Melvin Ingram

[Luck2Hilton4TD]

He's no Von Miller, but seems like he'll be the best free agent pass rusher to maybe hit the market:

 

http://horseshoeheroes.com/2017/02/10/colts-make-melvin-ingram-top-free-agent-priority/

[ztboiler]

There is no logic to him hitting the market...doesn't mean he won't, but it's a long shot at this stage.  He's the only guy that the Chargers have hitting free agency of note.

[akcolt]

37 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

There is no logic to him hitting the market...doesn't mean he won't, but it's a long shot at this stage.  He's the only guy that the Chargers have hitting free agency of note.

Gus Bradley is taking over the D switching to a 4-3 that might do it. Ingram could fit the D but not at the 10-11M he's likely to get on the open market. 

[ztboiler]

31 minutes ago, akcolt said:

Gus Bradley is taking over the D switching to a 4-3 that might do it. Ingram could fit the D but not at the 10-11M he's likely to get on the open market. 

There aren't that many different types of EDGE players in the NFL.  He's a LEO.

[SaturdayAllDay]

Chargers dont have much in the way of cap space and have a ton of holes to fill. Doubt they can afford to use over half of their remaining cap to lock him up. 

 

They only have 20 million or so in cap atm and 26 pending free agents. While most of them arent worth resigning, that is still a bunch of spots to fill and you cant fill them all with UDFAs. They might not resign many of their players but they have to get a few vets to round out the roster. 

 

I think he'd be stupid to not test the market, as there is no chance the chargers can tag him and hope to have any depth on their team. 

[ClaytonColt]

Completely agree with the article, he should be our top target. 

 

If they both hit free agency I'd even double down on pass rushers and pair him with Nick Perry.

[COLTS449]

I think Perry and Ingram both hit the market personally, and Perry or Ingram one will be a Colt IMO. Jones probably wont hit the market, but if he did I would say we would target him first. Sign one of these 2, then double up and get Williams/Takk/Charlton in the 1st. Melvin Ingram and Tim Williams would be pretty scary for opposing QB's.

[akcolt]

On 2/12/2017 at 6:39 PM, ztboiler said:

There aren't that many different types of EDGE players in the NFL.  He's a LEO.

He'd be the LEO in the 4-3 over front. He's a perfect fit for that look. I don't see Ingram playing with his hand in the dirt.  I think he is going have to do some different things. I'm not saying he can't or won't.  They have limited cap room. Is Ingram ths guy they want to give 10-12M a year moving forward? I'm not sure he will be maybe wishful thinking. It's interesting it gets Boss back to his natural position.  We will see how it shakes out. 

[Finball]

10-12M might not even cut it.

 

Tag would be around 15M. Vernon got 17M on avg for 5 years, 52.5M of it guaranteed.

 

Not much incentive for him to sign for so much less than Vernon. He has more sacks in the past two seasons, leading into FA, though less overall as Ingram started his career very slowly. But that shouldn't factor much since he's had two very good years in a row now, and has track record that no other edge rusher in the FA has as Chandler Jones will get the tag. Maybe JPP but he could also get tagged and at least Ingram still has all of his fingers. Cap will be going up by around 10% too.

 

Demand for pass rushers is so high anyway, that I think the Vernon deal would be a starting point.

[AZColt11]

I doubt he gets out of SD.  But even if he does, I think Ballard is going to be pretty careful with the money.  He has said he would prefer to build from the draft so I think any FA signings will either be cheap or one of the Chiefs that he knows well.

[Indy Fan]

Signing him would be fantastic assuming it's a realistic salary cap hit. Curious as to what you guys think he signs for and what the maximum you would sign him for.

[Finball]

1 hour ago, Indy Fan said:

Signing him would be fantastic assuming it's a realistic salary cap hit. Curious as to what you guys think he signs for and what the maximum you would sign him for.

 

Depends on the guaranteed money.

 

I don't want him at 15M per if it has over 50M guaranteed. But I'd take him at 17M per if it had like, say, 35M guaranteed, for example. In the first scenario, it's a 3+ year deal. If things go south, you still end up paying a lot. In the second scenario, it's a 2 yr deal, if things go south, it's an easy way out.

 

If it's less than 15M on a long-term deal, I'd be very, very surprised. I'm expecting at least the Vernon, deal whether it's from the Chargers or some other team. As the cap has gone up so rapidly in recent years, the contracts have gotten more crazier and crazier. I expected Vernon to be rich man after the Fins rescinded the tag but I had no clue that he would end up signing for higher AVG/YR and for more GDT money than JJ Watt.

 

I don't think I'd give him the Vernon deal. Risks would outweigh the rewards IMO, even with our severe needs when it comes to pass rushers. I'd go for B level guys for B level money and hope they can give an A year. And I like Ingram, if not for the cap/contract I'm expecting him to get, he'd be one of my top targets.

 

[NewColtsFan]

 

For whatever it's worth,  I just checked today,  and Spotrac projects Ingram to get a contract of roughly............

 

(Wait for it.....)

 

5/90.     Yup, 18 mill per.     Not a typo.

 

Typically contracts have roughly 40 to 60 percent guaranteed.   So, the math says roughly 36 to 54 Mill guaranteed.      Not sure Irsay wants to jump down that rabbit hole.       Those of us who were hoping for Ingram may have to look at a cheaper alternative.   

 

Perry and Sheard were both projected around 9 Mill per.

 

[Finball]

36 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

For whatever it's worth,  I just checked today,  and Spotrac projects Ingram to get a contract of roughly............

 

(Wait for it.....)

 

5/90.     Yup, 18 mill per.     Not a typo.

 

Typically contracts have roughly 40 to 60 percent guaranteed.   So, the math says roughly 36 to 54 Mill guaranteed.      Not sure Irsay wants to jump down that rabbit hole.       Those of us who were hoping for Ingram may have to look at a cheaper alternative.   

 

Perry and Sheard were both projected around 9 Mill per.

 

 

Yeah... that's pretty rough.

 

Perry has only one really good year, same with Sheard (not counting that one year in CLE long time ago).

 

GB usually keeps the guys they want to keep and they lack pass rushers. So I'm expecting him to re-sign.

 

On the other hand, I'd expect Sheard to hit the market. Considering the cost, age, he might be my #1 edge rusher target in FA. Him or Addison.

[akcolt]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

For whatever it's worth,  I just checked today,  and Spotrac projects Ingram to get a contract of roughly............

 

(Wait for it.....)

 

5/90.     Yup, 18 mill per.     Not a typo.

 

Typically contracts have roughly 40 to 60 percent guaranteed.   So, the math says roughly 36 to 54 Mill guaranteed.      Not sure Irsay wants to jump down that rabbit hole.       Those of us who were hoping for Ingram may have to look at a cheaper alternative.   

 

Perry and Sheard were both projected around 9 Mill per.

 

That can't be right Von Miller got 19M per year last year. Houston 16M per year in 2015. The next highest paid is Clay Matthews 13M per year in 2014.

 

Do you think Ingram gets more than Houston? I can't believe someone will give him that kind of money. We are desperate or I would not be interested. He's only had one double digit sack year. He barely got there 10.5 in 2015. He only had 8 sacks last year. He had 6 sacks in his first 3 years. 

 

Ingram is not the same as class as Houston who went 10 11 22 sacks leading up to his deal. Is he Hughes who got 9M per year in 2015? The numbers say no he is not even there. 

 

I like Ingram but he's inconsistent and disappears at times. I can't see him getting 18M per year. That's almost a M for every career sack He only has 24.5 in 5 years. That would be ridiculous no way Ballard comes in a makes Ingram the 2nd highest paid OLB in the league. 

[BProland85]

49 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

For whatever it's worth,  I just checked today,  and Spotrac projects Ingram to get a contract of roughly............

 

(Wait for it.....)

 

5/90.     Yup, 18 mill per.     Not a typo.

 

Typically contracts have roughly 40 to 60 percent guaranteed.   So, the math says roughly 36 to 54 Mill guaranteed.      Not sure Irsay wants to jump down that rabbit hole.       Those of us who were hoping for Ingram may have to look at a cheaper alternative.   

 

Perry and Sheard were both projected around 9 Mill per.

 

 

I too have a hard time seeing Ingram get that kind of money. I see him more as getting something similar to what Brian Orakpo got from the Titans 2 years ago, when he was also 28 years old. Plus Orakpo was more accomplished. Orakpo got 4 years 31 mil, so I could see Ingram getting somewhere around 4 years, 45 mil.

[Finball]

35 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

 

I too have a hard time seeing Ingram get that kind of money. I see him more as getting something similar to what Brian Orakpo got from the Titans 2 years ago, when he was also 28 years old. Plus Orakpo was more accomplished. Orakpo got 4 years 31 mil, so I could see Ingram getting somewhere around 4 years, 45 mil.

 

 

Orakpo had 0.5 sacks in 7 games in his contract year, then finished the season on IR after tearing his pectoral muscle.

 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, akcolt said:

That can't be right Von Miller got 19M per year last year. Houston 16M per year in 2015. The next highest paid is Clay Matthews 13M per year in 2014.

 

Do you think Ingram gets more than Houston? I can't believe someone will give him that kind of money. We are desperate or I would not be interested. He's only had one double digit sack year. He barely got there 10.5 in 2015. He only had 8 sacks last year. He had 6 sacks in his first 3 years. 

 

Ingram is not the same as class as Houston who went 10 11 22 sacks leading up to his deal. Is he Hughes who got 9M per year in 2015? The numbers say no he is not even there. 

 

I like Ingram but he's inconsistent and disappears at times. I can't see him getting 18M per year. That's almost a M for every career sack He only has 24.5 in 5 years. That would be ridiculous no way Ballard comes in a makes Ingram the 2nd highest paid OLB in the league. 

 

Well....   the Spotrac info is NOT premium....    so I'm linking the page.

 

Just click on the link:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-chargers/melvin-ingram-9828/market-value/

 

They'll show his Market Value to the left and then below that,  they'll give his adjusted predicted contract based on age and other facts...         his Market Value is $17.2    And his predicted contract is for 17.8.    (Sorry,  I rounded up to 18 mill per.)

 

Again,  this is NON-premium material.    Good to check it out once a week or two at this time of year.   They update info there all the time....     some good stuff.      Now, it's not fool-proof.    They'll be off here and there,  but at least it gives you a rough ballpark of what you can expect the agents to be asking for,  and what the teams might offer....

 

[BProland85]

9 hours ago, Finball said:

 

 

Orakpo had 0.5 sacks in 7 games in his contract year, then finished the season on IR after tearing his pectoral muscle.

 

 

Hence part of why I have Ingram getting considerably more $ than Orakpo. 

[Indy Fan]

18M scares me off a bit since we have so many holes I'd rather allocate those funds to the trenches. Makes Perry look that much more appealing at his estimated price tag e.g. (N. Perry + Zeitler = Ingrim) according to spotrac.

[CR91]

• If Chargers linebacker Melvin Ingram hits the open market, ESPN.com’s Mike Wells believes he’d be an intriguing option for the Colts. Indy was tied for 19th in sacks last season, while Ingram has compiled 18.5 sacks over the past two seasons.

 

[SaturdayAllDay]

13 minutes ago, CR91 said:

• If Chargers linebacker Melvin Ingram hits the open market, ESPN.com’s Mike Wells believes he’d be an intriguing option for the Colts. Indy was tied for 19th in sacks last season, while Ingram has compiled 18.5 sacks over the past two seasons.

 

To be fair, ESPN also put out a story on how the 49ers should be making a play for Ingram as well. Hard to see us outbidding them. 

[ar1888]

The same article also estimated Ingram would get in the range of 5 years 80 million. If that's what it takes to sign him, I say pass.

[Superman]

On 2/12/2017 at 7:06 PM, akcolt said:

Gus Bradley is taking over the D switching to a 4-3 that might do it. Ingram could fit the D but not at the 10-11M he's likely to get on the open market. 

 

Why wouldn't he get somewhere near the $17m/year that Vernon got last year? I believe he will, assuming he isn't tagged.

[ClaytonColt]

Any decent pass rusher coming to their second contract is going to command that sort of money. It's the way the market has gone for a couple of years.

 

I'd rather pay Ingram (and Perry) the cash needed to come here and watch them play through their peak years. Apart from Mewhort and Moncrief we're not exactly going to be paying fortunes to keep our own players over the next 3/4 years.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

On 2/16/2017 at 8:27 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

For whatever it's worth,  I just checked today,  and Spotrac projects Ingram to get a contract of roughly............

 

(Wait for it.....)

 

5/90.     Yup, 18 mill per.     Not a typo.

 

Typically contracts have roughly 40 to 60 percent guaranteed.   So, the math says roughly 36 to 54 Mill guaranteed.      Not sure Irsay wants to jump down that rabbit hole.       Those of us who were hoping for Ingram may have to look at a cheaper alternative.   

 

Perry and Sheard were both projected around 9 Mill per.

 

If your numbers are correct FORGET INGRAM, Ballard and Irsay aren't doing that!!

[aaron11]

thats the market today

 

if you want the best free agent pass rusher, then you pay this kind of money

 

same is happening with QBs, mid or low teir starters can get 15 mil a year or more

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

2 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

thats the market today

 

if you want the best free agent pass rusher, then you pay this kind of money

 

same is happening with QBs, mid or low teir starters can get 15 mil a year or more

TRUE

[wig]

He's my biggest want by quite a bit. Edge rushers are expensive, for good reason, and this team desperately needs one. 

[I'm mad, bro]

Let's draft some young athletes!! Spend big money on some smaller names and draft two edges early. 

[Superman]

On 2/19/2017 at 11:33 AM, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

If your numbers are correct FORGET INGRAM, Ballard and Irsay aren't doing that!!

 

I agree with you. The structure for Vernon's contract isn't bad, but Ingram is two years older than Vernon was, so that needs to be accounted for, as Ingram will be 32 in five years. 

 

I don't expect the Colts to pay that kind of money for Ingram, and I definitely don't think he'd live up to that kind of contract. But if you can keep your future commitment to him in check, then I could see it paying off, at least at first.

 

Problem is, I don't think Ingram is good enough to make a big difference in the Colts defense. 

[ClaytonColt]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I agree with you. The structure for Vernon's contract isn't bad, but Ingram is two years older than Vernon was, so that needs to be accounted for, as Ingram will be 32 in five years. 

 

I don't expect the Colts to pay that kind of money for Ingram, and I definitely don't think he'd live up to that kind of contract. But if you can keep your future commitment to him in check, then I could see it paying off, at least at first.

 

Problem is, I don't think Ingram is good enough to make a big difference in the Colts defense. 

I can definitely see your point that Ingram wouldn't be truly worth the money he's going to get - very few expensive free agents really are.

 

However I can't figure out why truly productive and dangerous edge rushers wouldn't make a difference to us. I'd get Perry and Ingram and while I'd agree that they'll be expensive they have as much hope of being our Freeney/Mathis combination as trying to fix that desperate need on the cheap.

[Superman]

Just now, ClaytonColt said:

I can definitely see your point that Ingram wouldn't be truly worth the money he's going to get - very few expensive free agents really are.

 

However I can't figure out why truly productive and dangerous edge rushers wouldn't make a difference to us. I'd get Perry and Ingram and while I'd agree that they'll be expensive they have as much hope of being our Freeney/Mathis combination as trying to fix that desperate need on the cheap.

 

A $17m/year difference? That's my problem. We still have issues in the secondary and at ILB, and I'm not confident we can stop the run. 

 

You sign guys like this, and you're lucky if you get even one year of good production out them. Best case scenario, you get two or three, then you start thinking about when they'll be cut. He'll be 28 when the season starts, how much prime production do you expect from him? Especially on a defense that is incomplete in other ways. 

 

I'd splurge for a stud pass rusher if I felt like the defense was at least close. In this case, I think Ingram would add something, for sure, but not enough to justify that investment. Not when the roster is in the state it's in right now.

[AKB]

I would pass on him. I'd rather sign a NT/Secondary.

 

Answer the edge in the draft.

[ClaytonColt]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

A $17m/year difference? That's my problem. We still have issues in the secondary and at ILB, and I'm not confident we can stop the run. 

 

You sign guys like this, and you're lucky if you get even one year of good production out them. Best case scenario, you get two or three, then you start thinking about when they'll be cut. He'll be 28 when the season starts, how much prime production do you expect from him? Especially on a defense that is incomplete in other ways. 

 

I'd splurge for a stud pass rusher if I felt like the defense was at least close. In this case, I think Ingram would add something, for sure, but not enough to justify that investment. Not when the roster is in the state it's in right now.

In real terms I have difficulty saying that any individual player would make a $17m difference to our team. It's 's ludicrous amount of money.

 

It's money that we have to spend though and our current roster gives an opportunity to do so - up until the current class of rookies come around for extensions we barely have to worry about spending money to keep our own. Moncrief and Mewhort  (injuries permitting) being the exceptions. 

 

If the argument comes down to whether we'd be better off spending 25-29m on two pass rushers who are capable of being top 10 statistically for the next 3 years or spreading that money around  more thinly then there's always two sides to that and it's a worthy discussion. To me we have to get some top end talent on the defense rather than spreading the cash around on more middle of the road players.

[Superman]

Just now, ClaytonColt said:

It's money that we have to spend though

 

We don't have to spend it right now, especially not on players that would be questionable as difference makers. Even if Ingram were just as good for us in 2017 as he was for the Chargers in 2016, how much better would the defense be, for $17m/year? And if he doesn't work out, you have all that money sunk in one player who isn't living up to it. If you're going to commit 10% of your cap to a pass rusher, he better be the freakin' man. 

 

I just don't view Ingram as that stud pass rusher, and even if he is, I don't think he'd produce at a high level for more than a couple years. I'd rather hold onto that big FA contract for a guy I think would have a greater impact, even if it's not this year. I don't think we're ready for that addition yet.

 

If he could be had for second tier pass rusher money -- five years, $60m, or that range -- I'd still be hesitant, but I could make a better case for that. It's not going to be $40m guaranteed, more like $25m, more flexibility moving forward, less money committed to a player who will be 30 in two years, etc. 

 

You might think Ingram is better than I do. That's a different conversation.

[BProland85]

4 hours ago, AustinnKaine said:

I would pass on him. I'd rather sign a NT/Secondary.

 

Answer the edge in the draft.

 

Id also pass on him because of the contract he'd demand. I'd rather sign a full time NT like Johnathan Hankins and a stud RG in Kevin Zeitler. Then in the draft I'd go after OLB, ILB, DB, and RB. 

[throwing BBZ]

On 2/18/2017 at 9:44 PM, SaturdayAllDay said:

To be fair, ESPN also put out a story on how the 49ers should be making a play for Ingram as well. Hard to see us outbidding them. 

 

 Do you think we would have to?
 Not with the Cal Tax system.
  Kinda think he wouldn`t exactly have that Team on his priority list.
 Then again...

[ClaytonColt]

8 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

We don't have to spend it right now, especially not on players that would be questionable as difference makers. Even if Ingram were just as good for us in 2017 as he was for the Chargers in 2016, how much better would the defense be, for $17m/year? And if he doesn't work out, you have all that money sunk in one player who isn't living up to it. If you're going to commit 10% of your cap to a pass rusher, he better be the freakin' man. 

 

I just don't view Ingram as that stud pass rusher, and even if he is, I don't think he'd produce at a high level for more than a couple years. I'd rather hold onto that big FA contract for a guy I think would have a greater impact, even if it's not this year. I don't think we're ready for that addition yet.

 

If he could be had for second tier pass rusher money -- five years, $60m, or that range -- I'd still be hesitant, but I could make a better case for that. It's not going to be $40m guaranteed, more like $25m, more flexibility moving forward, less money committed to a player who will be 30 in two years, etc. 

 

You might think Ingram is better than I do. That's a different conversation.

If we're holding on for a guy who is truly worth 10% of the cap then I don't think we'll ever actually pull the trigger. How many guys who are worthy of the figure will ever hit free agency?

 

I think I'm just bored of knowing that opposition quarterbacks can just sit there and take their sweet time against us. Maybe I don't have the patience to fix that through the next 2 or 3 drafts and have therefore accepted that it must get done through free agency and there is an associated cost to that and you're going to be getting a player who is in their mid to late 20s.

[SaturdayAllDay]

5 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Do you think we would have to?
 Not with their Tax system.
  Kinda think he wouldn`t exactly have that Team on his priority list.
 Then again...

You have me there. Being from Canada, I have very little knowledge on state taxes .

 

Like everyone else here, I have no clue where he will go (if anywhere). But money talks and interest from teams with almost double our cap space scare me.

 

I was also more just pointing out that the original ESPN article doesnt mean much, as they put out multiple different stories that day saying teams should sign Ingram. I dont put much stock into it.