Braden Smith contract extension is done

[DougDew]

15 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Hines had a very good rook year with Luck, just shy of rookie records for receiving yards. In fact he had the same receptions, just a better AVG last year.

 

I do agree though with you that he's likely competing differently right now. But I'd also say having Mack is likely only a one year deal. So it's really about how things stack up next year. I think the biggest consideration (that may change the dynamics) is how good Taylor did catching the ball last year. If Taylor can continue to be a dual threat, Hines' stock drops a bit. Harris is very limited due to size, and his limited gimmick value doesn't compare with Hines' overall skill package. Harris needs to be able to run routes if he's going to find a long term place on the team.

 

All that said, I'd love to see Hines get some slot reps.

In past years, Hines had to be used as a back up RB....taking handoffs in the back field.  That is not his forte.  He can do it, and can serve as emergency, but I never wanted to see him in that role.  If he is used in that capacity, keeping the Colts from rostering a true back up RB, I'd just as soon see him gone.

 

Going forward, even though Mack is on a one year deal, I suspect another backup RB will be added before Hines returns to that role, which is good.

 

I've always thought of him as a receiver.....defined by HOW he should get the ball, which means not via handoff. 

 

The question is not really how good Hines is, its about roster management and determining what his role is, other players' roles, and how easily someone else can fill that role.

 

Also, there is the roster management strategy of developing young players to then have them sign a nice contract with another team instead of the Colts, netting us a comp pick.  Then replace him with yet another young player to develop...Harris for example.... or a rookie like that little fast guy from Purdue that was drafted.  

 

It will come down to price and other offers since I don't think he is thought of as a core player that you don't let hit the market, such as Braden, Leonard, and Nelson.

 

[Dogg63]

I hate to post something on-topic, but here goes...  

 

 

[DougDew]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Talk about misinformation!  Congrats, that’s a heckuva effort!   Nice attempt at damage control.   Too bad none of it is true. 
 

You’re caught with the first sentence in the second paragraph….   Quoting you: “When Hines was strictly being used as a backup to Mack, you know run between the tackles like Mack does.”   Do you know when that was Doug?  Never!   That’s never happened.   Hines is a situational guy.  Always has been.  Yes, he had a game here or there as a guy with the hit hand like the Thursday night game vs. Tennessee, but those have been the exception, not the rule.   So that time frame…. Never happened, 

 

And you’re caught again when you reference Hines first three years here, as if something changed after those first three years.   Doug? Hines was drafted in 2018.  He's only been on the team for three total years.   This year, 2021, is year four.   Three years on his past.  That’s it.  Sorry.    He gets about 10 runs and catches a game.  About 5-6 rushes and about 4 receptions.  That’s his world. 
 

As for being confused, I think I’ve clearly demonstrated that’s your world.  Whether it’s football you’re writing about or the real world, your posts leave me confused.   But I’m not confused about your Hines post.  It’s become the stuff of legends. 
 

 

 

Its not misinformation.  I know what I thought and know what I wrote two years ago better than you do. 

 

Why do you do this, keep telling other forum members what they were thinking, as if you know more about it than they do?  Its a bad look for you.

 

Literally, I wrote it THE WEEK before he was inserted as a punt returner.  Then after he was, said hmmm, he might have a reason to stick now.

 

Did you know that he was going to be a good punt returner, and finally used that way in his what, THIRD year?  Good for you.

 

Then he got a better QB for his short passing game skill set, Rivers, and had more of an impact.

 

If you knew back then that the Colts would no longer have down field passers, who were both inaccurate and uncomfortable throwing the short game stuff, then replaced by a QB who was better for him, good for you again.   

[jvan1973]

21 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its not misinformation.  I know what I thought and know what I wrote two years ago better than you do. 

 

Why do you do this, keep telling other forum members what they were thinking, as if you know more about it than they do?  Its a bad look for you.

 

Literally, I wrote it THE WEEK before he was inserted as a punt returner.  Then after he was, said hmmm, he might have a reason to stick now.

 

Did you know that he was going to be a good punt returner, and finally used that way in his what, THIRD year?  Good for you.

 

Then he got a better QB for his short passing game skill set, Rivers, and had more of an impact.

 

If you knew back then that the Colts would no longer have down field passers, who were both inaccurate and uncomfortable throwing the short game stuff, then replaced by a QB who was better for him, good for you again.   

Hines caught 63 balls his rookie year.   He started returning kicks in his second year. 

[DougDew]

28 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Hines caught 63 balls his rookie year.   He started returning kicks in his second year. 

And had little impact doing either.   Not until he started returning PUNTS and got a QB that fit the O better did he thrive.    Two significant data point additions that no one on this forum fore saw.

[Myles]

 

 

Gourley recalls a story from Smith’s sophomore year. Smith bench pressed 515 pounds three times.

And after all that — two years later — Smith worked his way up to 545 pounds on the bench press.

 

https://medium.com/@asktumma/braden-smith-the-most-interesting-offensive-lineman-in-the-world-bac12b0c3db9

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

Its not misinformation.  I know what I thought and know what I wrote two years ago better than you do. 

 

Why do you do this, keep telling other forum members what they were thinking, as if you know more about it than they do?  Its a bad look for you.

 

Literally, I wrote it THE WEEK before he was inserted as a punt returner.  Then after he was, said hmmm, he might have a reason to stick now.

 

Did you know that he was going to be a good punt returner, and finally used that way in his what, THIRD year?  Good for you.

 

Then he got a better QB for his short passing game skill set, Rivers, and had more of an impact.

 

If you knew back then that the Colts would no longer have down field passers, who were both inaccurate and uncomfortable throwing the short game stuff, then replaced by a QB who was better for him, good for you again.   

Doug….

 

Im sorry, but you’re attempting to re-write history.    There was nothing about your post that day that said the Colts were using him wrong, that the Colts were wasting his talent. Your post is memorable because it was so shockingly specific.  It was anti-Hines. 
 

Hines was bad.  He had no talent.  He didn’t belong on the Colts roster, and he didn’t even belong on an NFL roster.   It was a bombshell.  It was made all the more worse because of the terrible timing.   You took a bad beating here when that happened.  This isn’t the first time anyone has brought this up.  
 

Did I know the Colts were going to insert Hines as a punt returner the next week?  Of course not.   But I wasn’t shocked.  Hines had returned kicks well in college, it was part of his draft value.  AND,  we had tried him as a returner in the pre-season of his rookie year, and he was just terrible!   He fumbled punts and kicks.  He bobbled most everything.   Some people here on this website called for him to be cut before the season even started.  Hines had a bumpy first pre-season with kicks, so the Colts stopped using him that way for a year-plus,  but I always hoped we’d use him that way again someday.   I just didn’t know when?   That day became famous, making your post memorable, but for all the wrong reasons.  That’s why I remember it so well.   
 

Even your remembrance of history doesn’t add up.   Simply look at his stats on his page here on this website.   They’re basically pretty consistent.  His one year with a modest down tick was 2019, the Brissett year when the offense suffered, not just Hines.  But he’s a good player that we value.   There has been no dramatic change in our usage of him.   Yes, we like to run him up the gut more than fans like.   But on 5-6 carries a game, that’s not all we ask him to do. 
 

Final thought:  I’ve been on Internet fan message boards for more than 20 years.  I’ve made more than my share of posts I’d like to have back.  I’ve written my share of stinkers.  (Ask me about a Frank Reich rant I wrote in 2018!)  We all do.  Everyone writes a bad post from time to time.  Can’t be helped.  People are flawed humans and occasionally we write bad posts.  It’s better to own them.  I try to own mine.  My respectful recommendation is to do the same.   Denying it is not helpful. 

[NewColtsFan]

28 minutes ago, Myles said:

 

 

Gourley recalls a story from Smith’s sophomore year. Smith bench pressed 515 pounds three times.

And after all that — two years later — Smith worked his way up to 545 pounds on the bench press.

 

https://medium.com/@asktumma/braden-smith-the-most-interesting-offensive-lineman-in-the-world-bac12b0c3db9

A few years back a writer (don’t remember his name) used to write annual columns about the the best, the most, the fastest, the strongest, and the freakiest players in college football.  
 

And in 2017, the year before we drafted him, Smith showed up on a list of freakiest college football players.   It stuck out to me because he might’ve been the only O-lineman.  He had all sorts of amazing weight lifting achievements while at Auburn.   Set all sorts of impressive records for them. 
 

So his name stuck with me.  And when we drafted him, I had a good idea of who Smith was.   Funny how that worked out.  I didn’t know he’d become our Right Tackle, but that’s turned into a very nice surprise! 

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

And had little impact doing either.   Not until he started returning PUNTS and got a QB that fit the O better did he thrive.    Two significant data point additions that no one on this forum fore saw.

He caught the ball very well his rookie season

[Myles]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

And had little impact doing either.   Not until he started returning PUNTS and got a QB that fit the O better did he thrive.    Two significant data point additions that no one on this forum fore saw.

His rookie season he caught 63 balls.   29 of them were for 1st downs.   I remember being pretty impressed and excited for what his potential could be.   

[Dogg63]

Just refreshing my own memory of the conversation from late 2019.

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

In past years, Hines had to be used as a back up RB....taking handoffs in the back field.  That is not his forte.  He can do it, and can serve as emergency, but I never wanted to see him in that role.  If he is used in that capacity, keeping the Colts from rostering a true back up RB, I'd just as soon see him gone.

 

Going forward, even though Mack is on a one year deal, I suspect another backup RB will be added before Hines returns to that role, which is good.

 

I've always thought of him as a receiver.....defined by HOW he should get the ball, which means not via handoff. 

 

The question is not really how good Hines is, its about roster management and determining what his role is, other players' roles, and how easily someone else can fill that role.

 

Also, there is the roster management strategy of developing young players to then have them sign a nice contract with another team instead of the Colts, netting us a comp pick.  Then replace him with yet another young player to develop...Harris for example.... or a rookie like that little fast guy from Purdue that was drafted.  

 

It will come down to price and other offers since I don't think he is thought of as a core player that you don't let hit the market, such as Braden, Leonard, and Nelson.

 

Hines has only had 10 or more carries in 4 games through 3 years. And he's never had more than 15 carries in a game. So I think it's safe to say he's always been looked at as a rotational/situational APB. The only problem I have, is with how the rotational/situational use was carved out last year. Using him on goal line and short yardage between the tackles just doesn't seem smart to me..... But I don't see him as just a receiver either. He rarely if at all runs anything more than RB routes. 

 

But all in all, if you're going to deploy an APB successfully, he's got to get running touches, 5-10 per game, and also 5-10 passing targets. If not, his snaps are predictable, and less successful. 

 

You bring up Harris a lot in the conversation about Hines. They're not comps IMO. Harris doesn't have the size that Hines does. Hines is prototypical APB that is at minimum a threat in all phases. Harris is not. Harris is at most (at least at this stage) a gimmick guy that will run some sweeps and catch some RB/slot targets. He doesn't have the size to run between the tackles, nor the route polish to be a WR.  Hope that changes (route/polish), but truly doubt he'll ever be trusted to have 5+ rush attempts a game.

 

And comp picks are nice, but doubt that's driving anything. 

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

And comp picks are nice, but doubt that's driving anything. 

 

If you put Hines' market at $6-7m/year, that's a 6th round comp pick. Definitely not a major factor.

[DougDew]

36 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Hines has only had 10 or more carries in 4 games through 3 years. And he's never had more than 15 carries in a game. So I think it's safe to say he's always been looked at as a rotational/situational APB. The only problem I have, is with how the rotational/situational use was carved out last year. Using him on goal line and short yardage between the tackles just doesn't seem smart to me..... But I don't see him as just a receiver either. He rarely if at all runs anything more than RB routes. 

 

But all in all, if you're going to deploy an APB successfully, he's got to get running touches, 5-10 per game, and also 5-10 passing targets. If not, his snaps are predictable, and less successful. 

 

You bring up Harris a lot in the conversation about Hines. They're not comps IMO. Harris doesn't have the size that Hines does. Hines is prototypical APB that is at minimum a threat in all phases. Harris is not. Harris is at most (at least at this stage) a gimmick guy that will run some sweeps and catch some RB/slot targets. He doesn't have the size to run between the tackles, nor the route polish to be a WR.  Hope that changes (route/polish), but truly doubt he'll ever be trusted to have 5+ rush attempts a game.

 

And comp picks are nice, but doubt that's driving anything. 

I've used the word "impact" about three different posts.  And I keep getting irrelevant numbers as a response.

 

Stats don't measure impact.  Stats are not relevant in this discussion.

 

When Luck was here in Frank's offense, the Luck to TY or Luck to Ebron, were the impactful plays.  Under Rivers, neither of those relationships were significant.  What Rivers to Hines did was a much more important component of the offense, therefore, what Hines did was more important than before, so he as a player became more important.  His role and execution grew from what it was before, despite the similarity of certain stats. 

 

When the offense ran on the Luck to TY and Luck to Ebron plays, (and Mack's running), whatever Hines did, was less important.  When Luck retired and Rivers eventually ran the offense differently, Hines thrived.

 

Yes, there is a distinct difference in what Hines brought and contributed to the O during the Rivers' year and what its was during the Luck years...and during the Luck years, it was barely roster worthy. 

 

I use Harris as an example of a scat player that is easily found any given year.  Its not a literal comparison.  Although, he has been taking handoffs in training camp.  Read into that what you want.

 

And I didn't say that comp picks are driving anything.  I said its part of the equation. 

 

And in this discussion, the term "extension" is used, or that "Hines is next".  He might be next, but he might be extended about a month before the contract expires. 

 

I'd be very surprised if he was extended significantly before his contract expires, like Nelson, Smith, or Leonard....so to put Hines into the same breath as those three in terms of what gets done and when it gets done is the heart of the issue here.

 

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

If you put Hines' market at $6-7m/year, that's a 6th round comp pick. Definitely not a major factor.

Exactly. And 6-7M would make him a top 10 paid RB, which he is not. The market for RBs stinks (for RBs, not for teams). Not sure how he would be evaluated dollar wise, but we know performance wise, he was mid to late 20s by PFF.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I've used the word "impact" about three different posts.  And I keep getting irrelevant numbers as a response.

 

Stats don't measure impact.  Stats are not relevant in this discussion.

When you're talking about a RB, stats absolutely are an indicator of impact. He catches the ball, and he rushes the ball, both of which are easily measured. You can talk about things that are impactful and not really measured, like blocking, etc., but that's not a big consideration for an APB.

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

When Luck was here in Frank's offense, the Luck to TY or Luck to Ebron, were the impactful plays.  Under Rivers, neither of those relationships were significant.  What Rivers to Hines did was a much more important component of the offense, therefore, what Hines did was more important than before, so he as a player became more important.  His role and execution grew from what it was before, despite the similarity of certain stats. 

 

When the offense ran on the Luck to TY and Luck to Ebron plays, (and Mack's running), whatever Hines did, was less important.  When Luck retired and Rivers eventually ran the offense differently, Hines thrived.

Hines thrived under Luck. You can't come close to setting rookie records without being an impact. And it was his rook season, which is all the more impressive. And both TY and Ebron were impactful, and both showed up on the stat sheet too.

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Yes, there is a distinct difference in what Hines brought and contributed to the O during the Rivers' year and what its was during the Luck years...and during the Luck years, it was barely roster worthy. 

Near the same yards rushing and passing (almost record setting) and barely roster worthy in 2018? That's funny. There's only the "appearance" of more impact last year because TY is fading, didn't have a go-to like Ebron, and Mack went down early requiring more touches by Hines.

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

I use Harris as an example of a scat player that is easily found any given year.  Its not a literal comparison. 

 

And I didn't say that comp picks are driving anything.  I said its part of the equation.

 

Comp picks are barely a second or third or 4th thought in the roster management equation. 

[DougDew]

38 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

When you're talking about a RB, stats absolutely are an indicator of impact. He catches the ball, and he rushes the ball, both of which are easily measured. You can talk about things that are impactful and not really measured, like blocking, etc., but that's not a big consideration for an APB.

Hines thrived under Luck. You can't come close to setting rookie records without being an impact. And it was his rook season, which is all the more impressive. And both TY and Ebron were impactful, and both showed up on the stat sheet too.

Near the same yards rushing and passing (almost record setting) and barely roster worthy in 2018? That's funny. There's only the "appearance" of more impact last year because TY is fading, didn't have a go-to like Ebron, and Mack went down early requiring more touches by Hines.

Comp picks are barely a second or third or 4th thought in the roster management equation. 

Frank's O uses a guy like Hines, so the stats are are going to be inflated no matter what specific player is playing the role.  That's why metrics like Hines's stats and records in the past mean nothing relative to the important issue, what the next guy could do.

 

The issue is what Hines brings relative to a potential substitute.  And how early do we have to lock him in to a next contract.  In the same convo as Smith?  Really?

 

The numbers others are throwing around sounds like a guy who is not that hard to replace.  The numbers suggest an APB who has been in the NFL for 4 years and learned his trade, relative to a rookie who might have growing pains, but might be a better option in the totality of roster management.

[Four2itus]

Well, Braden Smith's contract does have a lot to do with one's love or hatred of Hines.

 

[jvan1973]

58 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I've used the word "impact" about three different posts.  And I keep getting irrelevant numbers as a response.

 

Stats don't measure impact.  Stats are not relevant in this discussion.

 

When Luck was here in Frank's offense, the Luck to TY or Luck to Ebron, were the impactful plays.  Under Rivers, neither of those relationships were significant.  What Rivers to Hines did was a much more important component of the offense, therefore, what Hines did was more important than before, so he as a player became more important.  His role and execution grew from what it was before, despite the similarity of certain stats. 

 

When the offense ran on the Luck to TY and Luck to Ebron plays, (and Mack's running), whatever Hines did, was less important.  When Luck retired and Rivers eventually ran the offense differently, Hines thrived.

 

Yes, there is a distinct difference in what Hines brought and contributed to the O during the Rivers' year and what its was during the Luck years...and during the Luck years, it was barely roster worthy. 

 

I use Harris as an example of a scat player that is easily found any given year.  Its not a literal comparison.  Although, he has been taking handoffs in training camp.  Read into that what you want.

 

And I didn't say that comp picks are driving anything.  I said its part of the equation. 

 

And in this discussion, the term "extension" is used, or that "Hines is next".  He might be next, but he might be extended about a month before the contract expires. 

 

I'd be very surprised if he was extended significantly before his contract expires, like Nelson, Smith, or Leonard....so to put Hines into the same breath as those three in terms of what gets done and when it gets done is the heart of the issue here.

 

Hines played 1 season with Luck.  He also made a lot of impactful plays. 

[DougDew]

9 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Hines played 1 season with Luck.  He also made a lot of impactful plays. 

He also got fed the ball as a rook because there weren't many other options at the time.  That build stats, and impact, but says nothing relative to what another player in his place could/would do.  Stats/impact based on irreplaceable talent or based upon circumstance, and how much does each component contribute to the total.  That is the issue.

 

Somehow, I think people are smart enough to understand that without me explaining it 20 different ways, but choose to argue anyway.

 

To have a convo about Hines in a Braden Smith $72M contract extension thread is ridiculous, IMO.

[gspdx]

22 minutes ago, DougDew said:

To have a convo about Hines in a Braden Smith $72M contract extension thread is ridiculous, IMO.

 

I am glad we got the extension done.  

[jvan1973]

46 minutes ago, DougDew said:

He also got fed the ball as a rook because there weren't many other options at the time.  That build stats, and impact, but says nothing relative to what another player in his place could/would do.  Stats/impact based on irreplaceable talent or based upon circumstance, and how much does each component contribute to the total.  That is the issue.

 

Somehow, I think people are smart enough to understand that without me explaining it 20 different ways, but choose to argue anyway.

 

To have a convo about Hines in a Braden Smith $72M contract extension thread is ridiculous, IMO.

I agree,   the convo shouldn't be in the Braden Smith thread,  but to say Hines hasn't been impactful is just wrong.   Also,  there were many options in his only year with Luck.  TY and Ebron had an excellent season that year.    I think you need to refresh your memory of Hines rookie year. 

[EastStreet]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Frank's O uses a guy like Hines, so the stats are are going to be inflated no matter what specific player is playing the role.  That's why metrics like Hines's stats and records in the past mean nothing relative to the important issue, what the next guy could do.

 

The issue is what Hines brings relative to a potential substitute.  And how early do we have to lock him in to a next contract.  In the same convo as Smith?  Really?

Huh? So now his stats are inflated? lol. Saying he wasn't impactful in 2018 is just plain silly. He had the 4th most yards from scrimmage, and the 4th most TDs, in 2018. That's absolutely impactful. And it's crazy good for a rook APB.

 

And talking about what the next guy can do...... We didn't have a guy who could do what he did in 2018. At least in 2020 Taylor showed he could not only run, but also catch the ball at a high level. So arguably his need was bigger in 2018. 

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

The numbers others are throwing around sounds like a guy who is not that hard to replace.  The numbers suggest an APB who has been in the NFL for 4 years and learned his trade, relative to a rookie who might have growing pains, but might be a better option in the totality of roster management.

He was harder to replace in 2018 as we had no other true APB to replace his targets. Taylor was obviously a guy that could do both last year, and even had a higher AVG catching. I'm not saying Hines is not valuable to us. But his value did decline after Taylor showed he could be dangerous in both phases.

[lollygagger8]

Congrats Braden, you've earned it. 

[DougDew]

18 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Huh? So now his stats are inflated? lol. Saying he wasn't impactful in 2018 is just plain silly. He had the 4th most yards from scrimmage, and the 4th most TDs, in 2018. That's absolutely impactful. And it's crazy good for a rook APB.

 

And talking about what the next guy can do...... We didn't have a guy who could do what he did in 2018. At least in 2020 Taylor showed he could not only run, but also catch the ball at a high level. So arguably his need was bigger in 2018. 

He was harder to replace in 2018 as we had no other true APB to replace his targets. Taylor was obviously a guy that could do both last year, and even had a higher AVG catching. I'm not saying Hines is not valuable to us. But his value did decline after Taylor showed he could be dangerous in both phases.

To be clear, I'm participating in two separate conversations about Hines in a Braden Smith thread.  The only conversation I was intending to participate in was in response to the poster who brought up the possibility of a Hines extension in a Braden Smith extension thread.

 

The second conversation, the more dopey one, is this one, where I was defending myself from NCF who thought it necessary to bring up something I said about Hines in 2019.  At the time, I said he was lucky to have a roster spot...obviously based upon his contributions to date....which was one week before being installed as the punt returner.

 

That second conversation is where I talked about impact.  That he had little impact.  Impact is a qualitative term, not a quantitative term.  Stats are quantitative.

 

When Hines' production accounted for, say, 10 points per game.  And bombs to TY and Ebron accounted for 20 points a game, totaling 30, Hines is not as impactful as when we did not have bombs to TY or anybody else, and his 10 point per game production was a bigger part of our 17 pts per game output.  One situation has more bearing on whether or not the roster needs the 10 pt production relative to that roster spot in the second situation, even though the individual stats could be exactly the same.  And, the stats of other APBs on other teams might be lower or higher, but make more or less impact for their respective teams. 

 

But none of his rookie and second year stats matter relative to the first conversation, because Hines won't be fed the ball as much as he was a rookie because our 2nd round JT is a more well rounded RB than other 4th, 6th and old FA RBs back in 2018/2019, who for some reason could only take handoffs and JT will stay on the field for the screen passes, swing passes, and even wheel routes that Hines was fed back in the day.

 

So going forward, Hines' APB stats will be impacted by not lining up directly behind the QB as much as he used to, so we can look at other guys who also do not have to line up directly behind the QB as a possible replacement.

 

But if you want to continue to have the dopier of the two conversations within a Braden Smith thread...you know...the one that @NewColtsFanstarted about what I said about Hines back in 2019, you may have to do that just with him.

 

BTW, my overall opinion of Hines:    He's fine.

 

 

[EastStreet]

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

To be clear, I'm participating in two separate conversations about Hines in a Braden Smith thread.  The only conversation I was intending to participate in was in response to the poster who brought up the possibility of a Hines extension in a Braden Smith extension thread.

 

The second conversation, the more dopey one, is this one, where I was defending myself from NCF who thought it necessary to bring up something I said about Hines in 2019.  At the time, I said he was lucky to have a roster spot...obviously based upon his contributions to date....which was one week before being installed as the punt returner.

 

That second conversation is where I talked about impact.  That he had little impact.  Impact is a qualitative term, not a quantitative term.  Stats are quantitative.

 

When Hines' production accounted for, say, 10 points per game.  And bombs to TY and Ebron accounted for 20 points a game, totaling 30, Hines is not as impactful as when we did not have bombs to TY or anybody else, and his 10 point per game production was a bigger part of our 17 pts per game output.  One situation has more bearing on whether or not the roster needs the 10 pt production relative to that roster spot in the second situation, even though the individual stats could be exactly the same.  And, the stats of other APBs on other teams might be lower or higher, but make more or less impact for their respective teams. 

 

But none of his rookie and second year stats matter relative to the first conversation, because Hines won't be fed the ball as much as he was a rookie because our 2nd round JT is a more well rounded RB than other 4th, 6th and old FA RBs back in 2018/2019, who for some reason could only take handoffs and JT will stay on the field for the screen passes, swing passes, and even wheel routes that Hines was fed back in the day.

 

So going forward, Hines' APB stats will be impacted by not lining up directly behind the QB as much as he used to, so we can look at other guys who also do not have to line up directly behind the QB as a possible replacement.

 

But if you want to continue to have the dopier of the two conversations within a Braden Smith thread...you know...the one that @NewColtsFanstarted about what I said about Hines back in 2019, you may have to do that just with him.

 

BTW, my overall opinion of Hines:    He's fine.

 

 

that's a lot paragraphs to defend a bad hot take....

 

Quantitative or qualitative, Hines was absolutely impactful in 2018. If you're top 5 in yards from scrimmage (he was 4th in 2018), you have a substantial impact... both quantitively and qualitatively. That's pretty obvious to most. I guess some will hot-take, so be you.... 

[NewColtsFan]

50 minutes ago, DougDew said:

To be clear, I'm participating in two separate conversations about Hines in a Braden Smith thread.  The only conversation I was intending to participate in was in response to the poster who brought up the possibility of a Hines extension in a Braden Smith extension thread.

 

The second conversation, the more dopey one, is this one, where I was defending myself from NCF who thought it necessary to bring up something I said about Hines in 2019.  At the time, I said he was lucky to have a roster spot...obviously based upon his contributions to date....which was one week before being installed as the punt returner.

 

That second conversation is where I talked about impact.  That he had little impact.  Impact is a qualitative term, not a quantitative term.  Stats are quantitative.

 

When Hines' production accounted for, say, 10 points per game.  And bombs to TY and Ebron accounted for 20 points a game, totaling 30, Hines is not as impactful as when we did not have bombs to TY or anybody else, and his 10 point per game production was a bigger part of our 17 pts per game output.  One situation has more bearing on whether or not the roster needs the 10 pt production relative to that roster spot in the second situation, even though the individual stats could be exactly the same.  And, the stats of other APBs on other teams might be lower or higher, but make more or less impact for their respective teams. 

 

But none of his rookie and second year stats matter relative to the first conversation, because Hines won't be fed the ball as much as he was a rookie because our 2nd round JT is a more well rounded RB than other 4th, 6th and old FA RBs back in 2018/2019, who for some reason could only take handoffs and JT will stay on the field for the screen passes, swing passes, and even wheel routes that Hines was fed back in the day.

 

So going forward, Hines' APB stats will be impacted by not lining up directly behind the QB as much as he used to, so we can look at other guys who also do not have to line up directly behind the QB as a possible replacement.

 

But if you want to continue to have the dopier of the two conversations within a Braden Smith thread...you know...the one that @NewColtsFanstarted about what I said about Hines back in 2019, you may have to do that just with him.

 

BTW, my overall opinion of Hines:    He's fine.

 

 

@DougDew

 

This must be your lucky day!   You should run out and drop a $20 on a lottery ticket!   You might just win!

 

Why am I saying this, because I’m not going to take the bait, I’m going to turn the other cheek and not respond to your latest piece of passive-aggressive nonsense.   You can thank @Nadine because she has asked to try and lower the temperature around here and I will respect her wishes.  So thank her good.  Because if I had the Green Light it would be easy to crush this latest post.   Easy….
 

Good luck at the lotto!   

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

that's a lot paragraphs to defend a bad hot take....

 

Quantitative or qualitative, Hines was absolutely impactful in 2018. If you're top 5 in yards from scrimmage (he was 4th in 2018), you have a substantial impact... both quantitively and qualitatively. That's pretty obvious to most. I guess some will hot-take, so be you.... 

LOL.  Hot take, that's so cliche'. 

 

In terms of roster spot which is the context, the impact could have been achieved by someone else in a similar situation.  The impact that he provided relative to someone else in a similar situation was not evident.  That's the judgmental aspect of the situation that is important and for which stats provide no insight. 

 

 

 

 

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

LOL.  Hot take, that's so cliche'. 

 

In terms of roster spot which is the context, the impact could have been achieved by someone else in a similar situation.  The impact that he provided relative to someone else in a similar situation was not evident.  That's the judgmental aspect of the situation that is important and for which stats provide no insight. 

 

 

 

 

[jvan1973]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

LOL.  Hot take, that's so cliche'. 

 

In terms of roster spot which is the context, the impact could have been achieved by someone else in a similar situation.  The impact that he provided relative to someone else in a similar situation was not evident.  That's the judgmental aspect of the situation that is important and for which stats provide no insight. 

 

 

 

 

You are really dug in on a bad take.  You do this a lot,  so I'm not surprised.  Carry on

[jvan1973]

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

@DougDew

 

This must be your lucky day!   You should run out and drop a $20 on a lottery ticket!   You might just win!

 

Why am I saying this, because I’m not going to take the bait, I’m going to turn the other cheek and not respond to your latest piece of passive-aggressive nonsense.   You can thank @Nadine because she has asked to try and lower the temperature around here and I will respect her wishes.  So thank her good.  Because if I had the Green Light it would be easy to crush this latest post.   Easy….
 

Good luck at the lotto!   

Not really worth the typing at this point.   He will defend his bad opinions to the end.    Oh well.   Those that know,  know. 

[TomDiggs]

Braden numbers finally in. Interesting stuff. 
 

he did get a $15M signing bonus. So the colts did finally use that. 
 

Cap numbers (2021-2025):

 

$6.3

$11.6

$19.0
$16.7

$19.8

 

most of the money in the first three years. Only money due in 2024-2025 is the $3M a year in prorated signing bonus if he were not still on the roster. 
 

 

https://overthecap.com/player/braden-smith/6922/

 

[Boondoggle]

I wouldn't have approached it this way personally.  Would have let him hit FA and recouped the round 3 pick.  But all that aside I will never complain about the team keeping a good player around.  Happy for the guy.

 

Heart is heavy right now due to QB.  But at least we have a great OL in front of whoever will be starting.  

[Superman]

On 7/31/2021 at 10:43 AM, TomDiggs said:

Braden numbers finally in. Interesting stuff. 
 

he did get a $15M signing bonus. So the colts did finally use that. 
 

Cap numbers (2021-2025):

 

$6.3

$11.6

$19.0
$16.7

$19.8

 

most of the money in the first three years. Only money due in 2024-2025 is the $3M a year in prorated signing bonus if he were not still on the roster. 
 

 

https://overthecap.com/player/braden-smith/6922/

 

 

This is a major departure from their previously used contract strategy. Makes me think Leonard and Nelson will get similarly structured deals.

[EastStreet]

Dead money is low in the last two years (24/25) and overall I like it. Low cap number the next two years allows for the salary cap to rise a bit. 

[GoColts8818]

Remember when training camp started off with good news?  I miss that half an hour…

[NewColtsFan]

On 7/31/2021 at 10:49 AM, Boondoggle said:

I wouldn't have approached it this way personally.  Would have let him hit FA and recouped the round 3 pick.  But all that aside I will never complain about the team keeping a good player around.  Happy for the guy.

 

Heart is heavy right now due to QB.  But at least we have a great OL in front of whoever will be starting.  

You’d let Smith, who has achieved the rare feat of being drafted as a guard and converting to tackle in the NFL walk out the door for a 3rd round pick?    
 

Seriously?

 

Smith was picked near the top of the 2nd, pick 37.   If we let him walk, the best pick we’d get is near the bottom, pick 97.   A gap of 60 picks.   In other words, we wouldn’t be getting the same caliber of player.  Not even close.  
 

 

[Boondoggle]

13 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You’d let Smith, who has achieved the rare feat of being drafted as a guard and converting to tackle in the NFL walk out the door for a 3rd round pick?    
 

Seriously?

 

Smith was picked near the top of the 2nd, pick 37.   If we let him walk, the best pick we’d get is near the bottom, pick 97.   A gap of 60 picks.   In other words, we wouldn’t be getting the same caliber of player.  Not even close.  
 

 

You can find RTs in every draft.  So the answer to your question is "Yes."

 

But as I said they signed a good player and that's never a bad thing.  Just from the cap perspective, and the perspective of where you put your cap value, I don't think it was the wisest path.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Boondoggle said:

You can find RTs in every draft.  So the answer to your question is "Yes."

 

In a literal sense, sure. The question is whether you can find a player to take Braden Smith's spot, which would make losing him worth the comp pick. 

 

I don't necessarily agree with the idea that his replacement needs to be compared to the comp pick from losing him, but if you're willing to let him walk for the comp pick, then that comparison is only natural. 

 

I also think there's a diminishing return along the OL. Having five All Pro linemen is a great ideal, but how much better will that line be than one with two All Pros and three average-plus guys? And is that difference worth the significant cost, especially when that cost affects what you can do at other positions?

 

Still, for a team that didn't have a good OL for a decade, and maybe lost a great QB due to it, I think there's obviously a premium on having good line play. Letting Smith walk was probably never an option.

[Boondoggle]

9 hours ago, Superman said:

 

In a literal sense, sure. The question is whether you can find a player to take Braden Smith's spot, which would make losing him worth the comp pick. 

 

I don't necessarily agree with the idea that his replacement needs to be compared to the comp pick from losing him, but if you're willing to let him walk for the comp pick, then that comparison is only natural. 

 

I also think there's a diminishing return along the OL. Having five All Pro linemen is a great ideal, but how much better will that line be than one with two All Pros and three average-plus guys? And is that difference worth the significant cost, especially when that cost affects what you can do at other positions?

 

Still, for a team that didn't have a good OL for a decade, and maybe lost a great QB due to it, I think there's obviously a premium on having good line play. Letting Smith walk was probably never an option.

Yeah and again I'm definitely not complaining about it.

 

Generally at RT you have options schematically too, for chips and whatnot.  Now if you want to run a ton of 10 then maybe that guy who can cover the edge by himself vs most rushers becomes a lot more valuable.  But the Colts don't do that.

 

But anyway you know sometimes it's just better to shut up otherwise you realize you're the guy at the party talking about stuff nobody cares about.  Happy with the signing so think I'll do that.