Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Malik Hookers 5th year option Declined


Recommended Posts

If they trade Hooker for a pick and decide to go with Odum to start the season they would pick up 2M in cap space.  Maybe Ballard uses it to adjust our offer to Clowney and we sign him after all.  Just a thought. 

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

Anyone check Hooker's twitter feed, or any other social media?

 

Since we haven't heard anything, do we assume they didn't pick up his option?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2020 at 11:33 PM, 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?

 

On 5/2/2020 at 12:21 AM, 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

Based on the OTC links @EastStreet posted, it gives you the average salary per year and I don't think the calculation is based on that. You would most likely need to use the specific 2020 salary figures to properly calculate the option salary value.

 

If any of those guys have more back-loaded contracts, they may show a higher avg/year figure than they're actually making this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Reich is doing a presser. This almost sounds like a extension is coming.

 

 

 

I would say about 90% they extend him. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ThinBlueLineColts said:

Probably. But didn’t Reich also give similar coach speak about Quincy last year?

 

I'm mostly going by my feelings that he's a good player and approx. 7 million is not a deal breaker by any means. Also as long as he's not injured they could cut him if Blackmon or a 2021 draft choice looked to be a better 2021 option. Just makes more sense than not taking the option. IMO , the major reason for not taking the 5th year is if Hooker has made it known heather play in a different system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would they want to extend his contract? 

It was reported recently, he was on the trading block... and even if he's not traded, he is under contract for either one or two years (it they exercise option)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to give Ballard credit.  He is not afraid to admit a mistake. Shipping off Hairston and Wilson for picks and declining Hookers fifth year shows he will move on from a player if they don’t preform. Hooker shows flashes but it’s turning out he is closer to the 50% of first round players that are merely average. He isn’t bad but he isn’t great.  I would extend him for 3yrs  11mil with 5mil guaranteed.  That would be a decent price for a four year veteran. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ballard was going to accept Hooker's option, it would have been done days ago. Not a big surprise it was declined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After next year, when we bid goodbye to Marlon Mack and keep Jonathan Taylor, that would be pretty much goodbye to the 2017 draft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And honestly, I think it's more of a durability issue than scheme fit in terms of why it was declined.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

Not a fan of this move.  I think another year at that salary is more than reasonable.  Creating a need we don't have to a year early.  Oh well.

It doesn’t create a need if Hooker balls out and stays healthy. He could still come back. They do like Blackmon though. 

 

I dont get what took so long. Is it possible Hooker asked for it not to be picked up so he could become a free agent and find a better fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chad72 said:

After next year, when we bid goodbye to Marlon Mack and keep Jonathan Taylor, that would be pretty much goodbye to the 2017 draft.

I am not convinced Mack won’t be back. His market money wise won’t be what we think. Don’t forget walker also.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see us declining his 5th year option as a sign we're done with him. Hooker is now in a contract year and I can see us working on an extension if he stays healthy and plays well.

 

22 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

He is even more so on the trade block.

He was literally never on the trade block (as far as any public reporting). Teams calling you about a player isn't being on the trade block. Calling other teams making it known that the player is available for the right price is being on the trade block.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity......in general do players usually always move on when their 5th year is declined after the rookie contract ends or is there ample examples of players working out a contract and staying on? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chloe6124 said:

It doesn’t create a need if Hooker balls out and stays healthy. He could still come back. They do like Blackmon though. 

 

I dont get what took so long. Is it possible Hooker asked for it not to be picked up so he could become a free agent and find a better fit.

So that's IF he balls out and IF he stays healthy in which case we pay him more than he would have got anyway.

 

Or IF Blackmon gets healthy and IF he is as good as or better than Hooker (I don't see how we'll have enough information on that front after this year with his late ACL tear, recovery, and then the additional year or so needed to get back to trusting the knee.  Hooker's 5th year would have been very good in evaluating that). 

 

I stick by it.  I'm not a fan.  It's not a big surprise, but we're back down on the safety depth next season.

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

I don’t get what took so long. It is the right decision though.

They were looking to move him, I bet.... and no one jumped on it or Colts couldn't get enough in return.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the guy but his health has been a problem and I think he doesn’t really fit the cover 2 scheme. He’s more of a single high safety that’s where he plays his best. I think he’s a FA after this year unless he has an impeccable year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me. I want to hear Ballard talk about this one. Short of serious injury concerns, I cannot imagine he will be able to give me a convincing answer as to why not guarantee his option. This is a cheap option for a player of Hooker's talent. Even if you are not sure he's worth it, chances are there is one of the other 31 teams that would think he is worth and give you compensation for him. Now we are very likely losing him after this year not just as a player, but as an asset too. 

 

Anyone know the CBA well? Will he count toward the compensatory pick formula if he leaves next year? 

  • Like 4
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts may have been looking to trade him, but couldn't get enough in return so they gave him a prove it year.  Might be why they waited until the last minute.

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

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me. I want to hear Ballard talk about this one. Short of serious injury concerns, I cannot imagine he will be able to give me a convincing answer as to why not guarantee his option. This is a cheap option for a player of Hooker's talent. Even if you are not sure he's worth it, chances are there is one of the other 31 teams that would think 

he is worth and give you compensation for him. Now we are very likely losing him after this year not just as a player, but as an asset too. 

 

Anyone know the CBA well? Will he count toward the compensatory pick formula if he leaves next year? 

yes, he will.  If they had picked up his option and then released him later it would not have.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The big downfall is if he has a great season he I now going to cost a ton when we could of had him for 6.7 million. 

 

He also could of been really good trade bait if he has a great season.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me. I want to hear Ballard talk about this one. Short of serious injury concerns, I cannot imagine he will be able to give me a convincing answer as to why not guarantee his option. This is a cheap option for a player of Hooker's talent. Even if you are not sure he's worth it, chances are there is one of the other 31 teams that would think he is worth and give you compensation for him. Now we are very likely losing him after this year not just as a player, but as an asset too. 

 

Anyone know the CBA well? Will he count toward the compensatory pick formula if he leaves next year? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to make sense out of declining his option, I'd say it's either the colts are trying to trade Hooker, looking to extend him to a cheaper per average deal, or have no intention of re-signing and will let him walk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah 6.5 mil isn’t terrible to pay him for his 5th year option. And I would hate simply losing him in free agency and maybe getting a 4th round comp pick back or him. He’s still so talented. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, richard pallo said:

Zero reason?  Why would you pick it up if you don't see the player as a long term asset?  The Cardinals just declined Reddick and he has played in every game since joining the team.  No injuries.  A starting player.  The Colts did not pick it up quickly.  They are taking this to the very last day.  We will find out soon but if it was such an easy decision it would have been made by now and not at the last possible moment.  

I guess the fact they could get a compensatory pick out it this way is one reason, but other than that I find it a mistake.  Now they have to talk about how happy they were with him while he's a lame duck player.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

In essence they are betting that he won't have a good season. 

 

And if he does, it makes it really hard to retain him. Do you think he will be in the mood to give the team a hometeam discount after this? No way in hell... he will milk the Colts for every last penny he thinks he can get if we want him back, or he will just leave...

 

I just don't feel like this is a smart move.

  • Like 1
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...