Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

TY Hilton signs new deal (Mega Merge)


Recommended Posts

Okay, legit question here: If they were always going to pay TY, why did you draft Dorsett rather than a position of need, such as Malcolm Brown or Landon Collins?

BPA they thought Dorsett was a 1st round talent and Brown/Collins were not. Time will tell if they were right or wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 420
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The extension is 13 per. The cap hit for those 5 years will average slightly less because the signing bonus will be prorated over 6 years not 5. You can't look at the cap purely on a per year basis. Extra cap rolls over and total cap hit = total money paid. So its wrong to say that it is actually a 11 per deal because its extending his rookie contract. Its a $65 million deal over the next 5 years of cap.

i keep hearing you can't spread the signing bonus over 6 years, only 5. Damn I really hope it's not actually 13 per
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you're saying its outdated? haha

Must have been from his rookie season

It was actually from some point in the 2013 season. Coby actually did grade out well on PFF for PB in 2013 but as I showed you, he was bottom of the league in 2014.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said we will give him the biggest contract in NFL history? Besides that the cap will go up

I don't think there is much doubt that he's going to get a contract that is going to either be the biggest or close to the biggest. Certainly it will rival those of the top 5 current QB contracts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was actually from some point in the 2013 season. Coby actually did grade out well on PFF for PB in 2013 but as I showed you, he was bottom of the league in 2014.

Yes, that makes more sense and why I originally posted that I was surprised to see him so high in the article that I had read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i keep hearing you can't spread the signing bonus over 6 years, only 5. Damn I really hope it's not actually 13 per

The signing bonus will be spread out, just like in Russel Wilsons deal, but that doesn't change the value of the contract. I'm think we paid more than he's worth but was still better than letting him walk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, legit question here: If they were always going to pay TY, why did you draft Dorsett rather than a position of need, such as Malcolm Brown or Landon Collins?

 

It's bpa when you draft. We have Dorsett, Ty, Carter, Johnson and Moncrief at WR that will actually play and Johnson will be gone in a year or two. And it's insurance on Carter and Moncrief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is much doubt that he's going to get a contract that is going to either be the biggest or close to the biggest. Certainly it will rival those of the top 5 current QB contracts.

No doubt it will be a big contract but I dont know what the biggest contract in NFL is

Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt it will be a big contract but I dont know what the biggest contract in NFL is

Well, Rogers is 22 mil per year and it goes down from there but not much, Russell Wilson 21.9, Ben R. 21.  8 so on and so forth. I don't think there is much question he'll get a 20 plus mil per year deal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, legit question here: If they were always going to pay TY, why did you draft Dorsett rather than a position of need, such as Malcolm Brown or Landon Collins?

 

Because the draft is not about filling need, it's about grabbing the best players, with respect to positional value and your team philosophy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt it will be a big contract but I dont know what the biggest contract in NFL is

espn says look for close to 25 mil per year

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/171699/inside-slant-andrew-luck-should-push-nfls-barrier-on-guaranteed-contracts

 

Lets not forget that Costanzo is looking at a nice payday also. Im guessing in the neighborhood of 10 or 11 million per year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The extension is 13 per. The cap hit for those 5 years will average slightly less because the signing bonus will be prorated over 6 years not 5. You can't look at the cap purely on a per year basis. Extra cap rolls over and total cap hit = total money paid. So its wrong to say that it is actually a 11 per deal because its extending his rookie contract. Its a $65 million deal over the next 5 years of cap.

 

i keep hearing you can't spread the signing bonus over 6 years, only 5. Damn I really hope it's not actually 13 per

 

Signing bonus is only amortized over five years, so the sixth year of this contract won't have any prorated signing bonus. However, they could have an option bonus in Year 2 or beyond, which would amortize over up to five years, or through the end of the contract, whichever is shorter. That's how I would do it, but either way, that sixth year gives the team some flexibility in terms of structure.

 

Waiting on details, which probably will be a couple days at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

numbers Im talking about are cap hits.  it's being reported that his cap hit will be around 10.5 to 11 mil a year.

 

Still not necessarily accurate. We have to wait for details, but it's possible that his 2015 cap hit only goes up a little bit, which means the rest of the value still has to be averaged over five years. 

 

You're right to look at this as a six year deal at about $11m/year, because that's essentially what it is. But it will be reported as $13m/year in new money. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even with having to give Luck the biggest contract in NFL history you still think we can re-sign both?

 

Setting aside all the IFs and whatnot, the answer is yes. We can re-sign both. I don't think we will, but that's a concern for after 2015, and it will include the team's thinking about the replacement value of either of the two TEs. But just based on the math, keeping both TEs is doable. 

 

http://forums.colts.com/topic/38882-cap-projections-w-main-guys/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Setting aside all the IFs and whatnot, the answer is yes. We can re-sign both. I don't think we will, but that's a concern for after 2015, and it will include the team's thinking about the replacement value of either of the two TEs. But just based on the math, keeping both TEs is doable. 

 

http://forums.colts.com/topic/38882-cap-projections-w-main-guys/

The amount of guaranteed money that is going to tossed around the next 2 or 3 years is going to be mind boggling

Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount of guaranteed money that is going to tossed around the next 2 or 3 years is going to be mind boggling

 

Yeah, but that's because Grigson got a bunch of really good players in 2012, plus we had Castonzo in 2011. That's our core. Makes no sense not to keep those players. Vontae Davis is part of that group, also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

numbers Im talking about are cap hits.  it's being reported that his cap hit will be around 10.5 to 11 mil a year.

 

I understand that.  To meet the numbers you were talking about, it would mean a 16.5m/year extension.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but that's because Grigson got a bunch of really good players in 2012, plus we had Castonzo in 2011. That's our core. Makes no sense not to keep those players. Vontae Davis is part of that group, also.

 

 

I think you have to give the Colts an A for managing the cap. Other than the Cherlius contract , pretty much all of them have been team friendly deals .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have to give the Colts an A for managing the cap. Other than the Cherlius contract , pretty much all of them have been team friendly deals .

 

This was always the plan. Make sure you maintain flexibility for re-signing your young core, and the time is now. 

 

Even the Cherilus contract, which turned out to be a mistake, isn't that big of a deal for us. Highest paid RT and all that, and he didn't live up to it. And while we're still dealing with this cap hit until 2016, it will average out to $4.125m/year for four years. :: shrug :: Not great, but it didn't really hurt us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree to the bolded.  I think the TY deal was the Colts going with what they already know. I don't know any teams that give top 5 money to 2 WRs, so those guys are pretty much on notice that they'll be hitting the market should they come to the end of their contract and expecting a good payday (even if deserved).  It is what it is.  Realistically, what could you expect to get that you couldn't get with Dorsett and probably even Carter that you couldn't get with Hilton?  So I'm okay with it.  I wish Hilton was a tad more consistent and didn't disappear for stretches here and there, but even guys like Demaryus Thomas and Megatron are ineffective from time to time.

Yep - it makes it unlikely that we'll be able to bid on retaining Moncrief if he emerges as difference-maker.  However, there is some tactical brilliance in having TY and Dorsett locked up today for the next 5 years (including the option year on Dorsett) for a known cost.  Then we'll be able to sequentially retain Dorsett on his second contract if he emerges as a core guy.  The stagger is very much necessary to decision timing on locking up core guys while keeping salary cap flexibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great offense, no defense, no championships?

Uhhh seems to me we won a championship...and went to another...so yeah I don't know what your talking about. We competed at the highest level for many years during the Peyton Era.

 

Because the draft is not about filling need, it's about grabbing the best players, with respect to positional value and your team philosophy.

Indeed. Perfectly said Supes. If you think you have a pro bowl super star caliber player you grab him no matter if it isn't a huge need. You don't take players at position of need regardless of their perceived skill level...thats how you end up with a bunch of avg players on your team. You look for stars...for stand out players...and then you fill in the holes around them. If you have stars at the wr area well then you emphasize that in your offensive philosophy and you find FAs to fill in the gaps around them. We obviously didn't see as high a ceiling on those other guys as Dorsett. We also have seen we have lacked depth (meaningful) at the wr position for the last several years now. As the season has gone along we've seen guys go down or that position get shut down. Even though Grigson may have had every intention to re-sign TY he had no way of knowing what the market would be until DT/DEZ got signed and knowing what TY would demand. You have to have contengacy plans in place...for injuries and signings. That all is nice but it still came down to Dorsett being rated very highly and those other players not as high on his board. We've likely answered our long term and short term wr questions and can now address other areas of need in the future. I don't know why we have to answer that so often on these boards but we do. We think Dorsett's value was very very high...well above those around him in the draft..its that simple. You take difference makers/pro bowlers when you think you find them....those guys you think might be helpful or avg...well you can find them throughout the draft to supplement your team....we didn't have a glaring (starting) need at corner either but we took one high as well after moving back from the 2nd rd because we didn't have anyone rated at 2nd rd talent at our pick. If we drafted by need we would reach on guys...and likely bust more often or draft a 2nd or 3rd rd talent well before they should go. Now...we may question Grigs evaluations that is fine...but his reason seems sound.

 

Yeah, but that's because Grigson got a bunch of really good players in 2012, plus we had Castonzo in 2011. That's our core. Makes no sense not to keep those players. Vontae Davis is part of that group, also.

On point again. You sign your core players..you keep your stars....stars are hard to find or even more costly to acquire in FA. If stars were easy to draft we would have an elite pass rusher and running back and stars at every position...so we re-sign our core guys as long as it makes financial sense...TY did in this scenerio because he is a proven star. He got paid where his value showed him to be. This wasn't a scenerio where it was pay him or someone else....we could afford to keep him and others and thats what we did. I'm happy because we have our WRs locked up for the next 5-6 yrs with him and Dorsett and with Moncrief and Carter we shouldn't lose too much when AJ leaves. We can turn our attention to the trenches. In the end this team will only go as far as Grigs can draft stars to replace the FAs we have been buying in the past. We are going to have to hit on 2 or 3 every year to keep this thing going. Basically we are like Seattle....we have to start paying our stars...ours were just on the offensive side of the ball instead of defense...but they aren't letting those young guys walk...they lock them up and then look for creative ways to fill in the rest of the roster (ie trades for Graham) and drafting young talent on offense. We will only sustain this level if we draft well...thats always how it works..otherwise you see teams go through major ups and downs if they rely on FA....thankfully we should be able to ride Luck and co for a great many years and give us many shots at a title even if every draft isn't a success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, legit question here: If they were always going to pay TY, why did you draft Dorsett rather than a position of need, such as Malcolm Brown or Landon Collins?

 

when you see 13 and 15 burning the top of defenses for years to come, youll be counting your blessings we did draft dorsett

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like TY but I don't think he's worth top wr $$. It's going to set a precedent for our younger we'd also. He has improved but dude drops a lot of balls.

How is it going to set a precedent for the young guys?  TY had 861 yards as a rookie followed by back to back 1,000 seasons. I guess if the young guys put up numbers like that it will be a factor. Moncrief came no where near that his rookie year and I would be surprised to see him get close to a 1,000 yards this year. WR don't typically come in the league and put up the number TY did his first 3 years. The man deserved to be paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep - it makes it unlikely that we'll be able to bid on retaining Moncrief if he emerges as difference-maker.  However, there is some tactical brilliance in having TY and Dorsett locked up today for the next 5 years (including the option year on Dorsett) for a known cost.  Then we'll be able to sequentially retain Dorsett on his second contract if he emerges as a core guy.  The stagger is very much necessary to decision timing on locking up core guys while keeping salary cap flexibility.

 

I disagree with the bolded. 

 

Moncrief is a free agent in 2018, and can be tagged. Dorsett's four year contract runs through 2018, then the Colts have an option for 2019, so he's not really a free agent until 2020. That's the last year of Hilton's new deal, and by then, obviously, his guaranteed money is done. Moncrief's potential deal comes two years sooner (and Hilton's guaranteed money is likely done, or close to done by then). 

 

Long and short, these three guys are staggered. Hilton's new money will really kick in in 2016; Moncrief's new contract will be in 2018; Dorsett isn't even a concern until 2019 or 2020. In the meantime, Andre will be gone, one or both of the TEs will be gone, etc., etc. And the cap is going to go through the roof by 2020, close to $200m. 

 

Maybe the Colts will decide they don't want to have $40m/year plus tied up in three wide receivers, which is fine. But I don't think Hilton's deal or Dorsett's potential deal in anyway squeezes out Moncrief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I wrong? We got 1 championship with manning...when the defense showed up.

First, you said no championships. Second, the failures of the Manning led offenses in the playoffs is well documented. Im not going to bash anyone in particular but when it comes to playoff success and failures it can and has been argued that the offense struggled as bad as the defense. Manning had a very good chance to win 2 SB's but it was not to be. Let us not forget that Manning did have the benefit of 2 of the best DE's of their era as well.

 

Also, this is year 4 of a total rebuild.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...