This years FAs

[Colt Overseas]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

He re-signed before the season started, signed through 2022.

 

I forgot that, I actually meant the Panthers RT Williams who went on IR.

[Superman]

Just now, Colt Overseas said:

 

I forgot that, I actually meant the Panthers RT Williams who went on IR.

 

I was researching Daryl Williams a few days ago. I wonder what his health status is. He had a strong 2017.

[Colt Overseas]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I was researching Daryl Williams a few days ago. I wonder what his health status is. He had a strong 2017.

 

He is hoping to return to football activities next March. He returned too early from a MCL that put him out for the year.

 

https://247sports.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/Article/Daryl-Williams-injury-recovery-update-2019-127325034/

 

Yeah he was Second team All-Pro in 2017. Very good player. Worth noting the Panthers haven't talked to him yet and they are very tight against the cap.

 

[Matthew Gilbert]

4 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Who else you going to put at Guard then because I think you leave Braden Smith at starting RT. He's done great there. Would you overpay someone else who doesn't have the camaraderie with the team and start all over again? Slauson is the only other answer, and he might not play anymore. 

I think Braden Smith did a very nice job at RT this season. I said I thought he could play that position when the Colts drafted him but some posters disagreed. But I think Ballard still sees Smith as a RG long term and he still plans on drafting another OT. There is no need to overpay someone when you plan on drafting your guy anyways. 

[DougDew]

21 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

This is where I am at now. I think investing in RT and moving Smith back to RG is the better move long-term. In theory, it would improve both positions.

 

But who is to say Smith beats out Glow? I would think that would be a healthy competition. Whether Glow would want that competition and how much the Colts would be willing to pay him to compete make it tricky. But having a legit G like Glow as a backup G is a good problem to have.

 

I said this below, but I see some merit in bringing back Glow, keeping Smith at RT and drafting a RT to develop for a year or two. This team hasn't been shy about playing rookies on the OL...but in this scenario it wouldn't have to. Then, next season, they could address the logjam if necessary. Even if Glow was expensive, his contract could be constructed in a way that nearly all of the gtd money is paid in the first two years.

 

I think Ballard has a similar philosophy to the OL as he does DL. You need 7-8 guys that can play at a good-high level...but instead of keeping guys fresh it's more because of inevitable injuries (especially playing on that artificial turf). Not to mention they do like to throw the occasional jumbo package out there.

 

They found what seems like a good OL player in Glow. Those aren't easy to find (as we have learned from the Grigs era). So if Glow likes it enough in IND...they should probably retain him in some capacity...unless his contract offers just get crazy.

I don't think there is any question that Glow would be valuable to have back.  The question is are you going to make the commitment to treat him (and pay him) like a starter?  If you did that, you are then forcing yourself to treat Smith as the answer at RT for the next few years. 

 

Having thought about in more deeply now, I think your confidence in Smith impacts how much you can value Glow.  If you think Smith will be the answer at RT, you can value Glow at starters money.  If you think you can upgrade RT and Smith can play RG as well as Glow (and I assume most here think's he would) then the smart move is to look to improve 2 positions with one move.

 

But in order to do THAT, you need to have a pretty good understanding of the RT availability both in terms of upcoming FA and in the draft.  

 

If you can't find a better RT, you may have to just pony up the cash for Glow and plan on scheming plays to help support the right side of the line.  Maybe you then make a decision at TE.

[jskinnz]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

I think this applies to the whole S group TBH. Maybe not as late as summer for Geathers...but I would definitely sit back and see what happens with Geathers. Same with Farley and Mitchell...who I doubt will have serious suitors. If some team offers any of them them a nice contract...that's cool. But most likely that won't happen...outside of maybe Geathers. 

 

I think Geathers is separate from Farley, Mitchell and Wilcox.  If the Colts decide they want him, they will have to do something in March.  The other 3 will likely still be available in the summer.

[Legend of Luck]

59 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't think there is any question that Glow would be valuable to have back.  The question is are you going to make the commitment to treat him (and pay him) like a starter?  If you did that, you are then forcing yourself to treat Smith as the answer at RT for the next few years. 

 

Having thought about in more deeply now, I think your confidence in Smith impacts how much you can value Glow.  If you think Smith will be the answer at RT, you can value Glow at starters money.  If you think you can upgrade RT and Smith can play RG as well as Glow (and I assume most here think's he would) then the smart move is to look to improve 2 positions with one move.

 

But in order to do THAT, you need to have a pretty good understanding of the RT availability both in terms of upcoming FA and in the draft.  

 

If you can't find a better RT, you may have to just pony up the cash for Glow and plan on scheming plays to help support the right side of the line.  Maybe you then make a decision at TE.

 

I think you nailed it here. It comes down, ultimately, to Braden and what his desired position is.

We had discussed in another post that it seems like his weakness at RT is against speed rushers, being that he lacks the quickness and athleticism to handle those types of rushers.

So, for the staff, their evaluations will have to conclude whether

1. Is that trait coachable and can it improve? Or is it something that is more "physically" based?

2. If it cannot be improved on, is Braden's ability good ENOUGH to hold up most of the time, or will it ultimately be too big of a problem for him at RT?


For my list:


Desir- I definitely bring him back. I do believe the CB position could use a standout star along side Kenny Moore, but depth is important. If Desir is my 3rd or 4th or even 5th CB, I'm a happy guy. I think Desir earned a nice payday, but I dont imagine it'll be a very large contract.

Geathers- To me, this is a no brainer. I absolutely bring him back for a multitude of reasons. Firstly- due to his injury history and the PLETHORA of safeties available in FA, it's very unlikely his contract is anything other than team-friendly. Secondly, he plays a unique role in our defense and is a solid insurance plan if the team decided to actually upgrade at that position.

Farley- Yes. I think my dream scenario would be Hooker, Landon Collins, Farley, Geathers, and Odum.

Glowinski- I don't forsee a massive contract coming his way. I know he played well, and I very well could be wrong, but I think we'll be able to keep him somewhere in that 7-8 million range.

Inman- My late season offensive MVP, I without a doubt resign Inman. I saw some people say "If we have TY, Cain, and a rookie we'll be find because we don't play that many 4 wide sets." I think the reason you need at least 4 options is because of exactly what happened this year with Hilton. If someone gets hurt, you need depth. So whether Inman is 3rd, 4th, or 5th... I just want him back, and we all know his salary will be reasonable.

Adam- Until he decides to hang em up

Woods- Still up in the air here. But I'm leaning toward wanting him back.

Boehm- Gotta have him.
 

[DougDew]

12 minutes ago, Legend of Luck said:

 

I think you nailed it here. It comes down, ultimately, to Braden and what his desired position is.

We had discussed in another post that it seems like his weakness at RT is against speed rushers, being that he lacks the quickness and athleticism to handle those types of rushers.

So, for the staff, their evaluations will have to conclude whether

1. Is that trait coachable and can it improve? Or is it something that is more "physically" based?


 

Good point. 

 

Slightly violating my own desire to not talk about what the Colts might actually do, but maybe that decision has been made and Frank/Ballard have decided a more fundamentals based OL coaching staff advances the oline further than replacing the talent (not that you can't do both).  Glow is young enough to not be totally set in his ways so maybe the Colts will roll with the players they have and coach them up.

[Dark Superman]

I'm interested to see if we re-sign Glowinski or not. I'm curious to see what kind of contract Ballard hands him if he does come back.

[superrep1967]

21 hours ago, DougDew said:

FS JJ Wilcox had six tackles in the Chiefs game, so I'd keep him just out of principle.

 

Also on defense: Hunt, Desir, Geathers, Mitchell, Farley, and Woods

 

Offense: Glowinski and Inman

 

ST: Rhodes, Vinny, and Milton 

 

None of these players would change any of my draft plans.  My only concern about being able to retain any of them at a good price is Glowinski.  I wouldn't get into much of a bidding war to keep him.

Glowinski had a terrible game for our O-line in the Chiefs game. 

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, superrep1967 said:

Glowinski had a terrible game for our O-line in the Chiefs game. 

The whole Colts team had a terrible game.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Good point. 

 

Slightly violating my own desire to not talk about what the Colts might actually do, but maybe that decision has been made and Frank/Ballard have decided a more fundamentals based OL coaching staff advances the oline further than replacing the talent (not that you can't do both).  Glow is young enough to not be totally set in his ways so maybe the Colts will roll with the players they have and coach them up.

 

He's also a former 4th round pick...so not a total longshot to have a successful NFL career.

[Jeremy Waldon]

22 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

Bidding wars come after you don't resign a player ... no ?   If you resign him there are no "bidding wars." That would happen only if you fail to resign him and then try to resign him after he's declared a FA. Hopefully Ballard's idea of his worth is not far off what he and his agent are looking for.

I dont think we would have to over pay for any of them, i think the players see where we are headed. And they will want to be part of this super bowl bound team. Plus Chris and Frank are building a locker room i feel guys are going to want to stay and retire from if given the choice to do so

[Superman]

20 hours ago, jskinnz said:

 

I think Geathers is separate from Farley, Mitchell and Wilcox.  If the Colts decide they want him, they will have to do something in March.  The other 3 will likely still be available in the summer.

 

I think he's separate, also, but the safety market was dead last offseason, and that included better players than Geathers. That will be an interesting case, for a number of reasons.

[MacDee1975]

20 hours ago, Legend of Luck said:

Desir- I definitely bring him back. I do believe the CB position could use a standout star along side Kenny Moore, but depth is important. If Desir is my 3rd or 4th or even 5th CB, I'm a happy guy. I think Desir earned a nice payday, but I dont imagine it'll be a very large contract.
 

 

lol....Desir is WAY better than a number 5 cb.  Good Lord.

[Legend of Luck]

8 hours ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

lol....Desir is WAY better than a number 5 cb.  Good Lord.

Lol, that's exactly my point. 

 

Let's say we draft a CB high. Then maybe Quincy develops more. Then maybe Collins turns into a beast again. There are possible outcomes where he ends up, still playing great, but as our 5th guy.

[Flash7]

1 minute ago, Legend of Luck said:

Lol, that's exactly my point. 

 

Let's say we draft a CB high. Then maybe Quincy develops more. Then maybe Collins turns into a beast again. There are possible outcomes where he ends up, still playing great, but as our 5th guy.

Honest question: In your scenario, everyone is developing while Desir remains stagnant. If you follow Desir's career path, he started out as a guy who bounced around on a few teams, stuck with the Colts and really developed here. What's to say that Desir doesn't continue to develop, maybe at an even greater rate than the others you've mentioned?

[Legend of Luck]

3 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

Honest question: In your scenario, everyone is developing while Desir remains stagnant. If you follow Desir's career path, he started out as a guy who bounced around on a few teams, stuck with the Colts and really developed here. What's to say that Desir doesn't continue to develop, maybe at an even greater rate than the others you've mentioned?

That's a totally legitimate possibility. Like I said in my earlier post, even if he doesn't develop more, hes very good, and I'd be very happy with him as our #3 (I just want a more explosive playmaker alongside Kenny). But, you're correct, he absolutely can continue to rise. I just see it being easier to imagine Quincy doing that because hes so young, and Collins because hes been there before. Desir is a bit older and IMO isnt as athletic as the younger guys.

[cbear]

On 1/16/2019 at 3:27 PM, crazycolt1 said:

There is an opening for a offensive assistant so maybe Ballard gives Slauson a chance?

Just a thought?

 

Interesting.  Didn't the assistant oline coach leave?  I don't know how these things work, but that might be a good entry point into coaching if he feels the injury is a sign to hang them up. 

[cbear]

There's a handful I'd offer contracts to, but the only ones that I might consider upping my offer to above their current value (should they balk) is Glowinski, Desir and possibly Inman. 

 

Not much above though.  Need to stay disciplined and not be too swayed by one good year. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, cbear said:

 

Interesting.  Didn't the assistant oline coach leave?  I don't know how these things work, but that might be a good entry point into coaching if he feels the injury is a sign to hang them up. 

Yep, that is what made me think about it.  Frank praised Slauson with his work with the offensive line while he has been injured.  I don't know if Frank or Ballard already has someone else in mind but you never know. From the outside looking in it seems Slauson has been more than just a player on IR.

[GoColts8818]

4 hours ago, Flash7 said:

Honest question: In your scenario, everyone is developing while Desir remains stagnant. If you follow Desir's career path, he started out as a guy who bounced around on a few teams, stuck with the Colts and really developed here. What's to say that Desir doesn't continue to develop, maybe at an even greater rate than the others you've mentioned?

That’s the thing the others have to bring their game up to his level and then surpass him.  That’s hard to do in the NFL.  I think Desir is underrated here because he’s not a big name.  Him and Moore remind me of Nick Harper in that they were guys who weren’t supposed to make it in the NFL but they turned into solid starters that will be hard to unseat.