Colts cap space updates (merge / update)

[dw49]

I think overall from a pure cap perspective we've been good in FA under Grigson, the guys we have paid he's left escape routes in the contracts so we can cut loose if they don't work out.

Now you could question the level of talent we've brought in, or the talent evaluation, but we shouldn't really be looking to find talent in FA. I do think think there is a lot of pressure on Grigson to hit on his first rounder this year.

 

 

I guess you have to say he's 0-2 (Luck cant count)'s far in first rounders. But overall the 3 drafts are acceptable.

[SteelCityColt]

I guess you have to say he's 0-2 (Luck cant count)'s far in first rounders. But overall the 3 drafts are acceptable.

A fair assessment but if you want to be successful in the long term we need to be better than acceptable. Not trying to sound overly critical here, just stating the obvious.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Odd? It says the top 51 cap space is 16 million for me, without including Langford's contract and with Trent's cap hit gone which would leave us around 8-9.

I'm just walking home from work. When I get home I am going to add it all up myself.

 

Yup! That's what I get-

 

 

Click picture to enlarge:

 

Have to Subtract TRich >3 million, and Langford contract hit.  The money's running low and we have to have some cap leeway for during the season injury replacement signings.  There are still cap enlarging moves Colts can make as well.  We'll see how they go.

[dw49]

A fair assessment but if you want to be successful in the long term we need to be better than acceptable. Not trying to sound overly critical here, just stating the obvious.

I think it could end up better than "acceptable" as we need to see how a few more players develop. Chapman , Thornton , Hughes , Newsome , Holmes and John. At least a couple of those guys could end up making Grigson look pretty good after 3 years. That includes calling Werner a bad pick. But no question Werner and TR put a dent in his grades so far. Not looking to argue as I agree that you can't pee away the last 2 year's first rounders and not deserve some criticism. 

[Superman]

Just to say I echo your thoughts, I've not been particularly impressed with who we've sighed. Gore I love as a player (49ers are kinda my 2nd/NFC team) so I'm happy to have him but I also recognise he's an aged RB. As much as he defies the odds and the doomsaying every year it's going to catch up. Johnson, all depends how much he has in the tank. Cole I think we overpayed but we certainly needed pass rushing help. As usual though it does seem the financial structure of these deals is very cap management friendly.

Disappointed but at least we've not put any millstones around our neck, I'm willing to reserve a fuller judgement till after the draft. After all it's not like roster building is a series of mutually exclusive events, it's a continual process....

Stick to the process

 

I'm not disappointed, but I did expect a little bit more. A safety, for instance.

 

But yes, the cap situation is fine for us. And we're better in a couple areas that have plagued us -- pass rush, RB, WR. 

[Superman]

Take a look at spotrac . I see us having only about 4.5 mill when you take out 3.2 for TR and around 4 for the missing Langford contract. This # is lower than I've been reading.

 

Their top 51 figure shows $16m, but doesn't include Richardson or Langford. That's about $7.4m, so that would put us at $9m under the cap. Include the draft pool, and it's more like $4.5m. 

[dw49]

Their top 51 figure shows $16m, but doesn't include Richardson or Langford. That's about $7.4m, so that would put us at $9m under the cap. Include the draft pool, and it's more like $4.5m. 

 

 

Yes.. that's the # I get and the # others are getting doing the math.

[SteelCityColt]

I'm not disappointed, but I did expect a little bit more. A safety, for instance.

But yes, the cap situation is fine for us. And we're better in a couple areas that have plagued us -- pass rush, RB, WR.

I too am surprised we made no moves at safety given how thin the position is in the draft. There were a few decent value options too in FA in my opinion.

[Superman]

I too am surprised we made no moves at safety given how thin the position is in the draft. There were a few decent value options too in FA in my opinion.

 

It's not that thin in the draft. There are a handful of average to above average prospects, and there are a handful of above average potential converts from corner to safety -- like Josh Shaw. I think there are a number of guys who could start at safety right away for us. 

 

But I did expect us to add someone in free agency.

[SteelCityColt]

It's not that thin in the draft. There are a handful of average to above average prospects, and there are a handful of above average potential converts from corner to safety -- like Josh Shaw. I think there are a number of guys who could start at safety right away for us. 

 

But I did expect us to add someone in free agency.

I bow to your superior assessment skills

Random question, slightly off topic, but as you're a man you knows his X's and O's, there seems to be a fad at the moment of 3 safety formations with one playing a hybrid LBer role, if we had the personnel do you think we could incorporate it into our D?

[Superman]

I bow to your superior assessment skills

Random question, slightly off topic, but as you're a man you knows his X's and O's, there seems to be a fad at the moment of 3 safety formations with one playing a hybrid LBer role, if we had the personnel do you think we could incorporate it into our D?

 

I've been wanting us to do that for a while now. It would allow us to play more man coverage across the middle of the field, rather than the mostly zone coverage we play. We're always susceptible to crossing routes. We'd have to be judicious, because it can hurt our run defense. And I don't think we have the personnel for it right now.