Dontrelle Inman making a difference

[chad72]

3 hours ago, jchandler7 said:

Many of us on this board were wanting Inman. Nice to see we were right. He is playing really well and has gained good continuity with Luck.

 

Yep. There are some guys who, all they do is play good roles as role players. Mike Adams who played for us, he played his role well, I felt. Inman is playing his role real well. He should be getting more snaps.

[Restored]

22 hours ago, John Waylon said:

Grant is still getting about twice the snaps that he is, and it’s getting a little thin with the reasons why. Grant has been incredibly underwhelming since his arrival. Maybe even moreso than the DHB, Nicks, and Johnson signings before him. 

 

I think seeing more of Inman and less of Grant would be better for the offense as a whole, honestly. 

 

I agree. Keep in mind that Inman joined the team just over a month ago and it will take some time for him to get fully acclimated into the offense and be on the same page as Luck. I'm willing to bet we see more of him going forward as time goes on.

[Valpo2004]

12 hours ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

I wouldn't compare Grant to DHB, Nicks or Johnson.   We expected all 3 of them to come in and be very productive for us, but none of them wore (Nicks and Johnson had too much wear on their tires and DHB just wasn't good for us).  Grant came in to be a role player and, IMO, didn't have near the same expectations placed on him as the other guys.

 

 

Also, keep in mind -- Grant was brought into compete for snaps in this offense.  DHB, Nicks and Johnson were all expected to be sure-fire #1 or #2 WRs and expected to produce at high levels.  They were all overpaid, as well.  Grant was brought in to fill a small role on this team, and he's doing basically what was expected of him.  

 

Grant's best year (last year) he had 45 receptions, 573 yards and 4 TDs.  This year he's on pace for 46 receptions, 460+ yards and 2+ TDs.  Basically producing at the level he was brought in to produce at and similar to what we could expect of him at his ceiling.

 

A. Johnson came into Indy coming off years of 112, 109, and 85 catches and he had 41 for us.  Grigson overpaid a guy who had near nothing left in his tank.  Despite coming off injury, I think we all expected Nicks to be a ~1,000 yard WR for us.. he got us 405 yards.  I think many expected DHB to be a ~1,000 yard WR for us (especially after all Irsay's hype/tweeting) and he had 309 for us... They were all major busts... Grant's doing more or less what was expected of him coming into Indy.

 

I agree with most of it but I think Grant was expected to be more of a low level #2.  In reality he doesn't seem any better then Pascal or Rodgers.  (But not necessarily worse.)

 

Not that he got a lot of money but he still got 5 million.  If he was only expected to be about as productive as a couple of UDFA receivers than they wouldn't have gave him as much as they did.  They would have found another extremely cheap UDFA receiver that was making less then a million. 

 

Sorry but the 5 million he got denotes slightly higher expectations than what he's doing.  

[Hoose]

I would be shocked if Ryan Grant was back next year. They should give a fair chunk of that $ to Inman. He's worth it. 

[ColtsFanMikeC]

6 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I agree with most of it but I think Grant was expected to be more of a low level #2.  In reality he doesn't seem any better then Pascal or Rodgers.  (But not necessarily worse.)

 

Not that he got a lot of money but he still got 5 million.  If he was only expected to be about as productive as a couple of UDFA receivers than they wouldn't have gave him as much as they did.  They would have found another extremely cheap UDFA receiver that was making less then a million. 

 

Sorry but the 5 million he got denotes slightly higher expectations than what he's doing.  

 

He was offered 4 years/$29 mil ($7.25 mil/year) by Baltimore.  He took 1 year/$5 mil from Indy.

 

I really don't think we were expecting him to be more than a 'low level #2.'  Maybe some hope he could emerge as a higher tier #2, but I think we really just needed some WR depth.

 

In contrast, we let Moncrief walk and the Jags signed him to 1 year/$9.6 mil.  He has 33 catches, 488 yards, 3 TDs in 10 games, compared to Grant with 29 catches, 291 yards, 1 TD in 8 games. 

 

The market often dictates what players can sign for.  We saved $4.6 mil by signing Grant over Moncrief and he's producing at a very similar level (with 2 more games played, I think he'd probably have the same amount or more catches, maybe a few less yards and about the same amount of TDs).  

 

I think it was a low-risk/high-reward signing to fill an area of desperate need for one year.  Irsay wasn't blowing up twitter/social media about it like we were expecting him to be a big game-changer... we're still in very good cap shape, and the coaches/FO can address the WR group more this off-season if they see fit.  

 

[cbear]

Inman is now listed as a starter on depth chart. 

[jchandler7]

22 hours ago, reidaj1812 said:

Inman is why I do not think we should use one of our 2 #2 picks on wr. I think we should get a top wr from FA (and Inman could be our #3) or let Inman be #2 unless cain can beat him out of it.

Yeah, I personally don't think we need to break the bank for a WR. We only got a small sample size of Cain but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him as a solid #2 or #3 option for Luck next yr. I'd also like to see Inman as the #2 WR this yr. Grant/Rogers should not be out snapping him. They can both go next season or stay for cheap as backups but nothing more. 

[reidaj1812]

1 hour ago, jchandler7 said:

Yeah, I personally don't think we need to break the bank for a WR. We only got a small sample size of Cain but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him as a solid #2 or #3 option for Luck next yr. I'd also like to see Inman as the #2 WR this yr. Grant/Rogers should not be out snapping him. They can both go next season or stay for cheap as backups but nothing more. 

agree with this. Inman also blocks really well I notice that it kind of stuck out as I was watching (who is this #15 that was a great block) I didn't know who it was at first

[chad72]

5 hours ago, ColtsFanMikeC said:

 

He was offered 4 years/$29 mil ($7.25 mil/year) by Baltimore.  He took 1 year/$5 mil from Indy.

 

 

Grant had no choice. Baltimore reneged that offer and went after Crabtree once they realized Crabtree was available. Both WRs have disappointed - Grant and Crabtree.

[ColtsFanMikeC]

On 11/20/2018 at 9:24 PM, chad72 said:

 

Grant had no choice. Baltimore reneged that offer and went after Crabtree once they realized Crabtree was available. Both WRs have disappointed - Grant and Crabtree.

 

Grant failed a physical for Baltimore, which is why that deal didn't go down.  Totally missing the point of my post -- he was set to make $7.25 mil/year over 4 years... we got him on a 1 year $5 mil deal.

 

I don't really think he's disappointed.  He's playing at the same level as the best year of his 5 year career.  The point was, we signed Grant to a low-risk (potentially high-reward) contract to fill a major need on this year's team.  

 

When we signed DHB, Andre Johnson, and Hakeem Nicks, it seemed as though the front office and ownership were declaring them as big time receivers who would take this team over the top.  None of them played any better than Grant in playing, and Grant wasn't hyped up like any of the others.... he was signed to fill a need to a contract which put the team at no risk.

[Freenyfan102]

Great WR but not for the long-term solution