Loss sucks yes but (this is just me) only 3 with better records than us in AFC.
By
HOF19,
in Colts Football
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Thread of the Week
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
A true class act. I will miss Rudy. He wrote a nice farewell note to Vikings fans, former and current teammates, coaches, front office, owners and Minnesota in the Players Tribune. https://www.theplayerstribune.com/posts/dear-minnesota-vikings-kyle-rudolph-football-nfl -
The Colts did last year...except Rivers/JB wasn’t exactly Mahomes level on the field. But if this team had Mahomes...that would be wonderful. Would much rather spend $40M on an elite QB than $25M on a dice roll. PFF did an analysis of WAR above expectation for players drafted from 2017-current. In 4-year projections for Mahomes, he had a WAR of 11...while Q was at 1.6. So by this measure, Mahomes is ~7x more valuable (in WAR) than Q. Which means right now...with Mahomes at $40M AAV and Q at $6M AAV...they are basically equal value. Obviously that will change when Q gets his contract. But clearly, even at $40M, a QB like Mahomes is still a bargain compared to other positions on their second contracts. (And to be clear...I am not picking on Q or saying they shouldn’t sign him. PFF just happened to include his WAR in the article so I could use it for a comparison.) -
The rookie deal amount isn’t relevant...but it’s meant to show the jump...which is definitely relevant. We aren’t talking about one player...it’s (3) players. And when you are suddenly paying x times more for the same handful of players...it has an impact on the cap and roster construction (things like efficiency, positional spending and surplus value). And for a forward-thinking GM like Ballard, I imagine those are important aspects. But I actually said I was not “eager” to trade anyone. I am just open to it if helps balance out cap and roster construction, along with providing premium draft capital that can help the team replace those players or address other areas. I would guess the number of GMs that actually trade players heading into their second contracts have a much more specific analysis (GMs like Lynch, Grier, Douglas and BB...to name a few). In my (admittedly novice) opinion, it just seems like having 5 players (out of 51) take up more than half of the cap space is a potentially untenable situation over time.
-
By conklincolt · Posted
nothing his offensive line can't fix. He needs to be very careful what he say's , said, and does. Best attitude adjustment ever. -
By 2006Coltsbestever · Posted
I remember during the draft when Watson came out and Chicago traded up to get the #2 pick, I was like I called it even saying that in here, laughing. Thinking I called it, this was too easy. Then I heard this - with the 2nd pick of the 2017 draft, the Chicago Bears select Mitchell Trubisky. I was like
-
-
Members
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now