Malik Hookers 5th year option Declined

[Superman]

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 only guaranteed for injury.

 

Hooker can be a big playmaker. I think between his injuries, the scheme change, and the Colts having a so-so pass rush, his ability to impact the game has been seriously hampered. Even if you don't want to make a long term commitment to him -- which is totally understandable -- just securing one more low-to-moderate- risk season seemed like a really good decision. Worst case scenario, he gets hurt and the guarantee triggers. Best case, he plays really well and you have another year of control. Even if that means a trade, you can get him out of the conference and get an immediate return.

 

(And I totally understand Hooker's issues. He doesn't tackle well. He seems to go long stretches without having a tangible impact on the game; it's understandable when QBs don't throw his way, but you can get involved in the run game, and you can make stops on receivers. Biggest of all, he's injured a lot, and I think that might be the reason the Colts are checking out. But I still think everything Ballard said about him when he was drafted is true. He's a top notch prospect.)

 

The other thing is this seems contrary to their approach with JB. Different circumstance, different position, different person, but they seemed super interested in protecting their future options with JB, even overpaying him. This is the opposite approach, and in an easier situation to navigate. They didn't have a fifth year option on JB. It's weird to me, even if Hooker doesn't fit in their plan after 2020. 

 

So I think I get why they would decide to move on from him. But I don't agree with not using the option. It's kind of a head scratcher.

[Gstyle6600]

At the end of the day, Ballard had a tough call to make (he needed until the deadline to decide) and he made it, albeit im sure with a lot of thought/analysis. Ballard could have gotten this wrong, but i will trust him as he has shown to know what he is doing (more than any of us internet GMs). Ballard has firsthand knowledge of the type of player Hooker is, and like all other players, placed a monetary value on him. He has stated that he will not overpay for players (especially for their supposed projected improvement). IMO i think he is correct. According to Ballard,  based on his past play (injury history scheme fit etc) he (is betting he) will not be worth the average of the 3rd-25th highest paid safety in the 2021 season(11th-12 best?). Was he the 11th or 12 best safety this past year? i dunno but Ballard doesnt think so. He will give Hooker this year to prove him wrong and then recalculate what Ballard believes is his value, and offer him that. Hooker will then make his decision to take it or play elsewhere (if someone else offers him similar or obviously more money- that is unless he gets traded first or really balls out and we cant get a long term deal done and we use the franchise tag = highly unlikely given the situation).

 

As for Hookers motivation this year, im sure he is a bit salty right now, but he will do his best not only for the fact that other gms and coaches will use his 2020 tape to assess his value, but if he is a true professional (which he is), he will compete and play for his teammates as all do, no matter the contract circumstance. 

[stitches]

3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Because he has not played like a top tier safety.

This is not the question you are answering here. He has not played like a top tier safety, especially last year. The value of the rookie contract is that he doesn't need to be in order to be positive value on his contract. 6.7M for one additional year of team control for a talented played who has shown plenty of promise is nothing. You are paying Brissett 21M to sit on the bench and paying Hoyer 4M to sit on the bench for the Pats. But you cannot pay 6M for your starting safety?

Quote

He was picked 15 overall and plays like an undrafred  free agent. What is  more surprising is everyone being shocked by these turn of events.

He was picked 15 and he hasn't played to his draft position. But he's also not "playing like an undrafted free agent". Sorry this is again demonstrably false.

Quote

Blackmon was drafted as his replacement but everyone seems to over look his selection. People were pencilling Blackmon in at every position  other than free safety. He is the future, as Ballard and Reich see it.  They must love him a lot to pick him months away from an ACL tear.

We have no idea if he's even going to be ready to play this year, let alone where he will play. I bet they have a plan for him in order to draft him this high coming off a serious injury. 3d round picks bust all the time, especially ones that are coming into the league injured. If I had to bet on who has better career, I'd still bet on Hooker because at least I've seen him play in the league and I've seen him be a good starter in the league. We know nothing about Blackmon's transition to the league besides the fact that Ballard loves him, but it's not like Ballard infallible, he loved Basham and Lewis and Wilson and ... Hooker at some point. 3d round safety picks have less than 30% hit rate, so I don't expect Ballard to hit much higher than this...

 

[Luck 4 president]

The question is can we find his replacement for $6.7 million? I don’t think it would be smart to bank on Blackmon coming off a major injury and hasn’t played a single nfl snap yet. Letting hooker go just creates another hole that will require resources to fill. Resources that could have been used elsewhere 

[Luck 4 president]

If I remember correctly, it was leaked that Ballard had Hooker ranked as the 3rd best player on his board and was stoked he got him at 15. 

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

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 only guaranteed for injury.

 

Hooker can be a big playmaker. I think between his injuries, the scheme change, and the Colts having a so-so pass rush, his ability to impact the game has been seriously hampered. Even if you don't want to make a long term commitment to him -- which is totally understandable -- just securing one more low-to-moderate- risk season seemed like a really good decision. Worst case scenario, he gets hurt and the guarantee triggers. Best case, he plays really well and you have another year of control. Even if that means a trade, you can get him out of the conference and get an immediate return.

 

(And I totally understand Hooker's issues. He doesn't tackle well. He seems to go long stretches without having a tangible impact on the game; it's understandable when QBs don't throw his way, but you can get involved in the run game, and you can make stops on receivers. Biggest of all, he's injured a lot, and I think that might be the reason the Colts are checking out. But I still think everything Ballard said about him when he was drafted is true. He's a top notch prospect.)

 

The other thing is this seems contrary to their approach with JB. Different circumstance, different position, different person, but they seemed super interested in protecting their future options with JB, even overpaying him. This is the opposite approach, and in an easier situation to navigate. They didn't have a fifth year option on JB. It's weird to me, even if Hooker doesn't fit in their plan after 2020. 

 

So I think I get why they would decide to move on from him. But I don't agree with not using the option. It's kind of a head scratcher.

Agree...obviously both deals were different...but this decision on Hooker is almost in direct contradiction to the JB deal...which was considerably more expensive and risky...especially when you factor in the cost AND Hooker’s better talent.

 

For all of the reasons that the JB deal was a good thing (even if I disagree)...should make us question the approach here. 
 

Ultimately...I will not be surprised to see him dealt before the season starts...of course they also have decreased his value.
 

 

[shasta519]

14 minutes ago, Luck 4 president said:

If I remember correctly, it was leaked that Ballard had Hooker ranked as the 3rd best player on his board and was stoked he got him at 15. 

Yeah...he was considered a draft steal by most. I guess most people got it wrong...so far. That’s why the draft is a crapshoot I guess. 

[shasta519]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I agree that there are options. The only option that went away is the one they declined. Just seems like that decision is a really strong indicator as to what they intend to do.

 

And the last time I said 'odds are the Colts do X,' was right before the second day of the draft, when I said I thought it was probable that they would trade down from one of their second round picks. They traded up. So I don't know anything. 

That’s a safe bet. Ballard isn’t your average GM...but you won’t find many (if any) examples of teams declining and then signing that player to an extension. Kyle Fuller was one...but he also missed the entire year and was coming off knee surgery...so of course they declined a gtd for injury option.

 

I just don’t see Ballard bucking the trend here. They must know where they stand...because if there was any possibility of them re-signing him...they would have exercised it. If it was the injury issues that made even $6.7M too risky...then that isn’t going to really change.

 

But I suppose anything is possible. 

 

[life long]

Well this should have Malik very motivated to play well. That will be the only way to gain financial security even if the colts dont resign him. Money is a great motivator in sports. Pretty much everyone will be in a contract year. Which means if these guys want to get paid, they better play well! Very much a boom or bust approach...

[ukcolt12]

I don't like the decision to be honest.  Think this one will come back to bite Ballard.  Of course I would be happy to be proven wrong but have a feeling he will ball out somewhere else in 20/21 and all we would have done is leave ourselves with no depth in a key position of our D.

I would also argue that the whole secondary played pretty awful last season so is that not more a coaching issue?

The durability issue is a weak argument as outside of the ACL he has only missed a handful of games.

The scheme fit?  Well why draft him then?  And don't give me this rubbish that Ballard was actually going to stick with Pagano beyond that season.  Everyone knew he was a lame duck, everyone knew Pagano would fail again.

As stated happy to be proven wrong but think this will come back to hurt us.

 

[r a y s k i]

8 hours ago, Coltsman1788 said:

The Jets will be all over Malik when he becomes available. 

They just got Ashtyn Davis, he is gonna be solid for them

[CoachLite]

1 hour ago, ukcolt12 said:

I don't like the decision to be honest.  Think this one will come back to bite Ballard.  Of course I would be happy to be proven wrong but have a feeling he will ball out somewhere else in 20/21 and all we would have done is leave ourselves with no depth in a key position of our D.

I would also argue that the whole secondary played pretty awful last season so is that not more a coaching issue?

The durability issue is a weak argument as outside of the ACL he has only missed a handful of games.

The scheme fit?  Well why draft him then?  And don't give me this rubbish that Ballard was actually going to stick with Pagano beyond that season.  Everyone knew he was a lame duck, everyone knew Pagano would fail again.

As stated happy to be proven wrong but think this will come back to hurt us.

 

I don't expect any GM to hit on 100% of his draft decisions, even if the statistics indicate a good fit. This doesn't mean Hooker isn't a good football player - he is. He's just not what Ballard and Reich want for that position. No need for a lot of hurt feelings.

[ukcolt12]

11 minutes ago, CoachLite said:

I don't expect any GM to hit on 100% of his draft decisions, even if the statistics indicate a good fit. This doesn't mean Hooker isn't a good football player - he is. He's just not what Ballard and Reich want for that position. No need for a lot of hurt feelings.

Hurt feelings?! I just don't like the decision that's all. It's not gonna ruin my week or anything lol. 

 

[Myles]

1 hour ago, ukcolt12 said:

I don't like the decision to be honest.  Think this one will come back to bite Ballard.  Of course I would be happy to be proven wrong but have a feeling he will ball out somewhere else in 20/21 and all we would have done is leave ourselves with no depth in a key position of our D.

I would also argue that the whole secondary played pretty awful last season so is that not more a coaching issue?

The durability issue is a weak argument as outside of the ACL he has only missed a handful of games.

The scheme fit?  Well why draft him then?  And don't give me this rubbish that Ballard was actually going to stick with Pagano beyond that season.  Everyone knew he was a lame duck, everyone knew Pagano would fail again.

As stated happy to be proven wrong but think this will come back to hurt us.

 

I agree.   It's odd to pass on a fairly cheap additional year of his play.  With pressure from the D-line, he could have a very good season this year.  Hopefully there are not any residual affects in the locker room.  

[LockeDown]

Here is the gloomy side. Hooker fell in the draft. Gruden and Kiper didn’t like  the pick because of his aversion to tackling. We didn’t have Reich, Decker, Dodd or our current scouts to scout this pick at the time. The injury bug bit early and often.  He never seemed to be at the forefront as a locker room leader like Darius despite the fact he was a first round pick.  Yet still be was talented enough to keep and hopefully become a key core guy.  It just never seemed to work for maybe lots of reasons. Locker room presence? Scheme fit for EFlus? Injuries?  Ballard and FO might not be that high on him altogether but Even now he is giving him a chance to help us and himself.

Also, he’s been my pic for years so I wanted him to succeed. 

[Colt.45]

12 hours ago, AustexColt said:

I intuitively felt that we would not sign him for a 5th year, because Ballard's standard requires that player effort is a key determinant. He gave Geather's another year when he was always hurt because the guy gave it all on the field and that rubbed off well in the locker room. Malik may not be wired that way. Malik projects as a hightly talented player "Ed Reed" potential without the heart. Heart is really important to be on the team. 

 

If tomorrow, Darius Leonard starts to slack off, Ballard will see it and give him a chance to readjust his attitude. If that does not happen, he is gone.

 

Ballard has always said that this is about the TEAM and not about one player, including Andrew Luck. Reason we love Ballard is because he means what he says. 

 

Yup. That 'Ed Reed' potential was always that mirage that pulled fans and admin in. Hooker has range, that's it. We hoped he'd grow, he hasn't (for several valid reasons) but in retrospect, it should have been obvious. Ed Reed was a DOG, it wasn't just range and the ability to bait QBs the OG had. That heart, the aggression, the range, the leadership, the tackling, the willingness to engage in the run game. Hooker may become that Ed Reed elsewhere but somehow I doubt it, young safeties like Jamal Adams came in from day 1 and instantly showed what they were about. 

Hooker's range meant he was compared to one of the greatest safeties ever but in reality, his ceiling is probably being a good FS. The great ones all had that DOG which Hooker really hasn't ever shown. Sharper, Lott, Reed, etc, all fighters. Hopefully Hooker takes his game up several notches but Ed Reed? I don't see it happening and will gladly eat crow if it does.

[DougDew]

Not sure what all of the kvetching is about.  He's under contract for next year and will play.  We can resign him next season to a contract that suits his value.  If its 6.5 to 8 million per year, this is a wash.  He hasn't really earned that level of compensation yet, so chances are he won't next season either, but you never know.

 

 

[dodsworth]

Hooker isn't going to be picked up because the need for an over

the top ball hawk FS isn't as needed with the perceived pressure

the D line should apply on the QB. 

 

Ballard is building a smash mouth defense and is probably looking

for a Bethea type FS than a Hooker. 

[DougDew]

41 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

Here is the gloomy side. Hooker fell in the draft. Gruden and Kiper didn’t like  the pick because of his aversion to tackling. 

Agreed, there was a reason he fell.  The notion that he was a slam dunk top 10 player is hogwash.  He played with two first round draft picks at corner.  Against college competition, he could sit back there and pick off bad passes thrown in desperation.  Although he could cover a lot of field, its a singular skill that's hardly worthy of a high pick, but that's JMO.  The justification for the high ranking was his athleticism and moldable traits that have yet to reach whatever potential was perceived.   And there seems to be something about his attitude that isn't what we want, but that's just my feeling.

[ukcolt12]

42 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

Here is the gloomy side. Hooker fell in the draft. Gruden and Kiper didn’t like  the pick because of his aversion to tackling. We didn’t have Reich, Decker, Dodd or our current scouts to scout this pick at the time. The injury bug bit early and often.  He never seemed to be at the forefront as a locker room leader like Darius despite the fact he was a first round pick.  Yet still be was talented enough to keep and hopefully become a key core guy.  It just never seemed to work for maybe lots of reasons. Locker room presence? Scheme fit for EFlus? Injuries?  Ballard and FO might not be that high on him altogether but Even now he is giving him a chance to help us and himself.

Also, he’s been my pic for years so I wanted him to succeed. 

You make some good points.  Lets see how it plays out.  I just think there is something special in there which we would do well to try and extract.

[Myles]

52 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

Here is the gloomy side. Hooker fell in the draft. Gruden and Kiper didn’t like  the pick because of his aversion to tackling. 

Kiper had tackling concerns, but to say he didn't like the pick is not correct.   He had Hooker going to the Chargers at #7.    Overall he gave the Colts a draft grade of B.

 

ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper posted his 2017 NFL Draft grades on Sunday, with the Indianapolis Colts being handed a grade of B.

Kiper liked the decision by the Colts to strengthen the defense, which began with the selection of safety Malik Hooker at pick 15.

"New general manager Chris Ballard inherited a porous defense, and he went that direction with his first three picks," wrote Kiper. "Malik Hooker could have gone as high as No. 7, but the one-year wonder dropped to 15. He's the best center fielder in his class, and some have compared him to Ed Reed.

[HOZER]

27 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not sure what all of the kvetching is about.  He's under contract for next year and will play.  We can resign him next season to a contract that suits his value.  If its 6.5 to 8 million per year, this is a wash.  He hasn't really earned that level of compensation yet, so chances are he won't next season either, but you never know.

 

 

You taught me a new word today, thank you!

 

 

[Mr.NotSoCreative]

5 minutes ago, Myles said:

Kiper had tackling concerns, but to say he didn't like the pick is not correct.   He had Hooker going to the Chargers at #7.    Overall he gave the Colts a draft grade of B.

 

ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper posted his 2017 NFL Draft grades on Sunday, with the Indianapolis Colts being handed a grade of B.

Kiper liked the decision by the Colts to strengthen the defense, which began with the selection of safety Malik Hooker at pick 15.

"New general manager Chris Ballard inherited a porous defense, and he went that direction with his first three picks," wrote Kiper. "Malik Hooker could have gone as high as No. 7, but the one-year wonder dropped to 15. He's the best center fielder in his class, and some have compared him to Ed Reed.

Ed Reed, yea right.

[csmopar]

I like Hooker, I think hes an above average player. I liked him when he was picked.  However, wasn't OSU's secondary incredible that year? I seem to remember a couple OSU DBs that a few wondered if they had a bigger impact on Hooker's play than Hooker himself. 

 BUT, and this is a huge BUT, it does seem like his play is up and down. Now, is that a physical issue or is he perhaps not putting focus and effort 100% of the time, IE taking plays off? Or perhaps hes not putting forth efforts off the fields. All of these are real possibilities that could lead to him not getting that option picked up. Information the Colts have but have too much class to come out and smear/hurt Hooker's chances of signing elsewhere. 

[DougDew]

53 minutes ago, Myles said:

"Malik Hooker could have gone as high as No. 7, but the one-year wonder dropped to 15. He's the best center fielder in his class, and some have compared him to Ed Reed.

That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of the pick.  For a guy like Kiper to say a-matter-of-factly that he COULD have gone at 7 and that SOME compare him to Ed Reed, while he himself didn't, kind of indicates he wasn't going that far.   Although I knew that Hooker was short on college experience, I didn't realize that he was a one-year wonder. 

[Hoose]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Not sure what all of the kvetching is about.  He's under contract for next year and will play.  We can resign him next season to a contract that suits his value.  If its 6.5 to 8 million per year, this is a wash.  He hasn't really earned that level of compensation yet, so chances are he won't next season either, but you never know.

 

 

Well said. In the end, this is likely Ballard’s reasoning. 

[r a y s k i]

I loved the Hooker pick at the time of the draft, exactly what we needed as we struggled to force turnovers for years at that point.

 

However, loads of analysts say the Colts are misusing Hooker, not fitting the system around his talents but the other way around which from the limited snaps I've seen him play could be right. Not a fan of Eberflus myself. 

 

Ballard sounds crazy about Blackmon so looking forward to see him and also Hooker as well. Ultimately we'll have better places to spend that money we'd had for Hooker's 5th year option. 

We got some important free agents coming up. 

 

[Myles]

21 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of the pick.  For a guy like Kiper to say a-matter-of-factly that he COULD have gone at 7 and that SOME compare him to Ed Reed, while he himself didn't, kind of indicates he wasn't going that far.   Although I knew that Hooker was short on college experience, I didn't realize that he was a one-year wonder. 

Not a ringing endorsement, but far from him not liking the pick.  He may not have compared him to Ed Reed, but by mentioning that some did would be odd in a draft grading if he didn't feel it was somewhat true.   Also, him saying he could have gone as high as 7 was him referencing his own mock draft that had him going to the Chargers at 7.  

[Smonroe]

13 minutes ago, rayski said:

I loved the Hooker pick at the time of the draft, exactly what we needed as we struggled to force turnovers for years at that point.

 

However, loads of analysts say the Colts are misusing Hooker, not fitting the system around his talents but the other way around which from the limited snaps I've seen him play could be right. Not a fan of Eberflus myself. 

 

Ballard sounds crazy about Blackmon so looking forward to see him and also Hooker as well. Ultimately we'll have better places to spend that money we'd had for Hooker's 5th year option. 

We got some important free agents coming up. 

 

 

Agree with this.  I hate to see a Buckeye not working out, but Ballard and the coaches know the players a lot better than we ever will.  They have to take into account their health, future contracts and how that will affect the team's salary cap, etc.

 

I'm also not a fan of the Eberflus scheme.  It seems like decent QBs tear it apart most times.  I always hated 'bend don't brake' defenses, especially when they give so much cushion on 3rd down.  But I have to believe he's playing the scheme to fit the personnel. 

 

Hooker's abilities (when he's healthy) are not used to the full advantage here, but it's because he can't afford to use it due to other players' weaknesses.

[csmopar]

1 minute ago, Smonroe said:

 

Agree with this.  I hate to see a Buckeye not working out, but Ballard and the coaches know the players a lot better than we ever will.  They have to take into account their health, future contracts and how that will affect the team's salary cap, etc.

 

I'm also not a fan of the Eberflus scheme.  It seems like decent QBs tear it apart most times.  I always hated 'bend don't brake' defenses, especially when they give so much cushion on 3rd down.  But I have to believe he's playing the scheme to fit the personnel. 

 

Hooker's abilities (when he's healthy) are not used to the full advantage here, but it's because he can't afford to use it due to other players' weaknesses.

*break... sorry, had too.

but to your point, I don't know, you may be right. Either way, there's a reason his option isnt being picked up. Scheme, player who knows.

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

*break... sorry, had too.

but to your point, I don't know, you may be right. Either way, there's a reason his option isnt being picked up. Scheme, player who knows.

 

Ha!  Good catch.  But maybe the way I had it is correct since we were bending a lot and not putting the brakes on very much.  (Saints game was the only Colts game in memory that I quit watching at half time.  I was so disgusted.)

[csmopar]

6 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Ha!  Good catch.  But maybe the way I had it is correct since we were bending a lot and not putting the brakes on very much.  (Saints game was the only Colts game in memory that I quit watching at half time.  I was so disgusted.)

yeah. 

[stitches]

7 hours ago, shastamasta said:

Agree...obviously both deals were different...but this decision on Hooker is almost in direct contradiction to the JB deal...which was considerably more expensive and risky...especially when you factor in the cost AND Hooker’s better talent.

 

For all of the reasons that the JB deal was a good thing (even if I disagree)...should make us question the approach here. 
 

Ultimately...I will not be surprised to see him dealt before the season starts...of course they also have decreased his value.
 

 

It's super weird situation now. At the same time you have noone close enough to his talent to take that spot and you are in win-now mode and by refusing his option you are declaring you don't believe in him. The thing with dealing him before at the very least Blackmon is healthy is that it leaves us with pretty much noone else at the position. Odum, Khari and Milligan are our only other safeties under contract. How do you trade Hooker if this is the depth behind at the position? And this is assuming perfect health from everybody. 

 

The more I think about it the more it looks to me like he won't be traded unless Blackmon returns from injury and takes his job sometime during the season. He will play out his contract and leave. 

 

Either way I don't like the decision-making by Ballard here. If he doesn't like Hooker, why did he do nothing to improve the position for this coming season? And if he does like Hooker, why didn't he pick his option? 

 

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

I like Hooker, I think hes an above average player. I liked him when he was picked.  However, wasn't OSU's secondary incredible that year? I seem to remember a couple OSU DBs that a few wondered if they had a bigger impact on Hooker's play than Hooker himself. 

 BUT, and this is a huge BUT, it does seem like his play is up and down. Now, is that a physical issue or is he perhaps not putting focus and effort 100% of the time, IE taking plays off? Or perhaps hes not putting forth efforts off the fields. All of these are real possibilities that could lead to him not getting that option picked up. Information the Colts have but have too much class to come out and smear/hurt Hooker's chances of signing elsewhere. 

  

     Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
     The guy doesn't make plays on the ball. When has he ever read a play and busted someone as the ball gets there? When does it look like opposing QB's are throwing into double coverage because Hooker has come over to help the CB?
  I see a lazy, low Football IQ FS.
He actually did make some good tackling plays when he was used more like an aggressive SS.
I wish him luck.

[stitches]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Not sure what all of the kvetching is about.  He's under contract for next year and will play.  We can resign him next season to a contract that suits his value.  If its 6.5 to 8 million per year, this is a wash.  He hasn't really earned that level of compensation yet, so chances are he won't next season either, but you never know.

 

 

If he works out well enough to deserve 8M he's not signing it with the Colts. If we want to keep him, we will have to franchise tag him which will be about 12M, which is almost double what we could have had him for, had we just picked his option. And if we still don't want him, we will get a 5th-6th round compensatory pick or thereabout for him. What a giant waste. 

[stitches]

13 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry,  but I don't accept this this is the "only reasonable conclusion."

 

I think they are trying to light a fire under Hooker.  Players typically play their best ball in a contract year.    If Hooker achieves his potentional,  we get a great season from our FS.   At that point,  we either re-sign him or we let him go elsewhere and get the comp pick.

 

I think you're reading too much into this at this point...

 

Agree to disagree. You don't sacrifice team control and the relationship with the player to just "light a fire" under him. What happens when you light a fire under him and he plays well and doesn't want to re-sign with you and wants out? He's already unfollowed the Colts on his IG account. Does that look like a relationship you want to have with a starter on your roster? Does it look like he will be keen to re-sign with you if he actually plays well? Or would he just think - you didn't believe in me and now look at me, I will be lighting you up for the next half a decade with the Texans or Titans or whoever signs him... You get a 5th round compensatory pick... for lighting a fire under a player who will be great for another team. This makes no sense to me. 

[life long]

30 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

  

     Woulda, coulda, shoulda.
     The guy doesn't make plays on the ball. When has he ever read a play and busted someone as the ball gets there? When does it look like opposing QB's are throwing into double coverage because Hooker has come over to help the CB?
  I see a lazy, low Football IQ FS.
He actually did make some good tackling plays when he was used more like an aggressive SS.
I wish him luck.

Agreed about his lack of reading and jumping plays. He has 7 ints and it feels like everyone of them came on an overthrow by the qb. Obviously it's good to be in position that's half the battle but he doesn't seem to anything more than lucky on most of his interceptions. 

[DougDew]

39 minutes ago, stitches said:

If he works out well enough to deserve 8M he's not signing it with the Colts. If we want to keep him, we will have to franchise tag him which will be about 12M, which is almost double what we could have had him for, had we just picked his option. And if we still don't want him, we will get a 5th-6th round compensatory pick or thereabout for him. What a giant waste. 

Its not a waste.  Its a strategy.  Ballard has to structure his team to value certain positions and/or players.  Special players like Nelson and Leonard will be paid even though they play positions that tend to have less value, but other positions tend to be expensive simply because of their duties/responsibilities.  Finding good players at the more expensive positions is always more of the priority, IMO.

 

In your scenario, I don't think Ballard even believes that an $8M to $12 million FS is worth it for this defense, no matter who the player is.  Hooker is fighting the headwinds of being a FS in a zone-based defense, so a premium value would be hard for him to achieve anyway, IMO.

[throwing BBZ]

30 minutes ago, stitches said:

Agree to disagree. You don't sacrifice team control and the relationship with the player to just "light a fire" under him. What happens when you light a fire under him and he plays well and doesn't want to re-sign with you and wants out? He's already unfollowed the Colts on his social media accounts. Does that look like a relationship you want to have with a starter on your roster? Does it look like he will be keen to re-sign with you if he actually plays well? Or would he just think - you didn't believe in me and now look at me, I will be lighting you up for the next half a decade with the Texans or Titans or whoever signs him... You get a 5th round compensatory pick... for lighting a fire under a player who will be great for another team. This makes no sense to me. 

 

  It is my understanding that No highly talented player wants to play on the 5th year option.
 They want a long term contract with LOTS of guaranteed $$$.
  That salary Hooker would have gotten would also have been a slap in the face If he Played Well!
   He isn't out anything, and has the same contract year motivation.
  And i have no doubt that this move did not surprise him.
   

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its not a waste.  Its a strategy.  Ballard has to structure his team to value certain positions and/or players.  Special players like Nelson and Leonard will be paid even though they play positions that tend to have less value, but other positions tend to be expensive.  Finding good players at the more expensive positions is more of the priority, IMO.

 

In your scenario, I don't think Ballard even believes that a $12 million FS is worth it for this defense, no matter who the player is.  Hooker is fighting the headwinds of being a FS in a zone-based defense, so a premium value would be hard for him to achieve anyway, IMO.

 

In this system, yes, it will be hard to achieve extremely high value. But here we come to the point where you have to consider not only what he's worth for you but what he will be worth for someone else too. I think other GMs with teams that play more single high safety will still value Hooker highly and they will be able to project what impact he can have in their system, even if they are not watching him do it in the Colts system. Unless he suffers another injury I personally expect him to easily get paid more than that 6.7M we could have picked him for.