If Nelson wants 20M a year…

[runthepost]

If Nelson wants a contract at 20M a year what would you do?

[Coltsfan15653]

Let him go ... we saw that we can still be solid with Chris reed starting at lg 

[Aaron86]

Nobody would be getting 20+ until the Colts start making the playoffs and become a super bowl threat. Good thing I am not the owner.

[CheezyColt]

7 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

Nobody would be getting 20+ until the Colts start making the playoffs and become a super bowl threat. Good thing I am not the owner.

Because the best way to obtain/retain the talent required to become a super bowl threat is to refuse to pay players their market value.  Right.

[Solid84]

This is a really difficult question because Nelson is an amazing player and person. But he’s a guard. Us making the playoffs or super bowl won’t depend on a guard. 

[Shepman]

Franchise Tag him which is at least 3 mil less

[danlhart87]

I would sign him then regardless if I like it of not move him to LT and start Reed at LG

[bleed blue4life]

your wrong .you wim the game in the trenches

[DougDew]

Lower the price or tag him.  I doubt that any other team will pay him $20M seeing that the olines for the teams that made it to the playoffs and advanced in the playoffs did not have elite Gs.  Good ones, but not elite, IMO.

[Flash7]

Ballard is going to pay him. We'll have the league's highest paid O-line.

 

 

[Smonroe]

Don’t get wrapped up on what we pay players until it affects the team. 
 

Ballard has shown that he’s not overpaying for anyone.  Sometimes you have to go more than market value to improve the team.  Hopefully all the chips are pushed in this season.  But I doubt it.  

[John Hammonds]

Let's say it again for everyone in the back:

 

When you have a transformational player, that affects the performance of the entire team, both on and off the field, you keep him for as long as we wants to play for you, you play him at the position he is best at, and you pay him accordingly.

Regardless of position.

[Colt.45]

Ballard will pay him unless there's an offer too good to refuse.

Now the question is....where's that offer coming from? Who else in the league is going to trade a 1st rounder for the player, AND have to pay him what we're inevitably going to pay?

 

This was always going to be the issue with the way Ballard chose to build his roster. We're paying Q, that much is certain unless something unforeseen manifests itself. Low odds of that happening.

[pgt_rob]

I'm not sure what the correct answer is. Pay him or see if he would work a deal? Chance it and let him walk and plug in a different player that is possibly an unknown? I think I'd roll with Nelson.

[Superman]

Do you people who keep complaining about paying Nelson take the time to think about the math? 

 

If you want to get rid of Nelson at $20m, but would keep him at $16m, have you stopped to consider that you'd be getting rid of a franchise anchoring player over a matter of $4m/year? The 2022 salary cap will be $208m. With modest increases over the next four years (and the projections suggest major increases, so we're being conservative here), the cap would average around $230m between 2022-2025.

 

So you're trying to push Nelson out of the door over what amounts to 1.7% of the salary cap.

 

Having players like Nelson, even when you have to pay them a little bit more than you'd like, doesn't hurt your team. It helps your team. Trying to get rid of him over such a small percentage of the cap makes no sense.

 

What the Colts are going to do is pay him, and shut up about it, because he's a legitimately great player that makes our team better.

[GoColts8818]

It doesn’t really matter what we would do Ballard has already said they are keeping him so the decision has been made.

[chad72]

The cons of trading him drastically outweigh any pros gained whatsoever. If you get good QB play and invest in LT, pass offense and defense across the board (pass rush, pass catchers etc.), you build on what you already have. Contracts may have to be re-worked but Nelson not being a Colt would be at best 1 step forward and 5 steps backwards, not worth it.

[Solid84]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

Do you people who keep complaining about paying Nelson take the time to think about the math? 

 

If you want to get rid of Nelson at $20m, but would keep him at $16m, have you stopped to consider that you'd be getting rid of a franchise anchoring player over a matter of $4m/year? The 2022 salary cap will be $208m. With modest increases over the next four years (and the projections suggest major increases, so we're being conservative here), the cap would average around $230m between 2022-2025.

 

So you're trying to push Nelson out of the door over what amounts to 1.7% of the salary cap.

 

Having players like Nelson, even when you have to pay them a little bit more than you'd like, doesn't hurt your team. It helps your team. Trying to get rid of him over such a small percentage of the cap makes no sense.

 

What the Colts are going to do is pay him, and shut up about it, because he's a legitimately great player that makes our team better.

He’s an amazing player and an amazing person. The Colts will pay what it takes to keep him. But he’s a guard. Whenever Reed was in there was hardly a drop off in performance this season. Paying 16 or 20 however many mill it’ll take will end up biting us in the behind down the road. 
 

… and I say that as a guy who REALLY likes watching Nelson play. Him and JT are by far my favorite Colts. 

[shasta519]

15 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

Ballard will pay him unless there's an offer too good to refuse.

Now the question is....where's that offer coming from? Who else in the league is going to trade a 1st rounder for the player, AND have to pay him what we're inevitably going to pay?

 

This was always going to be the issue with the way Ballard chose to build his roster. We're paying Q, that much is certain unless something unforeseen manifests itself. Low odds of that happening.

 

Like you said, it's purely a thought exercise because the Colts will re-sign him. But I think Q could land a 1st round pick with the right team (maybe another pick as well, especially if that 1st was a future 1st). Perhaps a team that has a young QB on a cheap rookie deal, but has also had OL issues.

 

But on that note, IF the Colts are a team with a QB on a rookie deal, his potential contract really doesn't matter as much.

[Aaron86]

1 hour ago, CheezyColt said:

Because the best way to obtain/retain the talent required to become a super bowl threat is to refuse to pay players their market value.  Right.

Well when you have a guard that could replace him and want half the pay and he is already on your roster why not let him walk. At some point players need to be held accountable. And that crap show at the end of the season nobody not named Taylor would be safe.

 

Also this is why I said its a good thing I am not the owner.

 

[GoColts8818]

7 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

He’s an amazing player and an amazing person. The Colts will pay what it takes to keep him. But he’s a guard. Whenever Reed was in there was hardly a drop off in performance this season. Paying 16 or 20 however many mill it’ll take will end up biting us in the behind down the road. 
 

… and I say that as a guy who REALLY likes watching Nelson play. Him and JT are by far my favorite Colts. 

Here’s the thing with Reed and Nelson this year, first depth isn’t a bad thing so I’d keep both if they can.  Second they might need a right guard this year so Reed could be an answer there, and third Nelson had the worst year of his career and Reed had the best of his career, what are the odds that happens again for both?  
 

Also, taking nothing away from Reed we seem to say there was no noticeable difference to us because of what Taylor did, who had a career year.  It’s possible Taylor’s ability to make people miss and see holes helped make guys look better than they were a little bit.  If there was really no noticeable drop off then how come when the Colts gave Reed a chance to take Glow’s job it became clear real fast that Glow was better?  I think if you really watch tape of the line as a NFL coach you’ll see Reed isn’t as good as Nelson is and over time if you let Nelson walk for Reed you’d regret that decision.

[Colt.45]

5 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Like you said, it's purely a thought exercise because the Colts will re-sign him. But I think Q could land a 1st round pick with the right team (maybe another pick as well, especially if that 1st was a future 1st). Perhaps a team that has a young QB on a cheap rookie deal, but has also had OL issues.

 

But on that note, IF the Colts are a team with a QB on a rookie deal, his potential contract really doesn't matter as much.

 

This is a good point.

 

The Bengals immediately come to mind but they've got to the SB building outside-in, I think they have the validation that the line doesnt matter as much  

 

Who else has a young GOOD QB and a disastrous line?

[Solid84]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Here’s the thing with Reed and Nelson this year, first depth isn’t a bad thing so I’d keep both if they can.  Second they might need a right guard this year so Reed could be an answer there, and third Nelson had the worst year of his career and Reed had the best of his career, what are the odds that happens again for both?  
 

Also, taking nothing away from Reed we seem to say there was no noticeable difference to us because of what Taylor did, who had a career year.  It’s possible Taylor’s ability to make people miss and see holes helped make guys look better than they were a little bit.  If there was really no noticeable drop off then how come when the Colts gave Reed a chance to take Glow’s job it became clear real fast that Glow was better?  I think if you really watch tape of the line as a NFL coach you’ll see Reed isn’t as good as Nelson is and over time if you let Nelson walk for Reed you’d regret that decision.

I never said Reed was as good as Nelson or ment to say it. My point is the dropoff from an elite guard to a good one is negligible, but the dropoff in pay isn’t. 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, CheezyColt said:

Because the best way to obtain/retain the talent required to become a super bowl threat is to refuse to pay players their market value.  Right.

 

To be fair, the best G in the NFL is not really "required talent to be a SB threat." And market value for Q will likely be far beyond what we have seen for other Gs. The debate has its merits, but that's all it will ever be because we know that Ballard is going to sign him. 

[richard pallo]

Pay him and move on.

[Les Poulains]

To me it's easy; At that price, he's either a left tackle, or he's getting traded. 

[shasta519]

10 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

 

This is a good point.

 

The Bengals immediately come to mind but they've got to the SB building outside-in, I think they have the validation that the line doesnt matter as much  

 

Who else has a young GOOD QB and a disastrous line?

 

Off the top of my head...

 

CHI - Their G position (with Whitehair and Daniels) isn't really the weak spot, but Q would certainly be an update.

 

PHI - They just lost an All-Pro G to retirement. Q would definitely allow them to keep playing at a really high level. Plus, they have (3) 1st round picks.

 

Between strong relationships with CHI/PHI and recent Colts coaches installed as their HCs, those would be my first two calls.

[Mitch Connors]

Nelson is great and should be paid at a level that indicates he will be the best at his position for the next 5 seasons.

 

I think we're getting a little caught up in the position thing. If Ballard pays him like a QB I'd be livid just like Nelson would be livid if we tried to pay him like a long snapper. Paying him within the bounds of his position should absolutely happen. 

 

[strt182]

1 hour ago, Shepman said:

Franchise Tag him which is at least 3 mil less

i have been saying this for a year now. Fans have been saying how much hes going to cost we have a year or 2 to work it out with him.

[Superman]

31 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I never said Reed was as good as Nelson or ment to say it. My point is the dropoff from an elite guard to a good one is negligible, but the dropoff in pay isn’t. 

 

It's not negligible. Whatever value is placed on the difference in play between elite to good is worthy of discussion, but the difference between Nelson and Reed is not negligible.

 

Bigger picture, positional value is a very important factor for team building. But rooting out a foundational player after four seasons rather than paying him is bad for team building. The Colts made up their minds about positional value when they drafted Nelson, and have committed to building with him. That discussion is four years in the past.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, Coltsfan15653 said:

Let him go ... we saw that we can still be solid with Chris reed starting at lg 

Ballard should be putting a cap on that position. I would never give  him that much. Look at the Browns. They have a very good Oline and pay them a ton. Out of play offs. Honestly, if Ballard is a good GM, he should be sending him a contract right now. The only problem is that he is not tradeable. What team is going to trade for a guard who say wants $20 million. Honestly, I doubt you would get much for him. I am not sure if he hit free agency if anyone would touch him for 20 mill plus.

[Moosejawcolt]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

It's not negligible. Whatever value is placed on the difference in play between elite to good is worthy of discussion, but the difference between Nelson and Reed is not negligible.

 

Bigger picture, positional value is a very important factor for team building. But rooting out a foundational player after four seasons rather than paying him is bad for team building. The Colts made up their minds about positional value when they drafted Nelson, and have committed to building with him. That discussion is four years in the past.

I honestly think that it wasn't so much positional value  as to why they drafted Nelson. There was a lot of pressure on the front office to pick Nelson as Luck was getting killed. 

[Solid84]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's not negligible. Whatever value is placed on the difference in play between elite to good is worthy of discussion, but the difference between Nelson and Reed is not negligible.

 

Bigger picture, positional value is a very important factor for team building. But rooting out a foundational player after four seasons rather than paying him is bad for team building. The Colts made up their minds about positional value when they drafted Nelson, and have committed to building with him. That discussion is four years in the past.

I don’t think this discussion is about whether or not paying him is going to happen - it is. People are just questioning what it’s going to mean for the rest of the team going forward. 

[Scott Pennock]

Let him walk as a Guard or make him play LT for that money.....

[Aaron86]

2 hours ago, Solid84 said:

This is a really difficult question because Nelson is an amazing player and person. But he’s a guard. Us making the playoffs or super bowl won’t depend on a guard. 

You know one thing I keep forgetting tell myself is he did help reestablish the line. I just feel like we are going to pay him 20+ and not get the results we are wanting. But I am not good with the numbers so if we can retain him and still improve the rest of the roster I wouldnt be mad.

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Lower the price or tag him.  I doubt that any other team will pay him $20M seeing that the olines for the teams that made it to the playoffs and advanced in the playoffs did not have elite Gs.  Good ones, but not elite, IMO.

Honestly, I believe they would be best in trying to trade him, which I do not think you would net much. I would let him walk. U said it best. No team that advanced in the playoffs were paying guards obscene amounts of money. That 20 million would be so much better if it was invested in a corner, rush end, TE and/or WR. Yeah he is a 6th overall pick and you have to bite the bullet. I think Ballard is being very stubborn and short sighted based on his recent comments. He basically came out and said we are signing this guy. Reed filled in well and they rushed the ball without him. Does him absence from this team totally hindering it from winning as   opposed to Buckner missing a game? No...not even close. 

[Superman]

11 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I don’t think this discussion is about whether or not paying him is going to happen - it is. People are just questioning what it’s going to mean for the rest of the team going forward. 

 

The answer is obvious. Less money for other positions, which means the drafting has to supplement, and you have to hit on some replacement players in FA. This is the same balance every team has to strike.

 

And yes, ideally, if we had to choose between having LT locked up, or having LG locked up, we'd all go with LG. That doesn't mean you push good players out the door over a matter of $4m/year. 

 

Also, if you have highly paid players at all your premium positions -- let's say 8 total players between QB, LT, WR, Edge, DT, CB, TE -- that doesn't mean you can't have highly paid players at other positions. And right now, we do not have premium money tied up at LT, Edge, CB, or TE, so it's not even a decision point we need to worry about. Especially not if Nelson is still playing at an All Pro level. 

[jvan1973]

4 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Honestly, I believe they would be best in trying to trade him, which I do not think you would net much. I would let him walk. U said it best. No team that advanced in the playoffs were paying guards obscene amounts of money. That 20 million would be so much better if it was invested in a corner, rush end, TE and/or WR. Yeah he is a 6th overall pick and you have to bite the bullet. I think Ballard is being very stubborn and short sighted based on his recent comments. He basically came out and said we are signing this guy. Reed filled in well and they rushed the ball without him. Does him absence from this team totally hindering it from winning as   opposed to Buckner missing a game? No...not even close. 

How much is KC paying Thuney?

[Moosejawcolt]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

How much is KC paying Thuney?

17 i think.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Moosejawcolt said:

17 i think.

KC went pretty far in the playoffs.