Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Malik Hookers 5th year option Declined


Recommended Posts

It only becomes guaranteed if Hooker has a major injury.  This is the last year that teams can get out of that money if the player doesn't have a major injury.  The cap goes up tremendously next year.  JB will be off the books.  Luck will be off the books.  Rivers might be gone.  Houston and Autry will most likely be gone too.  There is no reason to not excercise the 5th year option especially when the safety drafted is coming off an ACL.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 471
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You are no doubt the dumbest poster on this board. Maybe dumber than anyone on the internet.   Please do us a favor ... either find a new team or keep your stupid opinions to yourself.

Why is this so hard to fathom? He is a solid player, who has struggled some to stay on the field. By declining the option, he now has to prove that he can be available. If he does, and truly balls out

I definitely would have hit Hooker with the option. I stated all the reasons earlier, but the biggest one is that the value was for half of what top tier safeties are making in FA right now. And it's

Posted Images

On 4/18/2020 at 11:26 AM, Dogg63 said:

He's shown flashes with a pretty lackluster pass rush. The improved pass rush (Buckner, et al) will allow the secondary to shine. I think we pick up his 5th and watch him ball out this year.

If he doesn't I would let him walk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 12:31 PM, EastStreet said:

Walker and Glow are cheap for us, and won't garner a lot of capital. It would be foolish to part with either given Walker is highly productive, and the OL already lacks depth. 

 

 Walker is a 2 down back that i think will be taken off often on 2nd and longs because he is mediocre in coverage. Of course if we had moved him, drafting another LB they liked to develop would have been part of that. NO, i did not expect this to happen.
 Same with Glow, he has been mediocre over the last 22 games and an upgrade would be nice.
 Didn't happen, so here we are.
  I was just imagining using them with a pick to move up to get someone we really liked.
 For example with our 3rd to get up into the 2nd for one of those More Juicy safeties that were there.
I am sure most of us would have liked to have gotten up into the 2nd for someone they really wanted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

The Colts must really be agonizing over this.  The Bucs just exercised their option on Howard so it appears he's staying.  8M is a high number for a player you still have concerns about.  

 

  We could cut him prior to the league year and make him a free agent and not pay that $8M.
 No comp pick if we did that, correct?

  Hopefully we get that contract year fire out of him on our way to the Super Bowl! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve been on the fence about this, but looking at all the options, I think they give him a 5th year. I know they’re disappointed by his play last year. I was too. But they don’t have the experience,  or “center fielder” depth at safety, and with all that cap money flowing in, they can afford it. And.....this player DOES have talent. Remember that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  We could cut him prior to the league year and make him a free agent and not pay that $8M.
 No comp pick if we did that, correct?

  Hopefully we get that contract year fire out of him on our way to the Super Bowl! 

That's my understanding no comp pick under that scenario.  I'm starting to think they will not pick it up and see if he can become the player we were hoping he would become.  If he doesn't have a good year they could still try to trade him.  But if that fails and he hits FA they would get a comp pick.   50/50 at this point I guess. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

I watched every game he played at OSU, and he was that good. 

 

However, your last sentence says it all.

Back in the day, I watched every college game Ryan Leaf played, and he was that good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have been reading, the price of exercising the option is middle of the road affordable, so I personally don’t see a downside.  If he performs closer to expectation, then he’s affordably locked in for an extra year.  If totally unhappy with his upcoming performance, then trade or cut him. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

From what I have been reading, the price of exercising the option is middle of the road affordable, so I personally don’t see a downside.  If he performs closer to expectation, then he’s affordably locked in for an extra year.  If totally unhappy with his upcoming performance, then trade or cut him. 

Agreed.  For the record, as much as I'm perceived as a Hooker hater, I've never advocated cutting him, trading him, or actively trying to replace him.  He's pretty middle of the road, and there is nothing wrong with that as long as there is more than middle of the road talent playing at other positions on the D.  And the knee has nothing to do with it.  He was probably always destined to be middle of the road despite what the perceptions of his potential were.

 

Is Ballard satisfied with a middle of the road safety and will compensate him accordingly?  He probably does, but we will see what Ballard thinks of him in the coming days and as the season plays out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Walker is a 2 down back that i think will be taken off often on 2nd and longs because he is mediocre in coverage. Of course if we had moved him, drafting another LB they liked to develop would have been part of that. NO, i did not expect this to happen.
 Same with Glow, he has been mediocre over the last 22 games and an upgrade would be nice.
 Didn't happen, so here we are.
  I was just imagining using them with a pick to move up to get someone we really liked.
 For example with our 3rd to get up into the 2nd for one of those More Juicy safeties that were there.
I am sure most of us would have liked to have gotten up into the 2nd for someone they really wanted. 

I look at things simply in 2 areas.

 

1) every single team has weak links, and these two are that weak given context.

 

2) we have much bigger needs than LB, or improving an OL that ranked top 5.

 

On LB in general, Walker is incredibly productive in Ts and mediocre in coverage. Oke excels in coverage, and is bad vs the run. So why not combo them them and use two cheap guys to make one great combo? Keeps both fresh, and keeps both their price tags down. And using Oke at SAM too is getting yet another bang for the buck. I think it's an absolutely great use of personnel. 

 

On OL.... I'm more worried about T depth, than Glow being a weak link. Glow's PFF rating took a hit this year, but he still wasn't "awful". Last year he was among top 20 at his position. You should really go look at other OLs in the league across their starters and compare their weak links. The Eagles are probably the only team with higher average grades, and their high Pass Pro rating is really a product of Jackson's elusiveness.

 

I would have loved for them to take a T and move Smith inside though. That would have jumped us into the unquestionable #1 spot for OL....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say let him walk. Fairly avg safety, not much more. Can't believe he didn't make one single tackle in one of those games the colts played. As a safety you're supposed to be in the thick of the game, we have capable safeties in waiting. 

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thunderbolt said:

I'd say let him walk. Fairly avg safety, not much more. Can't believe he didn't make one single tackle in one of those games the colts played. As a safety you're supposed to be in the thick of the game, we have capable safeties in waiting. 

You need to factor in what his role is on the call, and in our scheme. You also need to look at receptions allowed per target.

 

In his role, he's deepest man, and the lurker more than anyone else. Willis is closer to the LOS more often. So let's look at completions allowed and targets.

 

Name      Targets     Completions allowed    INTS

Hooker    20                  13 (65%)                        2

Willis       31                  27 (87%)                        0

 

So just by those #s, we might assume that teams picked on Willis (more targets), and Willis gave up a 22% higher completion average, and did not INT once. I'm guessing either teams respected Hooker more than Willis, or simply took advantage of our Charmin soft zone, or both.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Thunderbolt said:

I'd say let him walk. Fairly avg safety, not much more. Can't believe he didn't make one single tackle in one of those games the colts played. As a safety you're supposed to be in the thick of the game, we have capable safeties in waiting. 

Hooker isn't a SS that plays down in the box. His role is coverage and if he makes tackles it means:

A) A catch was allowed

B) The DL and/or LBs didn't do their job and he's having to play cleanup.

 

Hooker not making a tackle in a game isn't in itself a bad thing. It could mean that the DL and LBs did an amazing job not letting anything past them. Stats in themselves say nothing without context. Look at Hooker's game in it's entirety, not the random blips that can be contorted to fit the narrative that Hooker isn't good and is easily replaceable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

i would pass on this, we might be able to sign him for less than the option next year

 

he might want to test the market asap anyway and look for a team that lets him be a play maker.  the 5th year option wont prevent that

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i would pass on this, we might be able to sign him for less than the option next year

 

he might want to test the market asap anyway and look for a team that lets him be a play maker.  the 5th year option wont prevent that

 

Either you are confused or your post is poorly written. He can't test the market if we exercise the option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dw49 said:

 

Either you are confused or your post is poorly written. He can't test the market if we exercise the option.

he can test the market after the 5th year, thought that was obvious 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

he can test the market after the 5th year, thought that was obvious 

 

Oh.. he can test the market when his contract is up ? I bet many didn't know that ... good post 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

Oh.. he can test the market when his contract is up ? I bet many didn't know that ... good post 

 

thanks for commenting, your two posts have been noted

 

i said that because i think he might want to leave, hes not earning big bucks the way we are using him 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

thanks for commenting, your two posts have been noted

 

i said that because i think he might want to leave, hes not earning big bucks the way we are using him 

 

That makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd imagine they're just weighing their options, risk/reward of them picking up the option. If he has another pedestrian season, would there be a market for him in the offseason at that price? I doubt they'd wanna end up with a situation where they have to cut him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 11:26 AM, Dogg63 said:

He's shown flashes with a pretty lackluster pass rush. The improved pass rush (Buckner, et al) will allow the secondary to shine. I think we pick up his 5th and watch him ball out this year.

Yeah, because Buckner will help out Houston while demanding double teams. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:
23 hours ago, richard pallo said:

The Colts must really be agonizing over this.  The Bucs just exercised their option on Howard so it appears he's staying.  8M is a high number for a player you still have concerns about.  

 

  We could cut him prior to the league year and make him a free agent and not pay that $8M.

His 5th year option will reportedly cost only $6.77 million. Pretty cheap!

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

His 5th year option will reportedly cost only $6.77 million. Pretty cheap!

According to ESPN two days ago the 5th year option number for safeties is around 8M.  It's a high number for a player with concerns.  Not to mention we just drafted his replacement in Blackman.  Ballard said they view Blackman as a FS. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:
1 hour ago, Dogg63 said:

His 5th year option will reportedly cost only $6.77 million. Pretty cheap!

According to ESPN two days ago the 5th year option number for safeties is around 8M.  It's a high number for a player with concerns.  Not to mention we just drafted his replacement in Blackman.  Ballard said they view Blackman as a FS.

The Giants just picked up Peppers' 5th year option for $6.8M per NY Post. This article by CBS Sports has a table of 5th year option costs for each position (broken down by whether the player was a top-10 pick or not).

 

Also, the ESPN article you mention expects Hooker's option to get picked up. I tend to agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

 

 

31 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

The Giants just picked up Peppers' 5th year option for $6.8M per NY Post. This article by CBS Sports has a table of 5th year option costs for each position (broken down by whether the player was a top-10 pick or not).

 

Also, the ESPN article you mention expects Hooker's option to get picked up. I tend to agree.

The article you referenced by CBS Sports has Hooker's option decision as being listed as TBD.  That is what I have also seen on other sites 50/50.  Easy decision on Peppers though and Adams.  I would be surprised if they would commit to Hooker after Ballards comments but you never know.  I guess that's why it's taking so long.  Not an easy decision to make.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW the Dolphins just traded the 22nd pick of the 2017 draft , DE Charles Davis, to the Falcons for a 7th rd pick next year.  A former 1st rounder who played sparingly for the Dolphins.  The Falcons will now decide whether to pick up his 5th year option by Monday.  I am wondering if this trade might effect the offers the Colts reportedly received for Hooker during the draft.  Time is starting to run out so I guess we will know what's happening with Hooker very soon.  Maybe today.  Still 50/50 in my mind.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

They sure are taking their own sweet time with this. It really should be a no brainer. If he doesn’t ball out this year then you trade him that  fifth year or cut him. He won’t be making that much money. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I started a new thread. Did not see this one.

If Ballard keeps him for a year it is only to see if he will play out to his potential with the DL and a good pass rush. We have new DB coaches so it maybe they give another year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

They sure are taking their own sweet time with this. It really should be a no brainer. If he doesn’t ball out this year then you trade him that  fifth year or cut him. He won’t be making that much money. 

His fifth year would be about $9.5ishM vs his $4M dead cap this year (really on 2.2 base).

 

 

Top 10 Safeties make in the range of 10.5-14-6. 

He's not playing at that level so let's say he's 20th (that's generous) for just hypothetical sakes... 20th best S is making 6.2M. 

 

So honestly, why exercise the 5th year and pay him 10M that year, unless you think he's going to be easily in the top 10. If you don't exercise it, and let's say he's 8th, you're still not paying him much more. If you don't exercise, and he doesn't improve, you're saving yourself 5-7M. 

 

I do think he improves, but I wouldn't bet 5+M that he's going to improve and be top 10. 

 

Personally, I'd decline. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

His fifth year would be about $9.5ishM vs his $4M dead cap this year (really on 2.2 base).

 

 

Top 10 Safeties make in the range of 10.5-14-6. 

He's not playing at that level so let's say he's 20th (that's generous) for just hypothetical sakes... 20th best S is making 6.2M. 

 

So honestly, why exercise the 5th year and pay him 10M that year, unless you think he's going to be easily in the top 10. If you don't exercise it, and let's say he's 8th, you're still not paying him much more. If you don't exercise, and he doesn't improve, you're saving yourself 5-7M. 

 

I do think he improves, but I wouldn't bet 5+M that he's going to improve and be top 10. 

 

Personally, I'd decline. 

 

Actually it's a little less then 7 mil. 10 mil is if he was picked in the top 10

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Actually it's a little less then 7 mil. 10 mil is if he was picked in the top 10

 

I just did the math. It's 9M based on the below. It will fluctuate as the 3-25th salaries change.

 

Quote

Option year salaries for picks 11-32 are calculated using the average of the 3rd-25th highest salaries for the respective position. The table below illustrates option salaries for the 2017 draft class. Salaries for picks 11-32 will be updated once released by the league.

https://overthecap.com/trends-with-5th-year-options-with-2017-rookie-decisions-looming/

https://overthecap.com/position/safety/

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

I just did the math. It's 9M based on the below. It will fluctuate as the 3-25th salaries change.

 

https://overthecap.com/trends-with-5th-year-options-with-2017-rookie-decisions-looming/

https://overthecap.com/position/safety/

 

Again that's for top 10. Hooker was selected at 15. 

 

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-fifth-year-option-tracker-salaries-guide-to-2017-first-round-pick-decisions-for-every-team/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still of the belief they are trying to trade him for a player or a pick before the deadline.  If that fails I think they will decline the option and leave the door open for a future trade that would be easier without the option year in place. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

No, please read what I linked. Unless I've done bad math......

Quote

Option year salaries for picks 11-32 are calculated using the average of the 3rd-25th highest salaries for the respective position

 

Those salaries range (I posted the link to salaries too) range from 6M for the 25th (Bell) to Mathieu at the 3rd spot who makes 14M. The average of those 23 salaries would be 9M and change.

 

The link you shared, basically gives him pay similar to the 25th spot where Bell is... I've checked the NFL.com site as well on logic/rules. What am I missing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

No, please read what I linked. Unless I've done bad math......

 

Those salaries range (I posted the link to salaries too) range from 6M for the 25th (Bell) to Mathieu at the 3rd spot who makes 14M. The average of those 23 salaries would be 9M and change.

 

The link you shared, basically gives him pay similar to the 25th spot where Bell is... I've checked the NFL.com site as well on logic/rules. What am I missing?

 

3rd through the 25th. You take the average of all the safeties in between not just those two safeties.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

3rd through the 25th. You take the average of all the safeties in between not just those two safeties.

That is exactly what I did...... do the math and see what you come up with. 

What you posted puts him at the bottom of that range, not the average.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

That is exactly what I did...... do the math and see what you come up with. 

What you posted puts him at the bottom of that range, not the average.

 

I think we're missing a part of the calculation. I did it the same as you and I also got 9 mil, however I have checked 3 different sites and they all say either 6.5 mil to 7

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

I think we're missing a part of the calculation. I did it the same as you and I also got 9 mil, however I have checked 3 different sites and they all say either 6.5 mil to 7

 

Are they all by the same author (Corey) who flunked accounting and changed his major to journalism lol.... I've heard/seen the 9ishM several times (hence my earlier 9.5 mention).

I've checked and double checked the rules/logic on several sites, so unless they changed something in the new CBA (which I can't find anything), Mr. Corey simply has his math wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...