Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

TomDiggs

Member
  • Content Count

    417
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TomDiggs


  1. 3 hours ago, stitches said:

     

    Hooker is the player who has created the most turnovers on this team and he's missed about a season worth of games due to injururies.

     

    I agree here. Serious injury concerns are one of the reasons I would understand for not tying him up for long term contract... but here we're not talking about long-term contract. We are talking about a relatively cheap single year option. 

     

     

    Those are really small samples and get skewed by one weird game(the Chiefs game for example) with injuries to opposing key offensive players. Those stats also don't answer the counter-factual.  

     

    I'll play along and address a few for arguments sake. Though I do not explicitly disagree with some of the points made:

     

    1) Hooker 100% has not created the most turnovers. That would be ignoring the fact that Leonard has equalled his number of INTs in 2 seasons and that Leonard has also caused 6 fumbles all in one year less of time. Kenny Moore has also generated one less int and two more forced fumbles in the same time frame. Pierre Desir had the same stats as Moore.  All I am getting at is that I think they envisioned Hooker doing a lot more than he has. And to your point, if I say that the Colts signed player X to sack the QB and player X sacked a QB 4 times a year and that led the team, that does not mean that because he did the best at it that he accomplished what the Colts envisioned for him. I simply am saying I do not think Hooker has not created turnovers well enough. Which was my original point.

     

    2) I mentioned this in reply to Shasta's comment, but i still think this isn't about long term contracts here. It is about "do i want to tie up $7M in Hooker if he has been hurt every single year at some point for all 3 years and if he is hurt to end this season i may be on the hook for that $7M for 2021" I think the Colts said No to that and what it will cost them is that if Hooker plays lights out, they have to tag him and spend an extra $4M or so for that extra year. If he doesn't play well he is gone just like he would have been w the option anyhow. And if he gets hurt we dodged the $7M bullet.

     

    3) All I am getting at here is that you can make stats say whatever narrative you want. One narrative is that we faired well in games he has missed over the last two years. Is that a small sample size? Absolutely. Is it also true? Yes it is. Want to know another small sample size similarly? The Colts are 1-9 in games without TY Hilton since he was drafted. That is 10 games out of a possible 128. Yet that small sample size is clearly enough to show the impact his absence has. My point is that small sample size or not, Hooker's absence the past two years has not been a huge deal.

     

    At the end of the day all I am saying is that I was both surprised and also OK with the Colts not exercising the option.

     

    We did not lose any flexibility. We simply lost somewhere on the order of $4M for 2021 if he plays well and we are stuck tagging him.

     

    As others have stated there is a very good chance he is gone now anyhow.

     

    With how we value our lines, maybe we are realizing that investing heavy $ at Safety in general is not wise. So maybe Hooker was never going to get a big extension and we are simply saying we don't anticipate contributing even $7M to the safety position going forward. If so, I am OK w that.

     

     

    • Like 1

  2. 2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

     

    Declining the option AND then extending him one year later does not track.

     

     

    I just don't think it's likely at all that they give Hooker a big extension.

     

     

    So if they aren't willing to risk losing $6.7M...why would they risk losing 3-4x that amount (of gtd money) in a big extension?

     

     

     

    I think your focus here is on long term extension which is 100% NOT what my focus was.

     

    My focus as i stated was on "tagging" him.

     

    I would rather not have the potential to be on the hook for $7M in 2021 if he gets hurt (which has has at some point every year) and would rather he have to prove it and if he does in fact prove it then we lose out on roughly $4M. Period.

     

    We would have to tag him to keep him that extra year (or trade him or whatever the heck we do w that 5th year) instead of the $7M fifth year option.

     

    To me this becomes "tag him and possibly guarantee him $7M if he is hurt or not tag him and if he proves he was what we originally thought he was then we lose $4M to keep him that additional year compared to if we exercised the option"

     

    That is all i was getting at.


  3. I see this decision as being a lot simpler than most of our fans are reading into:

     

    1) Hooker was drafted for his ability to create turnovers. He has not done that well enough or consistently. Not worth rewarding him in any way when he hasn't.

     

    2) Hooker has missed a good amount of games. Rewarding a guy that misses over 1/4 of your games is not a practice you want to make a habit of. Especially when as another poster mentioned, the locker room is taking note of who gets paid and what they've done.

     

    3) It has been mentioned, but that $6.7M is guaranteed for injury only.  With his injury history the question probably became "is it a bigger risk to pay him $7M next year when he might be injured and we are on the hook for that or is it a bigger risk that he actually plays well and we have to pay an extra $4M above (~$11M) that to tag him if he proves worth it?'

     

     

    I will say, we have what, $58.2M invested in QBs right now? Next year that is going to go waaaaaay down. Even with all the upcoming extensions for guys we deem worthy and even with needing to lock in a QB, we will have money to pay Hooker if he is worth it. I am all for making him prove he is worth it and having to dish out extra if he proves it. At least if he doesn't prove it (which he so far has not) we will not be on the hook for $7M for him, especially if he does end up hurt and that would be guaranteed.

     

    I will also say that Hooker missed three games last year against the Raiders, Chiefs and Texans. We went 2-1 and averaged 63% completion percentage and about 273 yards per game with a 4-2 TD to Int ratio in his absence. That is not bad at all considering the QBs and offenses faced.

     

    And in trying to ignore his lost rookie year, he has missed 5 games the last two years and we are 4-1 in games he missed.

     

    So I do not see the sky as falling if he walks. May be better to invest that money elsewhere regardless, unless he ends up creating 5+ turnovers this year and looks like a true difference-maker.

     

    Just my 2 cents.

     

     


  4. I'll say this, I would not have minded Love down at 34. I did not want to have to give up any extra assets to move up with how deep this draft is.

     

    Heck Ballard has shot pretty straight from day one here and he keeps harping on wanting more picks. So moving a 4th rounder or so to move up did not seem likely.

     

    That all being said, almost everyone in the world knew the sweet spot for Jordan Love if he fell past NE/NO was going to be pick 27. Seattle had traded their first rounder every damn year since 2012. People knew Sea was a prime spot at 27 for anyone (Colts or any team interested in Love) to move up and select Love.

     

    So GB jumped over Seattle's pick to take him.

     

    I don't believe we ever would have given up more assets to go up and get Love.

     

    And even national media guys I believe are simply connecting dots....Colts need a project QB that can start after 2020. Colts pick high in round 2. Dodds is a former Seattle guy and may have some connections with Seattle. Seattle always moves their pick. Etc Etc

     

    I doubt anyone local or national knew if the Colts were truly trying to trade up. I could be wrong, but that is my take.

     

    I would love to see us trade back from 34 to the mid second round and recoup at least a 4th if not a late 3rd to do so. There is so much talent out there right now.

     

     

    • Like 1

  5. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/deforest-buckner-18955/

     

    The contract breakdown shown above. Actually like the move more now.

     

    As others may have mentioned before, this was basically a 4 yr $84M deal tacked on to the $12.4M franchise tag. So it became a 5 year $96.4M deal.

     

    When you look at the front-loading, Buckner gets $23.4M from us this year and then basically another $17M next year. After that, there is no dead cap hit if he did not make the roster.

     

    This guy is so talented, I doubt that ever happens. But basically after next year he will be on a year to year contract from 2022 to 2024.

     

    He basically gets $39.4M guaranteed this week with it being split between this year and next.

     

    Creative and smart cap management as I would have expected. Makes it look like an even better deal and not the "5 year $21M per year" offer that the media was trumping up.

     

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...