it; there are no good teams that have been built without drafting well over multiple seasons. The fact that your team hasn't done a good job of executing the formula in recent years isn't an excuse for dismissing the formula entirely.

 

Ballard's job is to draft well, and supplement the draft in other ways. He's clearly not resistant to free agency as a way to supplement the roster. But fiscal restraint is important, especially in a league with a hard salary cap.

 

And while we don't know exactly what happened, the fact that the Colts had Hankins in for a visit means they strongly considered him. They also likely knew what his desired salary range was when they invited him, and were somewhat open to it, otherwise it's just a waste of time. It's not likely that they arranged this visit only to lowball him. Most likely, the visit didn't go well for some other reason than money.

[Finball]

18 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

Hmmm, interesting..... that would give us alot of cash for next year. But who knows what FA will look like next Year, still want Hankins

 

At this point, it's pretty likely imo, that Hankins will settle for 1 yr deal (re-sgin with NYG is my bet) and then hit the market again next year.

 

Poe, Logan, Richardson, Short, Jaye Howard, Akiem Hicks, Tuitt, Easley, Jernigan etc... all are set to be FAs, though some will be re-signed but there shouls be pleny of options.

 

Ballard has also mentioned that (paraphrasing) the best time to acquire players is in August/Spetember, when cheap motivated players are released from other teams. Chiefs were very active in those months the past few years and have been able to find some solid players in those months. Including Jaye Howard from the aforementioned list. I'd expect us to be very active in acquring cuts from other teams too..

[Tmoney]

4 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Funny Tsizzle, we also know (rumours) what the super low ball Giant offer is. Get a grip.
 

Hahahah Tsizzle. Why you hating? Cuz I'm on fire

Never gave a #, never even said the Giants low balled I said we did. Giants made an offer that got rejected, Hankins stated his asking price and that wasn't happening. Maybe I'm just that much smarter then you, but I can figure out that this is going to meet in the middle somewhere. I know CB knew this as well, and yet we still couldn't make it happen. Sure other factors and variables could've been in play as well, but if it came down to purely money then why even bring him in when we know where this is ganna land.

[jvan1973]

2 minutes ago, bananabucket said:

And the Ballard apologists rush to defend him yet again.

 

Yes maybe he'll turn the team around eventually but it will be DESPITE this joke of an offseason.  He better knock the draft out of the freakin park,

You play too much madden.   Good teams don't go nuts in free agency unless their window is closing.  Our window isn't open right now.  Get a grip and pay attention to the teams that are there year in and year out

[DougDew]

17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

They also likely knew what his desired salary range was when they invited him, and were somewhat open to it, otherwise it's just a waste of time. It's not likely that they arranged this visit only to lowball him. Most likely, the visit didn't go well for some other reason than money.

Or else they were wondering if he dropped his price a bit after sitting so long.  A little bit of sales pitch to come to the Colts combined with asking for something off his original price. 

[NannyMcafee]

On 4/11/2017 at 5:53 PM, MPStack said:

They caught lightning in the bottle at the right time. However, that regular season defense of the Colts was about as bad as it gets. Anyways it doesn`t change my stance on Booger or the Colts were lucky to have won the SB in 2006. I`m done with the debate, now sign Hankins.

 

For some reason I feel last years defense was worse than 06 D. 

[Rackeen305]

1 hour ago, Tmoney said:

So disappointed in CB with this one. We get it you dont want to over spend or get trapped in long term contracts, but for F sakes man you dont build your castle with sticks and mud!!! Stop penny saving and nickle and diming and improve this dam roster. Who knows what FA is going to look like next year, who knows who we could even bring in for a visit. We had a chance to sign one of the better FAs for a more then reasonable deal I'm sure but CBs too worried about not repeating Ryan Grigsons mistakes. Terrible NT class in the draft, this will be a huge problem next year. God another year of David Parry getting punked hahaha

I couldn't have said it any better. #facts smh

[Rackeen305]

38 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

That's what I'm thinking, Ballard probably wanted 3 years, and Hankins wants 1 and then a chance to cash in next year, same scenario we had with Poe.....

So do you think the agents around the league plays by this rule, this year especially?

[Rackeen305]

7 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

For some reason I feel last years defense was worse than 06 D. 

Well 06' D had Bob (I believe just returning back from injury during the playoffs) where no one/team could run against Colts in the playoffs. So you may be correct.

 

16' had crappy Lbs, ok d-line, and laughable DBS. I hope CB knows this.

[Tmoney]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Every good team does it through the draft, with respect to the proven process of building and maintaining a good roster. There absolutely is a formula, and it's held true over the last 25 years. There are no exceptions to it; there are no good teams that have been built without drafting well over multiple seasons. The fact that your team hasn't done a good job of executing the formula in recent years isn't an excuse for dismissing the formula entirely.

 

Ballard's job is to draft well, and supplement the draft in other ways. He's clearly not resistant to free agency as a way to supplement the roster. But fiscal restraint is important, especially in a league with a hard salary cap.

 

And while we don't know exactly what happened, the fact that the Colts had Hankins in for a visit means they strongly considered him. They also likely knew what his desired salary range was when they invited him, and were somewhat open to it, otherwise it's just a waste of time. It's not likely that they arranged this visit only to lowball him. Most likely, the visit didn't go well for some other reason than money.

What does that equation look like? 

Draft+well=good team

To me that's less of a formula and more of a given, common knowledge. Maybe I lead you to believe that I think a team can be built purely through FA, and clearly that is not true. The draft is key, but when your 3 years behind on 1st round picks with money to spend that kinda mixes up the formula. That's an added variable that makes this a difficult process. I agree it takes multiple years of drafting well, but we also have to make up for Grigsons incompetence. Hankins would've provided 1 less need which is pretty crucial

[csmopar]

39 minutes ago, bananabucket said:

And the Ballard apologists rush to defend him yet again.

 

Yes maybe he'll turn the team around eventually but it will be DESPITE this joke of an offseason.  He better knock the draft out of the freakin park,

You realize this isn't madden where you just state your price and the FA signs with you every time..... there's 3 parties involved, the agent, the player and the Colts. Getting all three on the same page isn't easy

[csmopar]

2 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

What a Surprise. The NFL's version of the Miami Marlins won't pay up to sign a above average player.

Why do the colts bother wasting their time along with the players time?

Soon lots of players won't even bother meeting with Ballard because they doubt they will get $ they are looking for.

Indy isn't the most attractive place to play. The colts need to over pay to sign players NOT  be thrifty.

Considering the word is the guy wants top tier money and no other team will come close, I doubt it's us being frugal

[jvan1973]

25 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

For some reason I feel last years defense was worse than 06 D. 

That's because it was,  statically speaking

[jvan1973]

12 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

What does that equation look like? 

Draft+well=good team

To me that's less of a formula and more of a given, common knowledge. Maybe I lead you to believe that I think a team can be built purely through FA, and clearly that is not true. The draft is key, but when your 3 years behind on 1st round picks with money to spend that kinda mixes up the formula. That's an added variable that makes this a difficult process. I agree it takes multiple years of drafting well, but we also have to make up for Grigsons incompetence. Hankins would've provided 1 less need which is pretty crucial

Have you ever considered,  He didn't want to come here?  The team can't force a signing.    

[Superman]

16 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

when your 3 years behind on 1st round picks with money to spend that kinda mixes up the formula. That's an added variable that makes this a difficult process. I agree it takes multiple years of drafting well, but we also have to make up for Grigsons incompetence.

 

I disagree with all of this. You can't undo the past. All you can do is get it right moving forward. Having a sense of desperation because Grigson didn't do a good job will lead to bad decision making. You don't make up for Grigson's mistakes, you just make better decisions in the future.

 

As for Hankins filling a need, I think we all agree he would represent a notable upgrade at NT. That doesn't mean you just pay him whatever he asks for, even if you have the cap space. Maximize your resources. That's a staple of good team building.

[chad72]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I disagree with all of this. You can't undo the past. All you can do is get it right moving forward. Having a sense of desperation because Grigson didn't do a good job will lead to bad decision making. You don't make up for Grigson's mistakes, you just make better decisions in the future.

 

As for Hankins filling a need, I think we all agree he would represent a notable upgrade at NT. That doesn't mean you just pay him whatever he asks for, even if you have the cap space. Maximize your resources. That's a staple of good team building.

 

It is like coming back from a deficit, can't do it all in one shot. It has to happen little by little. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It is like coming back from a deficit, can't do it all in one shot. It has to happen little by little. 

 

Yup. You don't refuse to invest just because you got burned once. And you don't say 'I missed out on a great investment before, let me go all in on this investment to make up for it.' 

 

You look at what went right, what went wrong, what opportunities you missed, and try to learn from your mistakes. If you can adjust your strategy to get better, then you do so. You don't scrap the plan entirely.

[Tmoney]

20 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Have you ever considered,  He didn't want to come here?  The team can't force a signing.    

Could be, pretty weird to take a visit from a team you have no interest in signing with tho.

[VaAllDay757]

33 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Have you ever considered,  He didn't want to come here?  The team can't force a signing.    

That is a poor excuse if he really didn't want to be here then he wouldn't have came for a meeting

[jvan1973]

3 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

That is a poor excuse if he really didn't want to be here then he wouldn't have came for a meeting

I didn't know you were in the negotiations.  Please fill is in

[jvan1973]

17 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

Could be, pretty weird to take a visit from a team you have no interest in signing with tho.

No one knows what he was asking for.   I'm sure he would have signed if a nonsense number was thrown out

[VaAllDay757]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I didn't know you were in the negotiations.  Please fill is in

It's called common sense...why go somewhere if you don't want to be there? Waste of time....plenty of players turned down bigger contracts from other teams just to stay or play with a team where they wanted to play

[Tmoney]

22 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 I disagree with all of this. You can't undo the past. All you can do is get it right moving forward. Having a sense of desperation because Grigson didn't do a good job will lead to bad decision making. You don't make up for Grigson's mistake, you just make better decisions in the future.

 

As for Hankins filling a need, I think we all agree he would represent a notable upgrade at NT. That doesn't mean you just pay him whatever he asks for, even if you have the cap space. Maximize your resources. That's a staple of good team building.

We could ignore it all we want but in reality we have one of the worst rosters in the league. How many drafts are we willing to wait before we can field a competitive team. I dont think its desperate at all to add a few building pieces through FA when your a team with more then enough resources and too many needs to fill through 2-3 drafts. I'm not saying over pay anyone but with the lack of activity Hankins has I feel, yes I'm speculating, he could've been had for a reasonable deal like 1 year 8 mil. 

[Tmoney]

10 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

No one knows what he was asking for.   I'm sure he would have signed if a nonsense number was thrown out

I get you, you think he came to Indy thinking we might be the team he gets to over pay for him. Makes sense, but so deep into FA idk how this mans agent thinks he still has leverage.

[jvan1973]

5 minutes ago, VaAllDay757 said:

It's called common sense...why go somewhere if you don't want to be there? Waste of time....plenty of players turned down bigger contracts from other teams just to stay or play with a team where they wanted to play

Probably, perhaps even  maybe he wanted to see if the colts would give him a bigger offer than the giants.    Have you never negotiated your wages before?

[jvan1973]

1 minute ago, Tmoney said:

I get you, you think he came to Indy thinking we might be the team he gets to over pay for him. Makes sense, but so deep into FA idk how this mans agent thinks he still has leverage.

I think he wants to stay with the giants.  I have no proof to back that up.  But the dude is a stud,  many teams are interested.  He just seems like he is trying to get a better offer from NY

[Tmoney]

38 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It is like coming back from a deficit, can't do it all in one shot. It has to happen little by little. 

Yet you are still in the deficit. No need to panic, but if you dont play with urgency and efficiency that lead will do nothing but grow. 

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

I get you, you think he came to Indy thinking we might be the team he gets to over pay for him. Makes sense, but so deep into FA idk how this mans agent thinks he still has leverage.

This situation is starting to give Hankins the reputation of caring about a few more dollars than anything else.  Most players his age are concerned about building a career, and picking a team that he can play well with enhances a players career more than anything.

 

If he is picking a team based upon the absolute most dollars he can get in this current contract, than he is thinking about cashing in on a career that he feels might be short term.  If I was a GM, I'd be concerned about that.

 

I understand injury and wanting some guaranteed money, but a 25 year old player has to think about which team would provide him the best opportunity to play well because it also has a huge impact on the amount of total dollars a player can earn over an entire career. 

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

We could ignore it all we want but in reality we have one of the worst rosters in the league. How many drafts are we willing to wait before we can field a competitive team. I dont think its desperate at all to add a few building pieces through FA when your a team with more then enough resources and too many needs to fill through 2-3 drafts. I'm not saying over pay anyone but with the lack of activity Hankins has I feel, yes I'm speculating, he could've been had for a reasonable deal like 1 year 8 mil. 

 

Ignore what?

 

If you want to build and maintain good roster, you have to stack good drafts on top of each other. It's proven by history. You can add building pieces in FA, but they have to be the right pieces at the right time for the right cost. Adding Hankins on a one year prove-it deal doesn't exactly change the Colts from being a fringe playoff team to a title contender.

 

In Ballard's interview with Peter King (I believe), he spoke about being disciplined. He basically said that if they've decided they're willing to spend X amount on a guy, it's tempting to say 'well, we'll give him an extra million or two to get him,' but they're committed to being disciplined, and it requires restraint. Restraint is a defining characteristic of perennially contending programs. 

[SaturdayAllDay]

10 minutes ago, Tmoney said:

I get you, you think he came to Indy thinking we might be the team he gets to over pay for him. Makes sense, but so deep into FA idk how this mans agent thinks he still has leverage.

The thing is that his agent is notorious for this kind of behavior. He is part of a what was a popular agency in the early 2000's and fell off because they constantly over valued their players and never budged on their stances. Its not far fetched to believe that we may have offered that 6-8 Million that you seem to think would have sealed the deal, and his agent is still stuck on that 10 Million or more price tag that he started with. This is nothing new, and there are plenty of stories out there saying that his agent is the problem. 

[Tmoney]

24 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

The thing is that his agent is notorious for this kind of behavior. He is part of a what was a popular agency in the early 2000's and fell off because they constantly over valued their players and never budged on their stances. Its not far fetched to believe that we may have offered that 6-8 Million that you seem to think would have sealed the deal, and his agent is still stuck on that 10 Million or more price tag that he started with. This is nothing new, and there are plenty of stories out there saying that his agent is the problem. 

I've seen those stories didn't give them a read but I'll take your word. I guess its so hard for me to believe because that is complete ignorance on his agents part. If they're stuck on 10 mil he won't even get signed

[Tmoney]

34 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Ignore what?

 

If you want to build and maintain good roster, you have to stack good drafts on top of each other. It's proven by history. You can add building pieces in FA, but they have to be the right pieces at the right time for the right cost. Adding Hankins on a one year prove-it deal doesn't exactly change the Colts from being a fringe playoff team to a title contender.

 

In Ballard's interview with Peter King (I believe), he spoke about being disciplined. He basically said that if they've decided they're willing to spend X amount on a guy, it's tempting to say 'well, we'll give him an extra million or two to get him,' but they're committed to being disciplined, and it requires restraint. Restraint is a defining characteristic of perennially contending programs. 

Ignoring Grigsons mistakes. We bare the burden of his F ups even tho he's gone. Im all for moving on but I acknowledge that were behind as far as talent comparative to contending teams. True, adding Hankins doesn't guarantee any Lombardis, but he could've been a foundational piece to build our D around. I like what CB said and if Hankins was playing that game of trying to get more then what he's worth then so be it, I just can't comprehend what his agent is thinking if he's still playing games with teams a month into FA