Von Miller rejects 114.5 million dollar offer

[21isSuperman]

6 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I figured you guys would say no. That is a lot. Would you guys do it for next years 1st Rounder in 2017, a 4th Rounder in 2018, and Moncrief. These are all hypotheticals as I haven't heard anything. I am just wondering what you guys would give up for Von for fun.

The problem with trading for him is you'd have to give up significant assets, and you'd have to pay Von big money.

[crazycolt1]

Fans always have a knee jerk reaction when a team wins a super bowl with defense. In the history of the modern super bowls there have been defensive super bowl wins very seldom. There are only around five or so defensive wins in the super bowl. Bears, Ravens, Bucs, Broncos and only a couple of others. The misconception is defense wins super bowls but it only happens once in a while. Some Colt fans think by signing or trading for Miller would bring super bowls to Indy. Not so fast. We all have different opinions but in mine I don't see Miller being the one player who would do that. We finally seen Grigson use the draft like it should have been used and now some want him to risk future 1 st round picks and sign a contract that is not team friendly. It has already been established next years draft is full of talent. Having rookie contracts is by far better to have than to have one player breaking the bank.

[Superman]

On 6/14/2016 at 1:20 AM, crazycolt1 said:

I would say no. 2 first round picks equals 10 years of rookie contracts.

 

Meh. It's six years (2017-2022), and in 2021 and 2022, there are some potentially expensive 5th year options to be paid.

 

Furthermore, by 2020, the salary cap will be ~$200m. I'm not that worried about rookie contracts 5+ years from now.

 

In exchange for a big time defensive playmaker at one of the most important positions, a position that is hard to fill, I'd give up two first rounders, so long as I really liked and trusted the player. I think Von Miller qualifies. But I would want the 2018 pick to be conditional.

 

To me, asking for Moncrief is being greedy, and I think we could get him out of the deal. 

[crazycolt1]

41 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Meh. It's six years (2017-2022), and in 2021 and 2022, there are some potentially expensive 5th year options to be paid.

 

Furthermore, by 2020, the salary cap will be ~$200m. I'm not that worried about rookie contracts 5+ years from now.

 

In exchange for a big time defensive playmaker at one of the most important positions, a position that is hard to fill, I'd give up two first rounders, so long as I really liked and trusted the player. I think Von Miller qualifies. But I would want the 2018 pick to be conditional.

 

To me, asking for Moncrief is being greedy, and I think we could get him out of the deal. 

The 10 year comment was meant for both picks combined. Seems like a lot of attention given to a deal that is hypothetical.

[2006Coltsbestever]

I mainly threw out the hypothetical's just to see how much you think Von is worth and what you would give up for him being that we can use a Great Pass Rusher.

[Gavin]

2 1's and that's it

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, Gavin said:

2 1's and that's it

The reason why I put Moncrief in the discussion initially was he would be our only other valuable trading piece besides picks if you guys were wondering because no way I am trading Hilton. I wouldn't want to trade Moncrief but the Broncos wouldn't give up Von for little so I couldn't make my hypothetical one sided.

[Gavin]

39 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The reason why I put Moncrief in the discussion initially was he would be our only other valuable trading piece besides picks if you guys were wondering because no way I am trading Hilton. I wouldn't want to trade Moncrief but the Broncos wouldn't give up Von for little so I couldn't make my hypothetical one sided.

I get the reasoning behind it but don't think giving up Moncrief with nothing proven behind him really is a wise move. I'd offer up one of our young D Linemen. McGill, Simmons, Kerr even, I'd even see if they tookthe bait on Arthur Jones before I gave up Moncrief....Just no proven talent behind Moncrief, Dorsett flashed but still is largely unproven. Other then that nothing

[Superman]

9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

The 10 year comment was meant for both picks combined. Seems like a lot of attention given to a deal that is hypothetical.

 

Just considering the principled value of a player like Von Miller. Of course it's hypothetical.

 

I know that you were combining both picks, I just don't agree with that way of looking at it. To each his own, though.

[csmopar]

17 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I mainly threw out the hypothetical's just to see how much you think Von is worth and what you would give up for him being that we can use a Great Pass Rusher.

to be honest....i'd trade the farm, next year's entire draft.... but thats a madden trade.... in real life, no more than 2 1sts and maybe 2 3rds

[2006Coltsbestever]

47 minutes ago, csmopar said:

to be honest....i'd trade the farm, next year's entire draft.... but thats a madden trade.... in real life, no more than 2 1sts and maybe 2 3rds

I think I would give up 2 1's which would be 2017 and 2018, that still leaves us 6 other picks in the next 2 seasons and would give us the best Pass Rusher in the league. I wouldn't give up Moncrief with the picks though.

[oldunclemark]

On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 10:18 AM, Ollonesomeme said:

Yes, as I would for Suh and Watt. He is in their league. He would bring much more than that on the open market. He is a game changer.

Von Mille is NOT is the same league as JJ Watt

(You know what I mean. He';s in the NFL)
 

But JJ is a far superior player

[oldunclemark]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2016 at 8:16 PM, 21isSuperman said:

The problem with trading for him is you'd have to give up significant assets, and you'd have to pay Von big money.

Exactly.,.,.you have to give up the farm..and them you have to have enough crops left to feed the family

[oldunclemark]

I'd pay Von almost anything for one year.

But he's an erratic guy. He's had a drug suspension.

He missed the 2013 playoffs with injury.

I wouldn't guarantee him $60 mil and I don't think John Elway will either..

 

..and Von wont sit out a year......This contract (the one he has turned down) wont be on the table anywhere a year from now

 

[jvan1973]

2 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

I'd pay Von almost anything for one year.

But he's an erratic guy. He's had a drug suspension.

He missed the 2013 playoffs with injury.

I wouldn't guarantee him $60 mil and I don't think John Elway will either..

 

..and Von wont sit out a year......This contract (the one he has turned down) wont be on the table anywhere a year from now

 

A PED suspension and an injury hardly makes him "erratic"  are you sure you know what that word means?

[oldunclemark]

On ‎6‎/‎16‎/‎2016 at 8:25 PM, jvan1973 said:

A PED suspension and an injury hardly makes him "erratic"  are you sure you know what that word means?

Those 2 sentences were not connected.

He's had a drug suspension AND he is an erractic guy.

...and your memery is failing you here

You remember his early years when he was undisciplined on and off the field..

.....Part of acquiring DeMarcus Ware was to mentor Von....

[oldunclemark]

  and Von's suspension was not for PEDs...he was smokin' weed.

..and then he tried to disquise his drug test and got caught..

 

.......the good and the not-so-good factor in contract negotiations and he's had some not-so-good

[bap1331]

He is going to go to New England for $1 million. They probably have their own CIA style torture for free agents forcing them to come to the Patriots for a super low cheap price.

[Girlzarefanstoo]

Frankly, someone who would turn down really good money without thinking of the good of the overall team he's with always leaves me cold. He's really good.  We see him twice a year.  

 

However, I'm absolutely opposed to overpaying any position no matter how good the player is (excepting a franchise QB).  It leaves less money for surrounding players and depletes a team of its resources in $ and if a trade is involved picks.  Without doing a scientific research study, it never seems to work out well for the team that over-reached. 

[oldunclemark]

4 minutes ago, Girlzarefanstoo said:

Frankly, someone who would turn down really good money without thinking of the good of the overall team he's with always leaves me cold. He's really good.  We see him twice a year.  

 

However, I'm absolutely opposed to overpaying any position no matter how good the player is (excepting a franchise QB).  It leaves less money for surrounding players and depletes a team of its resources in $ and if a trade is involved picks.  Without doing a scientific research study, it never seems to work out well for the team that over-reached. 

Going along with what you are saying.

There's no problem with paying Von superbucks the next couple of years while they have no big money invested at QB..

But either Sanchez does well and they have to pay him big...or they have to look elsewhere for a QB and that will cost them.  They're on the hook $15 mil for Demariyus Thomas. ..and Emmanuel Sanders has to be paid soon.

Just signed a new left tackle for big bucks....had to ask DeMarcus Ware to take a pay cut

 

I see that Von wants his $20 mil for 3 years at the very least but I understand why Elway doesn't want to guarantee the 3rd year of $20 mil a year to a non-QB....when he may have to pay that to a QB

[ColtsBlueFL]

On 6/19/2016 at 1:29 PM, oldunclemark said:

I see that Von wants his $20 mil for 3 years at the very least but I understand why Elway doesn't want to guarantee the 3rd year of $20 mil a year to a non-QB....when he may have to pay that to a QB

 

Typically,  what it generally boils down to is for the player/agent and the number(s), and for the organization the structure of those number(s).  The details and minutiae of this is gnarly though...

 

Talks between the Broncos and Miler have cooled off over the last two weeks, it is reported.  Things likely to heat up again later.