The Offseason Reading Series #9: Projecting Moncrief's contract

[21isSuperman]

Note: This post is gif heavy, so it might take a bit of time to load.

 

Previous ORS installments

ORS1: The best Indianapolis Colts team ever

ORS2: Which Indianapolis Colt are you?

ORS3: Dissecting the 15th overall pick

ORS4: Choose your contract

ORS5: Which Simpsons characters are the Indianapolis Colts?

ORS6: The best trash-talking moments of Peyton Manning's career

ORS7: My favourite Andrew Luck throws

ORS8: Changes the NFL needs right now

 

Donte Moncrief has shown that when he’s healthy, he has WR1 ability.  One of the better draft picks of the Grigson era, Moncrief is entering the final year of his rookie deal.  At just 23 years old with plenty of good film and lots of talent, he’s going to get a big contract.  But what will that contract look like?  Let’s look at the numbers.

 

The stats

Donte Moncrief was a 3rd round pick in the 2014 draft.  In the three years he’s been in the league, he’s had the following stat lines:

 

2014: 32 receptions, 444 yards, 3 TDs

2015: 64 receptions, 733 yards, 6 TDs

2016: 30 receptions, 307 yards, 7 TDs

 

Despite only playing in 9 games in 2016, he still managed to post his highest ever TD total for a single season.  When projected over a 16 game season, his 2016 stats would have been 53 receptions, 546 yards, 12 TDs.  This shows just how strong of a redzone threat he is.  He doesn’t have 1000+ yards in any season, but 7 TDs in 9 games shows he’s unstoppable in the redzone, which is very valuable to an offense.  The stats show he's an important part of our offense and has the ability to make plays and score touchdowns.

 

The player and the fit

Moncrief is a physical specimen.  He’s got size (6’2”, 222 lbs), speed (4.40 40 yard dash), explosiveness (39.5 inch vertical, 11 foot broad jump), and youth (entering his age 24 season).  He’s shown great improvement over the years, both statistically and on film.  One of his concerns coming out of college was his route running, but take a look at this...

 

 

That’s a beautifully ran route.  He explodes off the line of scrimmage at the snap and you can’t tell what route he is going to run.  When the corner begins to turn his hips, he takes advantage and quickly plants his foot in the ground to run the comeback.  Not only does he take advantage of the CB’s position, but look at how quickly he gets in and out of his break and quickly snaps his head around to find the ball. He extends his 6’2” frame, catches the ball cleanly, secures it, gets both feet in bounds, and is tackled.  That is a coach’s dream.

 

Let’s look at another:

 

 

The thing that really stands out to me here is Moncrief’s athleticism.  Look at how smoothly he is running the route.  Not only that, but he has the speed to get away from the safety who bit on the undernearth curl route.

 

Yards after the catch haven’t been Moncrief’s strength in recent years.  Last year, while playing through injuries, he averaged 2.5 yards after a catch.  In 2015, he averaged 4.1 YAC, which is around average.  In his rookie season, he was a top 10 YAC player, averaging 6.7 YAC.  But I think his decreasing YAC is more due to the injuries and him not being put in the best position by the coaching staff.  Moncrief has the physical tools to be a YAC beast...

 

 

He has the speed and agility to make defenders miss.  Unfortunately for him, the Colts offense takes lots of deep shots down the field whereas YAC is easier to accumulate on short routes and quick hitters, like the gif above and this next one...

 

 

Give him the right routes, put the ball in his hands, and he has the physical tools to be a YAC beast.

 

Another concern for Moncrief coming out of college was his aggressiveness in fighting for 50/50 balls.  Does he attack the ball when it’s in the air?  Does he use his size to his advantage?  Does he take full advantage of his explosiveness?  Well…

 

 

Uses his insane vertical to outjump a corner in pretty good position, then brings the ball into his body to shield himself from the safety charging towards him.  Let's look at another...

 

 

This isn’t even fair.  Look at how badly he outjumps the cornerback.  Again, the corner is in decent position, but Moncrief’s explosiveness is too much for him to handle.  Not only that, but to bring more evidence to the argument that he can run good routes, he gave the corner a little juke on the route too so he could set up for the fade portion.  The corner did a good job of not biting the fake, but it didn’t make a difference for him as Moncrief is still able to muscle his way to the touchdown.

 

There’s one image of Moncrief that always sticks in my head, and it’s from the previous gif

 

 

It’s just a snapshot, but we can take so much from this photo.  Look at: 1) how much higher he is than the CB, showing off his athleticism and explosiveness, 2) how he has high-pointed the ball, and 3) how he is able to make the catch despite his left hand not even being fully on the ball!  He caught the ball with his knuckles!

 

So the player we have in Moncrief is young, explosive, athletic, and runs good routes.  That’s everything you want in a wide receiver.  Does he fit into the Colts’ offensive scheme?  Let’s put it this way: if you’re running an offense and Moncrief doesn’t fit your scheme, you’re probably running the wrong scheme.  In an offense that loves to take shots downfield, having a receiver who is big and fast is a great fit.  With that said, Moncrief also has the tools to be a great player in a more traditional West Coast offense that uses shorter routes and quick throws to get the ball into the hands of its playmakers.  I'm not saying Moncrief is the game's best receiver, but he has the physical tools to succeed in a variety of offenses.

 

How he compares to the rest of the league

Let’s take the sum of Moncrief’s 16 game stats, including the projected 16 game stats from last year:

 

149 receptions, 1723 yards, 21 TDs

 

This gives him an average of 50 receptions for 574 yards and 7 TDs per 16 games.  When you compare his stats to his peers, he is very statistically similar to guys like Tavon Austin (averaging 55 receptions and 491 yards in the last two years) and Allen Hurns (averaging 57 receptions for 824 yards and 7 TDs per 16 games in the last three years).  I think Allen Hurns is one of the best statistical comparisons to Moncrief as they are both averaging very similar reception and TD totals per 16 games thus far into their careers.  Both Austin and Hurns are making slightly over $10 mil per season with their contracts.  Another great statistical comparison is Mohamad Sanu, who has averaged 51 receptions for 627 yards per 16 games over the last three seasons.

 

Unfortunately, there is no perfect statistical comparison.  Moncrief has way more touchdowns per season than Austin and Sanu, but also far fewer yards than Hurns.  Hurns and Austin are the most comparable candidates, in my opinion, especially Hurns.

 

The contract

Tavon Austin’s contract extension was for 4 years, $42 mil, $28 mil guaranteed.  Allen Hurns’ current contract is 4 years, $40.05 mil, $20 mil guaranteed.  From this, we can expect something similar for Moncrief.  Because Moncrief is so young, I’d be willing to give him an extra year on his contract compared to what Austin and Hurns got.  My estimation is something in the area of…

 

5 years, $52.5 mil, $30 mil guaranteed

 

This gives Moncrief $10.5 mil and $6 mil guaranteed per year.  If I’m Chris Ballard, I’d try to tie up a lot of money into per-game bonuses, since Moncrief has had some injury issues in his professional career.  At the same time, Ballard might not want to give him that 5th year, so it could be something in the area of 4 years, $42 mil, $24 mil guaranteed, giving him more than what Hurns received.  The reason why I gave him a bit less guaranteed money than Austin is because Austin has stayed fairly healthy for his career.  Austin has missed 5 games his whole career (4 years) whereas Moncrief missed 7 games last year.

 

At the end of the day, Moncrief is a young homegrown talent who produces on the field and doesn’t get into trouble off of it.  That’s exactly the kind of player you want on your team.  Pay the man!

[21isSuperman]

@Steamboat_Shaun The above gifs are what I was referring to in the other thread when I said there is lots of film to see what Moncrief can do

[Steamboat_Shaun]

40 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

@Steamboat_Shaun The above gifs are what I was referring to in the other thread when I said there is lots of film to see what Moncrief can do

 

Oh I know what he's capable of, but last year it just seemed like he was primarily a redzone target, and I hope they try to get the ball in his hands between the 20s a little more this year. There's no reason to pigeon hole him as just an endzone TD guy, because he's more than capable of being a really versatile WR.

[21isSuperman]

26 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Oh I know what he's capable of, but last year it just seemed like he was primarily a redzone target, and I hope they try to get the ball in his hands between the 20s a little more this year. There's no reason to pigeon hole him as just an endzone TD guy, because he's more than capable of being a really versatile WR.

Absolutely.  Pay the man and utilize him more in the offense.  He's a really dynamic weapon

[Superman]

This is great work. Good post.

 

I'm as big a Moncrief fan as anyone. I might have missed you mentioning it, but on the big Pittsburgh deep ball and the Titans TD, the way he slows down and stacks the defender so that only he has a chance at making a play on the ball, that's an advanced receiving trait. Like you said, when Moncrief came out, there were questions about his technique, but the way he makes those plays, not just using his athleticism (which is special, by most objective measures), but adding the veteran touches, convinces me that he can be a top level producer in the NFL.

 

Like the rest of our receivers, he needs to be used properly. Moncrief himself has said he wants to improve his YAC this season. I'm glad you showed him making plays with the ball in his hand. No question he has the ability, but we need to get him the ball in spots where he can run after the catch. Easier for the QB and OL, and the playmaker does the work in the open field. Come on, Chud...

 

Even still, I think that projection is rich, and I think Hurns is too lofty a comparison. When Hurns got paid, he was coming off his second season, in which he put up 64 catches, 1,031 yards and 10 TDs. Moncrief really hasn't approached that kind of production. The Jags also were eager to spend cash to reach the spending floor, and weren't necessarily looking to stick to market pay; that explains why they extended Hurns after just two seasons, which is rare under the new CBA. 

 

Austin was clearly overpaid, and he was used in a dual role for the Rams. 

 

I think Sanu is the best comparison, given their circumstances, age and production. Moncrief might have an edge in production over Sanu; he did Sanu's Year 3 numbers in Year 2, and his pace in Year 3 would have been similar, but with more TDs. 

 

My projection for Moncrief was five years, $37.5m (new money, four years, $36m). That would put him ahead of Sanu (and Sanu got his money by changing teams, which usually comes at a premium), behind the overpaid Austin, and slightly behind Hurns (whose actual contract was five years, $40m). His contract would expire after the 2021 season, which will be the first year of the new CBA. 

[SP_21]

I hope we extend Moncrief but not for a substantial contract. I'd offer him 3 years $18 million front loaded like most of our contracts. 

 

I'd have no problem letting him walk and replacing him through the draft. 

[bababooey]

The Titans catch I believe was from his second year. I am impressed at how he is able to high point the ball and utilize his height over defenders. Just a matter of staying healthy.

 

He also has the best TD dance in the game.

[21isSuperman]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

This is great work. Good post.

 

I'm as big a Moncrief fan as anyone. I might have missed you mentioning it, but on the big Pittsburgh deep ball and the Titans TD, the way he slows down and stacks the defender so that only he has a chance at making a play on the ball, that's an advanced receiving trait. Like you said, when Moncrief came out, there were questions about his technique, but the way he makes those plays, not just using his athleticism (which is special, by most objective measures), but adding the veteran touches, convinces me that he can be a top level producer in the NFL.

 

Like the rest of our receivers, he needs to be used properly. Moncrief himself has said he wants to improve his YAC this season. I'm glad you showed him making plays with the ball in his hand. No question he has the ability, but we need to get him the ball in spots where he can run after the catch. Easier for the QB and OL, and the playmaker does the work in the open field. Come on, Chud...

 

Even still, I think that projection is rich, and I think Hurns is too lofty a comparison. When Hurns got paid, he was coming off his second season, in which he put up 64 catches, 1,031 yards and 10 TDs. Moncrief really hasn't approached that kind of production. The Jags also were eager to spend cash to reach the spending floor, and weren't necessarily looking to stick to market pay; that explains why they extended Hurns after just two seasons, which is rare under the new CBA. 

 

Austin was clearly overpaid, and he was used in a dual role for the Rams. 

 

I think Sanu is the best comparison, given their circumstances, age and production. Moncrief might have an edge in production over Sanu; he did Sanu's Year 3 numbers in Year 2, and his pace in Year 3 would have been similar, but with more TDs. 

 

My projection for Moncrief was five years, $37.5m (new money, four years, $36m). That would put him ahead of Sanu (and Sanu got his money by changing teams, which usually comes at a premium), behind the overpaid Austin, and slightly behind Hurns (whose actual contract was five years, $40m). His contract would expire after the 2021 season, which will be the first year of the new CBA. 

I'm glad you read and responded.  You're far better at cap/contract stuff than I am, so I was interested in hearing your opinion.

 

I did think giving our WR2 (who albeit has WR1 ability) $10 mil a year was a little high, but I thought his agent might use Hurns and Austin as leverage, even if those guys were signed under exceptional circumstances (eg. my client is outperforming Austin and Hurns, so if you don't want to pay him what he's worth, another team will).  It also concerned me that perhaps it would be too much cap money tied up to one position with him and Hilton's contracts, but I figured there are past precedents for that too, like the 2014 Dolphins, 2015 Broncos, and last year's Redskins.

 

I wanted to do another contract projection for Mewhort, but I approached Moncrief in a very scientific/numbers and stats based way, and that's simply not possible for offensive linemen.  Maybe I'll figure another method out.

 

2 hours ago, SP_21 said:

I hope we extend Moncrief but not for a substantial contract. I'd offer him 3 years $18 million front loaded like most of our contracts. 

 

I'd have no problem letting him walk and replacing him through the draft. 

I don't think there's any way he accepts $6 mil a year.  He/his agent will demand (and deserve) more.  Plus, Ballard comes from the Chiefs, who have a strong history of drafting and keeping talent.  When you (or your predecessor, in this case) have drafted good talent like Moncrief, you keep him on your roster.  It sends a message to the rest of the roster that if you put in the work and perform well on the field, you'll get what you deserve.  Similar to what happened with Jack Doyle.  It also gives you a reputation that you take care of your players and draft picks as long as they're playing well, making Indy a more attractive option for players. 

 

1 hour ago, bababooey said:

The Titans catch I believe was from his second year. I am impressed at how he is able to high point the ball and utilize his height over defenders. Just a matter of staying healthy.

 

He also has the best TD dance in the game.

In Moncrief's defense, his only injury-riddled season was last year.  Aside from last year, he's played in 16 games every year.  But I do think an incentive-laden contract would be a good safety net in case his injury problems become more prominent.

[NewColtsFan]

18 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

 

 

I don't think there's any way he accepts $6 mil a year.  He/his agent will demand (and deserve) more.  Plus, Ballard comes from the Chiefs, who have a strong history of drafting and keeping talent.  When you (or your predecessor, in this case) have drafted good talent like Moncrief, you keep him on your roster.  It sends a message to the rest of the roster that if you put in the work and perform well on the field, you'll get what you deserve.  Similar to what happened with Jack Doyle.  It also gives you a reputation that you take care of your players and draft picks as long as they're playing well, making Indy a more attractive option for players. 

 

 

This is a particularly good post,  and this section for me is key....

 

I think every sentence makes a very strong argument.       Honestly,  I think Moncreif will end up with a little less than you floated and a little more than Superman is projecting.     Somewhere in the middle feels about right.  Say 8-9 million per?

 

I think Mewhort might be someone who gets a offer that he's not all that happy with.    I'm not sure how much Ballard will want to pay a guard.     We all remember how reluctant Grigson was to pay interior lineman.    Well,  Kelly is going to command a pretty penny.    North of 8i million per.

 

So, I could see us letting Mewhort go unless he agress to a team friendly deal.    Flipping Haeg to Left Guard where his pass blocking is even more important,   and plugging Banner inside at guard for a year ot two to get his feet wet.     Then,  we let AC go,  flip Clark to LT and move Banner to RT and then need to find a guard to plug in at RG.      But I think that's very doable.       Anyway....    I'm lprojecting long-term here...    just thinking out loud...

 

But I really like your nailing that point about offering a good contract to your own and the message it sends to your club house and to other agents.       It's a very important point that can't be stressed too much.

 

Good post...!                 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, 21isSuperman said:

I'm glad you read and responded.  You're far better at cap/contract stuff than I am, so I was interested in hearing your opinion.

 

I did think giving our WR2 (who albeit has WR1 ability) $10 mil a year was a little high, but I thought his agent might use Hurns and Austin as leverage, even if those guys were signed under exceptional circumstances (eg. my client is outperforming Austin and Hurns, so if you don't want to pay him what he's worth, another team will).  It also concerned me that perhaps it would be too much cap money tied up to one position with him and Hilton's contracts, but I figured there are past precedents for that too, like the 2014 Dolphins, 2015 Broncos, and last year's Redskins.

 

I wanted to do another contract projection for Mewhort, but I approached Moncrief in a very scientific/numbers and stats based way, and that's simply not possible for offensive linemen.  Maybe I'll figure another method out.

 

My thinking on Austin is that he's going to be cut within the next year, unless his production takes a significant step forward. I'm probably being naive, but I would expect an agent not to use an obvious bad contract given out by a bad team as a comp. The Austin contract shouldn't exist, so I'm dismissive of it. 

 

The issue with Hurns is that the year he had prior to his new contract was far better than any season Moncrief has had. I see why Moncrief's side would use it as a comp, but my response is that Moncrief doesn't have that level of production, yet. 

 

Also, I'm assuming you're talking about extending Moncrief now, not waiting until free agency. That being the case, I think you get a bit of a discount, so that the player can get paid now before something tragic happens. But Hurns had the same situation, and the Jags had a restricted tag they could have used for a 4th year. He's a good comp, he just has more production. If you're talking about re-signing him next year, then we don't know what kind of comps he'll have. He might put up a monster season.

 

I haven't thought too much about using that much cap on the position, but I wasn't giving him $10m+/year. I had Moncrief's cap hits at $5.3m in 2017 and $6.2m in 2018. Hilton is at $10m and $13m. That's 9.1% of the cap in 2017 and 7.6% in 2018, after which, either piece is movable if needed. The Broncos are a good example; in 2015 they had 13% of their cap tied to DT and Sanders, but they also had some good to great defensive players on rookie deals (Von, Wolfe (extended during the season), Jackson, Roby, Marshall, Trevathan). 

 

Like you said, I think when you hit on a guy in the draft, you keep him, to the extent that it's possible. Right now, the Colts are in good shape on the cap, so I don't think they need to be stressing frugality when it comes to keeping your own. They absolutely need to make smart moves and they can't burn money, but they don't need to penny pinch and give their players the impression that if they show promise that they won't be rewarded. I think we should pay Moncrief now, but figuring out "going rate" is where things get tricky.

 

I haven't heard anything from the Colts that suggests they are working on new deals for Moncrief or Mewhort, so I don't know what will happen.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

I am hopeful that he will be extended, hence lessening the contract.  The same with Mewhort, and the money is there.  Though Ballard will ultimately decide this moving forward and I am hopeful he sees in them, what I do?

[21isSuperman]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

This is a particularly good post,  and this section for me is key....

 

I think every sentence makes a very strong argument.       Honestly,  I think Moncreif will end up with a little less than you floated and a little more than Superman is projecting.     Somewhere in the middle feels about right.  Say 8-9 million per?

 

I think Mewhort might be someone who gets a offer that he's not all that happy with.    I'm not sure how much Ballard will want to pay a guard.     We all remember how reluctant Grigson was to pay interior lineman.    Well,  Kelly is going to command a pretty penny.    North of 8i million per.

 

So, I could see us letting Mewhort go unless he agress to a team friendly deal.    Flipping Haeg to Left Guard where his pass blocking is even more important,   and plugging Banner inside at guard for a year ot two to get his feet wet.     Then,  we let AC go,  flip Clark to LT and move Banner to RT and then need to find a guard to plug in at RG.      But I think that's very doable.       Anyway....    I'm lprojecting long-term here...    just thinking out loud...

 

But I really like your nailing that point about offering a good contract to your own and the message it sends to your club house and to other agents.       It's a very important point that can't be stressed too much.

 

Good post...!                 

Exactly.  We don't want to become known as a team that is too cheap to put out a good roster.  Irsay has never been cheap, making several previous Colts players the highest paid at their positions.  And Ballard seems like he knows what he's doing with contracts; he knows when to spend money and when to save it.

 

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

My thinking on Austin is that he's going to be cut within the next year, unless his production takes a significant step forward. I'm probably being naive, but I would expect an agent not to use an obvious bad contract given out by a bad team as a comp. The Austin contract shouldn't exist, so I'm dismissive of it. 

 

The issue with Hurns is that the year he had prior to his new contract was far better than any season Moncrief has had. I see why Moncrief's side would use it as a comp, but my response is that Moncrief doesn't have that level of production, yet. 

 

Also, I'm assuming you're talking about extending Moncrief now, not waiting until free agency. That being the case, I think you get a bit of a discount, so that the player can get paid now before something tragic happens. But Hurns had the same situation, and the Jags had a restricted tag they could have used for a 4th year. He's a good comp, he just has more production. If you're talking about re-signing him next year, then we don't know what kind of comps he'll have. He might put up a monster season.

 

I haven't thought too much about using that much cap on the position, but I wasn't giving him $10m+/year. I had Moncrief's cap hits at $5.3m in 2017 and $6.2m in 2018. Hilton is at $10m and $13m. That's 9.1% of the cap in 2017 and 7.6% in 2018, after which, either piece is movable if needed. The Broncos are a good example; in 2015 they had 13% of their cap tied to DT and Sanders, but they also had some good to great defensive players on rookie deals (Von, Wolfe (extended during the season), Jackson, Roby, Marshall, Trevathan). 

 

Like you said, I think when you hit on a guy in the draft, you keep him, to the extent that it's possible. Right now, the Colts are in good shape on the cap, so I don't think they need to be stressing frugality when it comes to keeping your own. They absolutely need to make smart moves and they can't burn money, but they don't need to penny pinch and give their players the impression that if they show promise that they won't be rewarded. I think we should pay Moncrief now, but figuring out "going rate" is where things get tricky.

 

I haven't heard anything from the Colts that suggests they are working on new deals for Moncrief or Mewhort, so I don't know what will happen.

Fair points, especially the one about getting a discount if we sign him now.  I hadn't thought of that.  I'm not a cap expert by any means.  I just get a little nervous when you have two receivers getting paid ~$10 mil a year each.  There's only one ball to catch, so I don't like the idea of paying big money to two receivers at the same time.

[rock8591]

One word - inflation.

 

$10 million is nothing in this league in 1-2 years.

 

Remember the $5 shake in Pulp Fiction?

[Valpo2004]

10 M per year would put him at #15 among WR contracts.

 

Ahead of:

Jordy Nelson - 1257 yards 14 TD's last year

Micheal Crabtree - 1003 yards 8 TD's last year

Marvin Jones - 930 yards 4 TD's last year

Julian Edelman - 1106 yards 3 TD's last year

 

I think 10M is way too much.   

 

I'm thinking more like 7 or 8M.  Of course a lot of that depends on what kind of season he has this year.  But at this point I wouldn't drop 10M a year on him.

 

[SP_21]

19 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

This is a particularly good post,  and this section for me is key....

 

I think every sentence makes a very strong argument.       Honestly,  I think Moncreif will end up with a little less than you floated and a little more than Superman is projecting.     Somewhere in the middle feels about right.  Say 8-9 million per?

 

I think Mewhort might be someone who gets a offer that he's not all that happy with.    I'm not sure how much Ballard will want to pay a guard.     We all remember how reluctant Grigson was to pay interior lineman.    Well,  Kelly is going to command a pretty penny.    North of 8i million per.

 

So, I could see us letting Mewhort go unless he agress to a team friendly deal.    Flipping Haeg to Left Guard where his pass blocking is even more important,   and plugging Banner inside at guard for a year ot two to get his feet wet.     Then,  we let AC go,  flip Clark to LT and move Banner to RT and then need to find a guard to plug in at RG.      But I think that's very doable.       Anyway....    I'm lprojecting long-term here...    just thinking out loud...

 

But I really like your nailing that point about offering a good contract to your own and the message it sends to your club house and to other agents.       It's a very important point that can't be stressed too much.

 

Good post...!                 

I really hope we don't resign Moncrief at the expense of Mewhort. A quality LG is worth way more to me than a WR2. I don't think Irsay would allow that situation to occur since he's made the O-Line a priority. 

 

Seriously though I'd be very surprised if Moncrief and Mewhort aren't Colts for a very long while. 

[Superman]

4 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

10 M per year would put him at #15 among WR contracts.

 

Ahead of:

Jordy Nelson - 1257 yards 14 TD's last year

Micheal Crabtree - 1003 yards 8 TD's last year

Marvin Jones - 930 yards 4 TD's last year

Julian Edelman - 1106 yards 3 TD's last year

 

I think 10M is way too much.   

 

I'm thinking more like 7 or 8M.  Of course a lot of that depends on what kind of season he has this year.  But at this point I wouldn't drop 10M a year on him.

 

 

Nelson's contract is four years old. At the time, it was 7% of the salary cap (by yearly average). Moncrief getting $10m/year now -- which is basically what Nelson got -- would be less than 6% of the current cap. Similar lessons with Crabtree. Both are better than Moncrief, though.

 

Edelman is an outlier, just like Brady.

 

Marvin Jones is a good comp, at $8m/year. 

[Superman]

17 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

Fair points, especially the one about getting a discount if we sign him now.  I hadn't thought of that.  I'm not a cap expert by any means.  I just get a little nervous when you have two receivers getting paid ~$10 mil a year each.  There's only one ball to catch, so I don't like the idea of paying big money to two receivers at the same time.

 

WR is not the position to spend big at, IMO, so I understand your stance. If we list positions by order of importance, I think QB, Edge, OL, DL and CB are all ahead of WR, especially for a #2 guy like Moncrief (and I think his ceiling is sky high, but his production is moderate for a #2, at best). 

 

Let me share some more of my thinking: The way our roster is balanced right now, the Colts can afford a premium for good players at non-premium positions. We have a lot of young defensive players, we have a young, inexpensive OL (even if Mewhort gets a new deal now), and in many ways the roster is still coming together. The 2013 draft set the team's development back, and the FA signings didn't work out, but those players are all gone now, so those contracts not being on the books gives the team some flexibility.

 

I assume Gore will retire, Langford may be a decision point with one year left, Butler will be a FA, AV will be a FA, etc. If the cap goes up the customary 7% (being conservative, it went up 7.7% from last year, 8.4% the previous year), before any moves and without counting any 2017 rollover, the Colts will have about $60m in cap space. Moncrief, Mewhort and Davis are the only real priorities, and the only guys that will be looking at sizable contract offers. 

 

The team could decide to shift the balance of their spending at that point, adding some free agents at other positions -- corner and edge will be needs, and those are the most expensive positions right now. I'd be disappointed if we sacrificed Moncrief, because I don't think we really have to, but it would be understandable. I think getting him locked in now would give us some cap flexibility on his deal -- spread it out over five years, instead of four -- and if he really hits his stride as a #2 with #1 potential, we'll have him at a discount for several years. 

 

TL;DR, we can afford Moncrief now because of our roster mechanics, and it might wind up being a discounted rate in the future, so I'd extend him this offseason. 

[TheRustonRifle#7]

11 hours ago, rock8591 said:

One word - inflation.

 

$10 million is nothing in this league in 1-2 years.

 

Remember the $5 shake in Pulp Fiction?

 

 

Mod edit: video contains strong language

[21isSuperman]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

WR is not the position to spend big at, IMO, so I understand your stance. If we list positions by order of importance, I think QB, Edge, OL, DL and CB are all ahead of WR, especially for a #2 guy like Moncrief (and I think his ceiling is sky high, but his production is moderate for a #2, at best). 

 

Let me share some more of my thinking: The way our roster is balanced right now, the Colts can afford a premium for good players at non-premium positions. We have a lot of young defensive players, we have a young, inexpensive OL (even if Mewhort gets a new deal now), and in many ways the roster is still coming together. The 2013 draft set the team's development back, and the FA signings didn't work out, but those players are all gone now, so those contracts not being on the books gives the team some flexibility.

 

I assume Gore will retire, Langford may be a decision point with one year left, Butler will be a FA, AV will be a FA, etc. If the cap goes up the customary 7% (being conservative, it went up 7.7% from last year, 8.4% the previous year), before any moves and without counting any 2017 rollover, the Colts will have about $60m in cap space. Moncrief, Mewhort and Davis are the only real priorities, and the only guys that will be looking at sizable contract offers. 

 

The team could decide to shift the balance of their spending at that point, adding some free agents at other positions -- corner and edge will be needs, and those are the most expensive positions right now. I'd be disappointed if we sacrificed Moncrief, because I don't think we really have to, but it would be understandable. I think getting him locked in now would give us some cap flexibility on his deal -- spread it out over five years, instead of four -- and if he really hits his stride as a #2 with #1 potential, we'll have him at a discount for several years. 

 

TL;DR, we can afford Moncrief now because of our roster mechanics, and it might wind up being a discounted rate in the future, so I'd extend him this offseason. 

I'm an advocate of front-loading contracts.  With what you said in mind about the Colts not having a lot of big money contracts on the books right now, would you advocate for front-loading the deal?

 

I generally like front-loading contracts.  It gives you more flexibility in the future.  I know players don't always like them and it could lead to holdouts and whatnot in the latter years.  But from the team's perspective, I prefer to front-load deals.