Colts sign Devin Funchess (Merge)

[JPFolks]

2 hours ago, ColtJax said:

 

The Jags paid him 10 million last year, and he was horrible. The market is once again insane, Humphreys, a slot receiver is going to make 10 million. For a 1 year deal you're always going to have to pay more, so this isn't a bad "show me" deal. There's a reason why the Giants let Collins walk, the Redskins do what they always do, they over spend in FA and end up picking in the top ten for it.. 

I was suggesting that THIS year Moncrief would likely have been a cheaper option.  We'll see once he is signed somewhere.  I didn't WANT him back, it is simply "compared to a stick in the eye or a kick in the shin.. the shin might be a better option..." sort of choice.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

4 minutes ago, stitches said:

i don't get this. What is the high reward portion here? If he is good, he will be worth his paycheck. If he is what he has been he won't be worth it. If he's good, we won't have him signed and under control in order to reap the rewards of him getting good under our coaches' tutelage. Where is the high reward here?  

The reward is he fills a void and helps this team. If He loves it here we extend him we found another receiver.  It also gives us a year to see if Cain can play or any of our other young receivers step up.

[JPFolks]

1 hour ago, akcolt said:

The 3 cone and short shuttle times help explain why the play speed looks different.  

Do you know what their differences were in the combine? Also, I don't even see the straight line speed.  

[CheezyColt]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

i don't get this. What is the high reward portion here? If he is good, he will be worth his paycheck. If he is what he has been he won't be worth it. If he's good, we won't have him signed and under control in order to reap the rewards of him getting good under our coaches' tutelage. Where is the high reward here?  

If he comes here for a year and balls out, then we have the inside track to re-sign him if we so choose. If he gets a massive payday elsewhere then we get the comp pick. We'll be hoping Cain/Fountain breaks out and are in a position to draft another good prospect or two in this year's draft. Funch signing lessens the pressure on those young guys to produce, but also will easily be able to be cast aside if someone does break out. IMO, that's why paying the premium to Funch in exchange for no future security, was a good move.

 

I would have liked a Tyrell Williams or Adam Humphries, but it's clear Ballard REALLY believes in building through the draft and using FA to supplement rather than pickup cornerstones.

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

This is definitely a fair criticism which I cannot argue with. We'll just wait and see what his plan is with pass rush, but if nothing of note happens between now and the 2019 season opener, it would certainly be a head-scratcher...

 

Obligatory, Ballard and Co. deserve the benefit of the doubt, at the very least. I just don't get the approach with this signing, neither the fit nor the value.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

This is hilarious to me.

 

He might get injured in TC like Cain and miss the entire season or he might have a good year and catch 10+ TDs like Ebron did.

 

Either way the same people will complain because they don't like the signing... 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, JPFolks said:

Do you know what their differences were in the combine? Also, I don't even see the straight line speed.  

 

He was better in the agility tests, I think that's what the other poster's point was.

 

14 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Do people not understand the difference between a one year 13m contract and a six year 84 million contract with a ton of guaranteed money.

 

No, no one understands that. Please enlighten us.

[Patrick Miller]

Imo this is a great pick up! Low risk possible high reward.

[Chucklez]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

i don't get this. What is the high reward portion here? If he is good, he will be worth his paycheck. If he is what he has been he won't be worth it. If he's good, we won't have him signed and under control in order to reap the rewards of him getting good under our coaches' tutelage. Where is the high reward here?  

The fact that if he is good, we will finally have a high quality WR2 opposite TY for once. 

The way the WR market was playing out, we werent going to get him for much cheaper than this and if we signed him to a 3 year deal at that value AND he did suck.... then it's a horrible deal.

 

Make no mistake, this is a stop-gap signing.... unless he comes in and plays at an all pro level... in which case pay the man....

[JPFolks]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

He was better in the agility tests, I think that's what the other poster's point was.

He implied it.  So have you.  Same question though, do you know how the two did in the combine? That was my point and my question.  You may well be right, but what are the numbers.  People complain about Combine numbers all the time not equating to football speed.  This might be an interesting case to look at.  So again, I don't know the ACTUAL numbers, do you? 

[James]

3 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

this is a stop-gap signing.... 

 

But why have the Colts only tried this stop-gap nonsense? 

[Superman]

Just now, JPFolks said:

He implied it.  So have you.  Same question though, do you know how the two did in the combine? That was my point and my question.  You may well be right, but what are the numbers.  People complain about Combine numbers all the time not equating to football speed.  This might be an interesting case to look at.  So again, I don't know the ACTUAL numbers, do you? 

 

Maybe we're talking past each other.

 

It doesn't look like Funchess ran the agility drills at the combine. At his pro day, he ran a 4.48 short shuttle and a 6.98 three cone, both very good numbers. So the thinking is that he looks better than a 4.7 guy on film -- and he did at Michigan, IMO -- because he just happened to run a bad 40 at the combine.

[Chucklez]

13 minutes ago, stitches said:

In DROP %. 40th. 4.5% drop rate. This is not good. It's below average. We had about 4.5% drop rate this season as a team and we were the 3d worst team in the league. 

 

 

This is just plain is not true..... These are the career average drop rates of some pretty notable WRs...
 

Demaryus Thomas: 5.68%

Michael Crabtree: 5.62%

Julio Jones: 4%

Josh Gordon: 4.65%

Brandon Marshall: 6.03%

Julian Edelman: 5.62%

Mike Evans: 4.15%

Davante Adams: 4.52%

 

....... You need to throw last year out of the equation, Cam Newton was broken last year. He was throwing crippled ducks outside the hashes last year.

 

[stitches]

4 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

 

 

This is just plain is not true..... These are the career average drop rates of some pretty notable WRs...
 

Demaryus Thomas: 5.68%

Michael Crabtree: 5.62%

Julio Jones: 4%

Josh Gordon: 4.65%

Brandon Marshall: 6.03%

Julian Edelman: 5.62%

Mike Evans: 4.15%

Davante Adams: 4.52%

 

....... You need to throw last year out of the equation, Cam Newton was broken last year. He was throwing crippled ducks outside the hashes last year.

 

Why would I disregard the most recent sample size? This makes no sense. You take the biggest sample possible. He's been a drop machine for ages. He had 20 drops in 3 years in college and he's continued that trend in the league. I hate to keep arguing over those drops, because in the big scheme I don't think they are that important, but lets not get it twisted. 4.5% drop rate is a high% for the league. 

[stitches]

21 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

The fact that if he is good, we will finally have a high quality WR2 opposite TY for once. 

The way the WR market was playing out, we werent going to get him for much cheaper than this and if we signed him to a 3 year deal at that value AND he did suck.... then it's a horrible deal.

 

Make no mistake, this is a stop-gap signing.... unless he comes in and plays at an all pro level... in which case pay the man....

This is not high reward. We are already paying him like he IS high quality WR2 before he's ever produced like one. This is more like... mediocre reward. If he plays like all pro this will be good reward but it all will be mitigated by the fact that it will be for a single season, rather than him being tied for the long term. This is why I said earlier that what I don't like about this deal is that it's 1 season. If you are going to give him a contract like this, get a team option on a second or maybe even a third year in order to reap the benefits of a good value contract IF he turns out good in our system. Now if he's good you either lose him after the season or you have to pay like an elite receiver next year. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

21 minutes ago, James said:

 

But why have the Colts only tried this stop-gap nonsense? 

What if he comes in and plays out of his mind and he becomes the receiver we need. I assume he will stay here if he has a great year.

[a06cc]

I guess half of you don’t pay any attention. Ballard even knew you guys would want a WR and complain about it. I’m convinced he can see into the future. I find it really funny around this time of year. It reminds me of how I use to be back in the early 2000’s. Until you see teams over pay for a guy who can’t play in their system will you truly understand. We are going to build this team through the draft. Have some patience please! 

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

Why would I disregard the most recent sample size? This makes no sense. You take the biggest sample possible. He's been a drop machine for ages. He had 20 drops in 3 years in college and he's continued that trend in the league. I hate to keep arguing over those drops, because in the big scheme I don't think they are that important, but lets not get it twisted. 4.5% drop rate is a high% for the league. 

 

You shouldn’t throw it out. Moore had no problem putting up ~800 yards as a rookie with Cam and that offense. He also caught 67% of his targets.

 

The big difference...speed and Moore’s average separation on catches was two yards more than Funchess (4.2 vs 2.2).

[James]

2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

What if he comes in and plays out of his mind and he becomes the receiver we need. I assume he will stay here if he has a great year.

 

Donnie Avery, Andre Johnson, Ryan Grant and many more....

 

I'm tired of these short term deals. Get a proper quality WR on a 4-5 year long contract or draft one (to be fair they have with Cain, who I am a big believer in).

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, James said:

 

Donnie Avery, Andre Johnson, Ryan Grant and many more....

 

I'm tired of these short term deals. Get a proper quality WR on a 4-5 year long contract or draft one (to be fair they have with Cain, who I am a big believer in).

How many players sign  4-5 year contracts ?

[shasta519]

9 minutes ago, James said:

 

Donnie Avery, Andre Johnson, Ryan Grant and many more....

 

I'm tired of these short term deals. Get a proper quality WR on a 4-5 year long contract or draft one (to be fair they have with Cain, who I am a big believer in).

 

Avery was actually solid. They have not been able to replicate that success...outside of Hilton...who was drafted that same year. Pretty crazy to think about.

[Four2itus]

I don't know what Ballard's options were, but I can guess...no better than any of you are doing.

 

I guess that he had a list of a few WR's that he thought he would approach at this time, and some of those may have not been available by the time we got to the date. I also guess that he still see's Cain as a big part of this group, but he needs a year to gauge. I also guess that he has plans to go at a WR early in the draft...and there is not an option in FA that will work financially in the long run, knowing what our own are going to cost in the next few years. 

 

So when he talked to Devin's agent, it became clear that the WR wanted a 3 year deal. Ballard tried the same one year offer with other options, but they were just as steadfast. So, he kept upping the amount till he got the stop gap he needs to get through this year of evaluation. 

 

Probably paid 3 Million too high, and now he can concentrate on the other positions from now till draft. So in my opinion, this long winded debate is over 3 mill. 

 

Hey....you never know, I could be close...

[Chucklez]

21 minutes ago, stitches said:

This is not high reward. We are already paying him like he IS high quality WR2 before he's ever produced like one. This is more like... mediocre reward. If he plays like all pro this will be good reward but it all will be mitigated by the fact that it will be for a single season, rather than him being tied for the long term. This is why I said earlier that what I don't like about this deal is that it's 1 season. If you are going to give him a contract like this, get a team option on a second or maybe even a third year in order to reap the benefits of a good value contract IF he turns out good in our system. Now if he's good you either lose him after the season or you have to pay like an elite receiver next year. 

This is moot...

 

We have over $100m in cap space, much of which we HAVE to spend or it is dead money anyways. The fact of the matter is we HAD to spend $10m for a player like Funchess in this WR market.

[James]

12 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Avery was actually solid. They have not been able to replicate that success...outside of Hilton...who was drafted that same year. Pretty crazy to think about.

 

Yeah, Avery might have been the best one, and that says something.

[stitches]

Here's an article about Funchess by Zach Hicks on Stampede Blue:

 

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

This is moot...

 

We have over $100m in cap space, much of which we HAVE to spend or it is dead money anyways. The fact of the matter is we HAD to spend $10m for a player like Funchess in this WR market.

 

False.

 

Please, stop saying this.

 

1) Just because the Colts have cap space doesn't mean it has to be spent. It certainly doesn't mean it has to be spent on any particular player or position. 

 

2) The WR market values Funchess at less than $10m, IMO. Better receivers got less, and there are other receivers at Funchess level still on the market.

 

3) Having a surplus doesn't justify a bloated contract. Because of cap rollover, spending more than you need to in 2019 takes away from what you can spend in 2020, and beyond.

[chad72]

21 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Avery was actually solid. They have not been able to replicate that success...outside of Hilton...who was drafted that same year. Pretty crazy to think about.

 

Inman has been the closest to Avery in terms of production albeit extrapolating a shorter season for him.

[Chucklez]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

False.

 

Please, stop saying this.

 

1) Just because the Colts have cap space doesn't mean it has to be spent. It certainly doesn't mean it has to be spent on any particular player or position. 

 

2) The WR market values Funchess at less than $10m, IMO. Better receivers got less, and there are other receivers at Funchess level still on the market.

 

3) Having a surplus doesn't justify a bloated contract. Because of cap rollover, spending more than you need to in 2019 takes away from what you can spend in 2020, and beyond.

It's a 1yr deal. It'll be off the books next year anyways. Whats the big deal? If I am spouting non-sense, please spell it out for me, but I honestly dont see the issue here.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Chucklez said:

It's a 1yr deal. It'll be off the books next year anyways. Whats the big deal? If I am spouting non-sense, please spell it out for me, but I honestly dont see the issue here.

 

There's no big deal. But just because it's a one year deal doesn't mean it's justified by the market. 

 

My response above is because a) we don't have to spend X amount of money, and b) the market doesn't really support this value for a player with Funchess' production and ability.

 

And my primary concern is I don't think he's the right receiver for our offense right now. If it was one year, $5m, like Ryan Grant, it's a shrug. At a premium cost, it's a head scratcher. It can be explained by the obvious fact that Ballard and Co disagree with me, but that goes without saying. 

 

(I will admit, however, that some recent viewing leads me to believe I've underrated his route running ability, so maybe he'll be a better fit than I initially expected.)

[ColtsBlueFL]

13 hours ago, JPFolks said:

I didn't need to look it up, I knew from watching.  But I did check just now and it is WORSE than I thought.  Funchess had the WORST drop rate in the NFL!!!   https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/2019/02/09/panthers-devin-funchess-kelvin-benjamin-drop-rate-nfl/ 

 

 

Hmmmm, I calculated these:

 

Eric Ebron         8.1%
Devin Funchess     8.9%

 

Calvin ridley     10.9%
Jared Cook         8.9 %
Michael Crabtree   9.0%
John Ross          12%
Keelan Cole        10%
Laquon Treadwell   9.5%
Melvin Gordon      9.1%
Courtlan Sutton    8.3%
Theo Riddick       8.1%
Kenyan Drake       8.3%

 

Ryan Grant         7.7%

Julian Edelman     7.4%

 

Chester Rogers     6.9%

T.Y. Hilton        3.3%

 

I did it by drops per target.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

This feels like Ebron 2.0...

 

Even if he has a resurgence with the Colts and has 10+ TDs this year, some people will still be "unimpressed" with Funchess just because Ballard didn't trade for Antonio Brown like they wanted...

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

And my primary concern is I don't think he's the right receiver for our offense right now. If it was one year, $5m, like Ryan Grant, it's a shrug. At a premium cost, it's a head scratcher. It can be explained by the obvious fact that Ballard and Co disagree with me, but that goes without saying. 

 

(I will admit, however, that some recent viewing leads me to believe I've underrated his route running ability, so maybe he'll be a better fit than I initially expected.)

I am not trying to be argumentative but I honestly believe a change of scenery and having a better QB, we could see a different player. Let our coaches coach him up and Frank work him in the mix maybe he could surprise?  I think he will used different than he was in Carolina.

 

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Obligatory, Ballard and Co. deserve the benefit of the doubt, at the very least. I just don't get the approach with this signing, neither the fit nor the value.

 

I mean, we all could do the sensible thing which is wait until Wednesday when Ballard signs and comments on what he liked and why he is bringing him on... which he inevitably will since he's been transparent about his moves up to this point...

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I am not trying to be argumentative but I honestly believe a change of scenery and having a better QB, we could see a different player. Let our coaches coach him up and Frank work him in the mix maybe he could surprise?  I think he will used different than he was in Carolina.

 

 

I think one thing we can be sure of is the Colts expect more out of him than Carolina got. And since I'm a Colts fan, I'd rather be wrong and see him play out of his mind than be right and see him give us 40 catches for 500 yards.

[Chucklez]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

There's no big deal. But just because it's a one year deal doesn't mean it's justified by the market. 

 

My response above is because a) we don't have to spend X amount of money, and b) the market doesn't really support this value for a player with Funchess' production and ability.

 

And my primary concern is I don't think he's the right receiver for our offense right now. If it was one year, $5m, like Ryan Grant, it's a shrug. At a premium cost, it's a head scratcher. It can be explained by the obvious fact that Ballard and Co disagree with me, but that goes without saying. 

 

(I will admit, however, that some recent viewing leads me to believe I've underrated his route running ability, so maybe he'll be a better fit than I initially expected.)

My understanding was that we had a significant portion of our cap money to spend in 2019 as there are rules about how much can be continuously rolled over within a specific time period, or in 2020 it would just be distributed to the players on the team anyways?

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I mean, we all could do the sensible thing which is wait until Wednesday when Ballard signs and comments on what he liked and why he is bringing him on... which he inevitably will since he's been transparent about his moves up to this point...

 

It's not insensible for me to state my disagreement, and the reasons for it.

 

But I fully intend to pay sincere attention to whatever Ballard and Co say about this addition, and any others they happen to make. Probably my favorite thing Ballard has done so far is his post draft meeting with the local media last year. I hope he does the same moving forward.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Chucklez said:

My understanding was that we had a significant portion of our cap money to spend in 2019 as there are rules about how much can be continuously rolled over within a specific time period, or in 2020 it would just be distributed to the players on the team anyways?

 

That's true, but that doesn't mean we have to spend it. And it certainly doesn't mean we have to give it to players like Funchess.

[HOZER]

In Ballard I trust, even if there’s a swing and a miss every now and then.

[crazycolt1]

17 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think one thing we can be sure of is the Colts expect more out of him than Carolina got. And since I'm a Colts fan, I'd rather be wrong and see him play out of his mind than be right and see him give us 40 catches for 500 yards.

I am just trying to stay optimistic, that's all.

I am more concerned with the contract as you brought up earlier but that bridge wont be crossed till next season.

Now we just wait and see.