If Nelson wants 20M a year…

[GoColts8818]

16 minutes ago, Superman said:

It's also interesting (or you might call it 'head scratchingly shortsighted') that fans of a team that recently lost a franchise level QB partly because the OL couldn't protect him are so cavalier with the idea of getting rid of a great OL player.

Fans are greedy they want great players for cheap so they can get other great players for cheap.  If it were that easy everyone could be a NFL GM.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

Fans are greedy they want great players for cheap so they can get other great players for cheap.  If it were that easy everyone could be a NFL GM.

I don't mind expensive great players at important positions. I am a bit more dubious about the value of even the greatest of talents at the least valuable positions when they come at a premier price. 

[stitches]

34 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To really consider, I'd need to have a clear path to flipping those picks for an immediate contributor at a premium position. Or an opportunity to draft my potential franchise QB (and so far, I don't think this is the draft to be needing a QB). 

 

The motivation is not to save or repurpose cap money, though.

You get 20M to spend on ANY position you want. ANY! The best talent you can convince to come to the Colts for 20M... AND you get 1st and 2nd round picks to add... 

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

You get 20M to spend on ANY position you want. ANY! The best talent you can convince to come to the Colts for 20M... AND you get 1st and 2nd round picks to add... 

which could both very well be busts and could be later picks decreasing their value.  Also, as we have seen free agents aren’t sure things most of the time.  You also make a giant hole that the Colts relay on to be the foundation of their offense.  

[AustexColt]

Ballard plan blew up when he signed up CW. I say play CW and sign up Q. Where he really messed up was letting Autry and Houston go.

Sign Schwartz and let him tell you who to cut. Reich nor Eberflus evaluation are as good. Consider Vrabel a DC hired Schwartz to improve his DL!!!

 

 

 

 

[stitches]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

which could both very well be busts and could be later picks decreasing their value.  Also, as we have seen free agents aren’t sure things most of the time.  You also make a giant hole that the Colts relay on to be the foundation of their offense.  

Yes, or they could become hall of famers... or Q can continue downward spiral and never be the same after series of injuries... Come on... use some level of probabalistic thinking here. I'm not asking you for best case scenario vs worst case scenario. Of course the worst case scenario is not good when compared to the best case on the other side.  

 

I'm giving you 20M to spend any way you want, 1st and 2nd round pick.... or Q for 100/5 or whatever he wants. Try to be reasonable and equally charitable with both sides of the equation here. 

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

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. 

What? Of course it's something we have to worry about. We don't have money locked up at those positions because what we have there isn't good enough...

 

If we spend $20m/year on Nelson we have significantly less to spend on those other way more important decisions. How is that not a problem? Yes Ballard can strike gold in the draft but that's really the only solution and we don't have a first rounder this year...

 

Also, for the record, I'm not on the pay him $16m/year not $20m/year wagon. Ballard is going to pay and you are absolutely right $4m/year probably isn't going to change much.

[Moosejawcolt]

So the question remains. What is to much for Nelson per year?? At what figure do the Colts walk away or attempt to trade him?

[Solid84]

27 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

I think it looked negligible because you had a running back covering it up and Nelson had a down year along with Reed having a great year so the gap was smaller than it normally would be.  Reed was given a chance to become a starter and couldn’t unseat Glow, the guy many people felt was the weak spot on the line the last few years, and couldn’t do it and it was noticeable in a bad way when Reed was in there and Glow wasn’t.  That’s my point, I don’t think it’s as negligible as some here think it is.  I think if you break down tape you will see little things that make you go yeah I’d rather have Nelson.

 

With that said this all moot because Ballard has already said he’s keeping Nelson so the decision has been made.

I'm not sure why Reed has to be better than Glow to be good enough to play LG? Like I said going Nelson -> Reed isn't a 1 to 1 exchange, but the dropoff in performance is less than the value we could get with the money saved on Nelson's deal.

[GoColts8818]

5 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I'm not sure why Reed has to be better than Glow to be good enough to play LG? Like I said going Nelson -> Reed isn't a 1 to 1 exchange, but the dropoff in performance is less than the value we could get with the money saved on Nelson's deal.

If he can’t over take Glow at right guard do you really trust him to replace Nelson at left guard full time?  That’s a pretty big roll of the dice.

[GoColts8818]

17 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yes, or they could become hall of famers... or Q can continue downward spiral and never be the same after series of injuries... Come on... use some level of probabalistic thinking here. I'm not asking you for best case scenario vs worst case scenario. Of course the worst case scenario is not good when compared to the best case on the other side.  

 

I'm giving you 20M to spend any way you want, 1st and 2nd round pick.... or Q for 100/5 or whatever he wants. Try to be reasonable and equally charitable with both sides of the equation here. 

Considering the odds of free agents and draft picks being busts is much higher than than them being hall of famers it’s not out of line to say hey those are big arguments for NOT doing it.  You don’t get better in the NFL getting ride of your best players.  Name me one team in the NFL that’s done that and gotten better?  You win by building around them.  Nelson might very well be the Colts best player and along with Kelly and Taylor are the guys everything they do on offense is built around.  It’s why Ballard isn’t interested in moving him to LT and why he’s not even blinking about paying him.  

[csmopar]

6 hours ago, runthepost said:

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

[Solid84]

2 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

If he can’t over take Glow at right guard do you really trust him to replace Nelson at left guard full time?  That’s a pretty big roll of the dice.

Yes I do. He's done fine when he played for Nelson.

 

What would a deal for Reed look like, what's realistic? $5-7m/year? That would save us $13-15m/year. That's not enough for an elite receiver, but a good one maybe even a great one. I'd take Reed + a good-great WR over Nelson any day.

[Superman]

23 minutes ago, stitches said:

You get 20M to spend on ANY position you want. ANY! The best talent you can convince to come to the Colts for 20M... AND you get 1st and 2nd round picks to add... 

 

Now we're talking about our entire team building strategy, short term and long term. We don't have a franchise QB, so I don't think I want to spend big money at WR. And we can't get 'the best talent' at Edge in FA. The $20m will be valuable, but not yet.

 

The picks would potentially help me get a franchise QB, but you have to acknowledge that you're giving up a proven performer, likely in his prime, for the potential of draft picks. 

 

This is almost a reset. Might as well get rid of Buckner and Leonard also. And by the time we're ready to do something, JT will be slowing down, so let's move him also. 

 

This is why I said I need a clear path to an immediate contributor at a premium position, or a path to my QB. Because otherwise, I think it's a step back in the quality of the roster.

[GoColts8818]

Just now, Solid84 said:

Yes I do. He's done fine when he played for Nelson.

 

What would a deal for Reed look like, what's realistic? $5-7m/year? That would save us $13-15m/year. That's not enough for an elite receiver, but a good one maybe even a great one. I'd take Reed + a good-great WR over Nelson any day.

He’s done fine in small periods of times when teams weren’t game planning for him and you had  a running back who was having a career year behind him.  He didn’t do that great in pass protection, no lineman did other than Nelson who gave up one sack all year, the numbers show that.  When they tried to play him full time and replace a lesser player than Nelson you could see the drop off and teams attacked him more and again the numbers showed that.  So no I am not willing to roll that dice.  Add in you might very well need Reed to replace Glow, who is a free agent as well as Reed, and he might not be available to replace Nelson.  
 

The Colts have the money to have Nelson and a good to great WR if there is one to be had (outside of Adams who wants $30 million).  

[stitches]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Now we're talking about our entire team building strategy, short term and long term. We don't have a franchise QB, so I don't think I want to spend big money at WR. And we can't get 'the best talent' at Edge in FA. The $20m will be valuable, but not yet.

 

The picks would potentially help me get a franchise QB, but you have to acknowledge that you're giving up a proven performer, likely in his prime, for the potential of draft picks. 

 

This is almost a reset. Might as well get rid of Buckner and Leonard also. And by the time we're ready to do something, JT will be slowing down, so let's move him also. 

 

This is why I said I need a clear path to an immediate contributor at a premium position, or a path to my QB. Because otherwise, I think it's a step back in the quality of the roster.

We are getting there, aren't we (my radical idea I shared in PM) ?  

 

But yeah... ultimately it boils down to this - this team has a ton of resources poured into(or about to be poured into) positions that matter very little while we have very little talent at the positions that matter most. We need realignment. Maybe we don't need to get rid off all of them... but IMO we need talent and resources investment reset. 

[Solid84]

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

He’s done fine in small periods of times when teams weren’t game planning for him and you had  a running back who was having a career year behind him.  He didn’t do that great in pass protection, no lineman did other than Nelson who gave up one sack all year, the numbers show that.  When they tried to play him full time and replace a lesser player than Nelson you could see the drop off and teams attacked him more and again the numbers showed that.  So no I am not willing to roll that dice.  Add in you might very well need Reed to replace Glow, who is a free agent as well as Reed, and he might not be available to replace Nelson.  
 

The Colts have the money to have Nelson and a good to great WR if there is one to be had (outside of Adams who wants $30 million).  

And when we also need a LT? A CB? A FS? Maybe even a veteran DE... there's not room for everything.

[Hawkeyecolt]

Interesting thread and worth debate.  Reed played better at LG than RG. He picked up a few holds at RG. All in all he played well and the line actually played better than they had been prior when he subbed for Q which helped spark this debate even more. 
 

Q isn’t going anywhere.  Ballard pretty much said so. I’m in the camp of not understanding why he thinks Q will be a HOF guard but not LT. Are his arms not long enough for Ballard’s standards?  He certainly moves well enough. 
 

Since they don’t seem interested in making that move in order to better allocate where the Colts spend money as well as solving LT long-term then I’m fixing the former by moving on from Kelly as soon as possible.  Now, I’m not cutting him because they wouldn’t save much money THIS year because he restructured his contract once but what they save in 2023 & 2024 is huge and could allow them to structure from FA contracts in a way that takes advantage of those savings.  If I can save $3 million now and play Pinter in order to save $25 million over 23 & 24 Im all in on that. 
 

If the team’s center is playing on a rookie contract it totally offsets what Q is making. Enough so, they can spend on LT if they so chose. I think Q will get about $18 million per year. That top’s Thuney and sits where Scherff is with WFT.  Scherff has been tagged twice. Of course this is all dependent on the team being confident in Pinter’s abilities. 
 

If the team wants to upgrade at WR, TE, LT, edge rusher and add depth everywhere else especially CB then something has to give. Yes, you can overpay your LG but you can’t do that and overpay a C by that much too. 

[GoColts8818]

4 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

And when we also need a LT? A CB? A FS? Maybe even a veteran DE... there's not room for everything.

They are going to have to hit on draft picks too.  I am not sure they view FS or a startling CB as needs like some here do.  I think they are comfortable with with their starting safeties and like Rodgers, Ya-sin, and Moore as their top three corners.  
 

I also think they are going count on Dayo and Paye making jumps at end and they might add a vet depth guy more than a big ticket end.

[stitches]

14 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Considering the odds of free agents and draft picks being busts is much higher than than them being hall of famers it’s not out of line to say hey those are big arguments for NOT doing it.  You don’t get better in the NFL getting ride of your best players.  Name me one team in the NFL that’s done that and gotten better?  You win by building around them.  Nelson might very well be the Colts best player and along with Kelly and Taylor are the guys everything they do on offense is built around.  It’s why Ballard isn’t interested in moving him to LT and why he’s not even blinking about paying him.  

How many of the playoff teams are built around their left guard? To me this is not particularly close scenario. I take the picks and money and try to rework my team and add needed reinforcements to areas of the team that matter most. A team built around Nelson, Kelly and Taylor is going nowhere. I'm sorry but that's true. Especially when the life of RBs in the league is so short. 

[GoColts8818]

1 minute ago, stitches said:

How many of the playoff teams are built around their left guard? To me this is not particularly close scenario. I take the picks and money and try to rework my team and add needed reinforcements to areas of the team that matter most. A team built around Nelson, Kelly and Taylor is going nowhere. I'm sorry but that's true. Especially when the life of RBs in the league is so short. 

It’s not just built around Nelson, it’s built around controlling the line of scrimmage and making turnovers.  The Pats dynasty was built on that.  Clearly, they are missing the QB peace and that’s the extremely large hole.  

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, stitches said:

We are getting there, aren't we (my radical idea I shared in PM) ?  

 

But yeah... ultimately it boils down to this - this team has a ton of resources poured into(or about to be poured into) positions that matter very little while we have very little talent at the positions that matter most. We need realignment. Maybe we don't need to get rid off all of them... but IMO we need talent and resources investment reset. 

 

I already told you what I would do: double down on defense in 2022, see if I can add a decent starter at TE/WR in FA, and see what happens. If Wentz doesn't look like my idea of a franchise QB, then I'd be open to resetting the offense in 2023 with a new QB. I don't think Nelson is hurting my strategy in the short term.

 

So really, unless I had a chance at a Stafford level replacement at QB, I don't think your proposed trade gets me there. (Also, meant to say earlier, I think that's a ridiculous offer for Nelson, and there's basically zero chance of it ever getting to that point.)

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

It’s not just built around Nelson, it’s built around controlling the line of scrimmage and making turnovers.  The Pats dynasty was built on that.  Clearly, they are missing the QB peace and that’s the extremely large hole.  

The Pats? Seriously? The Pats were built on the best QB in the history of the league consistently taking under market value and allowing money to be spent elsewhere. The Colts if we give Nelson 20M a year will be overpaying one of the least important positions of football and it will be taking away from our ability to consistently add talent elsewhere. 

[GoColts8818]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I already told you what I would do: double down on defense in 2022, see if I can add a decent starter at TE/WR in FA, and see what happens. If Wentz doesn't look like my idea of a franchise QB, then I'd be open to resetting the offense in 2023 with a new QB. I don't think Nelson is hurting my strategy in the short term.

 

So really, unless I had a chance at a Stafford level replacement at QB, I don't think your proposed trade gets me there. (Also, meant to say earlier, I think that's a ridiculous offer for Nelson, and there's basically zero chance of it ever getting to that point.)

And realistically there are three QBs who MIGHT be available that would fit Stafford level.  Rodgers, Wilson, and depending on how you feel about him, Carr.  Carr sounds like he will be off the table.  Wilson has a no trade clause and the Colts aren’t one or the teams he’s reportedly willing to wave it for so that leaves Rodgers if him and the Packers don’t kiss and make up.  Short of Irsay directly telling Ballard he wants Rodgers here next year I don’t see the Colts getting involved in that.
 

Beyond that you are looking at guys like Jimmy G which would just be trading Carson Wentz for another version of him.  I think they are going to bring in someone like Fitzmagic who won’t excite people so they have an option to go to if Wentz struggles again.  That’s really the only thing I think the Colts can do unless Ballard has something cooking like the Buckner trade that no one sees coming.  With that said I will say things can change in the NFL in hurray.  

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

The Pats? Seriously? The Pats were built on the best QB in the history of the league consistently taking under market value and allowing money to be spent elsewhere. The Colts if we give Nelson 20M a year will be overpaying one of the least important positions of football and it will be taking away from our ability to consistently add talent elsewhere. 

I am pretty sure I said the very large hole is the QB position.  Once you get beyond the QB position the Pats were very much built around controlling the line of scrimmage and winning the turnover battle which is what Ballard is trying to do here.  That’s why a lot of people thought Brady coming to Indy made sense when he left New England.  The Colts elected to go with Rivers instead.  

[DougDew]

38 minutes ago, Superman said:

This is almost a reset. Might as well get rid of Buckner and Leonard also. And by the time we're ready to do something, JT will be slowing down, so let's move him also. 

 

Bingo.  You're being sarcastic, but you're actually more right than wrong.

 

It was probably going to have to be a reset the day Nelson was drafted number 6, and the plan completely foiled the day Luck retired and made this an un-short SB build. 

 

Its obvious where the capital needs to go.  You can have busts at any position, that doesn't mean you change how you look at maximum capital outlays for certain positions. 

 

This discussion will happen in a few years when JT hits his contract time.   The next RB doesn't have to be as good, provided the Colts find talent at the positions they need to find talent at.  QB, LT, WR, TE.  If they don't, resigning him will be more vital than it should be.

 

Leonard has not elevated his game since he was a rookie....marginally....incrementally not that much.  Look at the stats.  That's because college LBers can come right into the NFL and chase the ball and tackle....which is what a WILL does.  Its harder to have more of an impact when the impactfulness of the position he plays can be maxed out in his rookie year.  His potential replacement did not have to be as talented if the Colts could have found talent at EDGE and Corner.  But wasted picks on a FS and developmental situational pass rushers makes keeping Leonard more vital than it should have been.

 

Its messed up.  The only guys worth resigning/keeping are Pitt and RYS, (and Braden Smith) at whatever prices they will fetch.  Because those are two of the positions that you worry about keeping when you find good players at. Hopefully Paye and Dayo show enough next year.   If every other player got turned over with capital reallocated in the right places with proper capital allocation thresholds set at the positions, we'd get closer to the SB.

 

Maybe I'm just frustrated.

 

But, Ballard might strike gold with draft picks this year and next. Or some FA has a few career years with us.   I hope he does.  Go Colts.

[Nickster]

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

Considering the odds of free agents and draft picks being busts is much higher than than them being hall of famers it’s not out of line to say hey those are big arguments for NOT doing it.  You don’t get better in the NFL getting ride of your best players.  Name me one team in the NFL that’s done that and gotten better?  You win by building around them.  Nelson might very well be the Colts best player and along with Kelly and Taylor are the guys everything they do on offense is built around.  It’s why Ballard isn’t interested in moving him to LT and why he’s not even blinking about paying him.  

New England did this a lot.   Richard Seymour was let go at the apex of his career and got Nate Solder in the draft in return.  

 

But there are all kinds of examples when teams have to give up high priced players in order to allocate that money elsewhere.

I just don't think it's a good idea to build a team around a LG an RB and  a WILL.  Hopefully history will prove me wrong. 

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, Nickster said:

New England did this a lot.   Richard Seymour was let go at the apex of his career and got Nate Solder in the draft in return.  

 

But there are all kinds of examples when teams have to give up high priced players in order to allocate that money elsewhere.

I just don't think it's a good idea to build a team around a LG an RB and  a WILL.  Hopefully history will prove me wrong. 

SF did it with Defo.  

[EastStreet]

He's an anchor player not only on the OL, but on the team. 

He's one of only a couple of players on the roster that brings the "nasty" 

 

And he will be signed.

 

It's fair to debate if it's smart to build your OL around a LG from a draft capital and cap perspective, but it happened. And now that it's happened, and now that he's considered a top OL in the league (not just top G), he's simply not going anywhere. 

[NewColtsFan]

4 hours ago, Nickster said:

New England did this a lot.   Richard Seymour was let go at the apex of his career and got Nate Solder in the draft in return.  

 

But there are all kinds of examples when teams have to give up high priced players in order to allocate that money elsewhere.

I just don't think it's a good idea to build a team around a LG an RB and  a WILL.  Hopefully history will prove me wrong. 

Thanks for clarifying your position.   So many here have been confused on what your views are?    Good to finally have you on the record. 

 

 

 

[conklincolt]

11 hours 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.

not sure letting our best players walk would get us in the playoffs or make us any sort of threat.

[Aaron86]

2 hours ago, conklincolt said:

not sure letting our best players walk would get us in the playoffs or make us any sort of threat.

I love Nelson, but paying a guard 20+ million a year is not a recipe for success either. I dont want to loose any of our best players. But they did not step up when needed. 

Like I said its a good thing I am not the owner 

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

I love Nelson, but paying a guard 20+ million a year is not a recipe for success either. I dont want to loose any of our best players. But they did not step up when needed. 

Like I said its a good thing I am not the owner 

We're paying Buckner 20+ right now.

I'd venture to say at current healthy levels, we get more value relative to the market with Q than Buckner... 

 

I also question the general strategy around building your OL around a guard, but it's all relative. 

 

And while I think Defo would provide much higher value in different or tweaked scheme, I also know Q would also be more valuable in more of a power gap OL scheme... But as it stands, Q is much more of an anchor on O, than Defo is on D.

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

We're paying Buckner 20+ right now.

I'd venture to say at current healthy levels, we get more value relative to the market with Q than Buckner... 

 

I also question the general strategy around building your OL around a guard, but it's all relative. 

 

And while I think Defo would provide much higher value in different or tweaked scheme, I also know Q would also be more valuable in more of a power gap OL scheme... But as it stands, Q is much more of an anchor on O, than Defo is on D.

That’s a pretty sobering though huh?

[Nickster]

3 hours ago, EastStreet said:

We're paying Buckner 20+ right now.

I'd venture to say at current healthy levels, we get more value relative to the market with Q than Buckner... 

 

I also question the general strategy around building your OL around a guard, but it's all relative. 

 

And while I think Defo would provide much higher value in different or tweaked scheme, I also know Q would also be more valuable in more of a power gap OL scheme... But as it stands, Q is much more of an anchor on O, than Defo is on D.

We run our share of gap.

 

What advantages do you envision from running less zone?  I don’t think we have an issue with run blocking personally.  I’d be interested what you think a change in scheme would accomplish.

 

[Aaron86]

9 hours ago, EastStreet said:

We're paying Buckner 20+ right now.

I'd venture to say at current healthy levels, we get more value relative to the market with Q than Buckner... 

 

I also question the general strategy around building your OL around a guard, but it's all relative. 

 

And while I think Defo would provide much higher value in different or tweaked scheme, I also know Q would also be more valuable in more of a power gap OL scheme... But as it stands, Q is much more of an anchor on O, than Defo is on D.

I honestly think we are over spending on players at the wrong positions. I know Nelson is probably going to get 20+  and I really dont know how they will structure it. But dang we are tied up in 3 or 4  players right now that have really not put us in the postion we want to be. Starting with Wentz. I just want to see some fire out of our players. Every game should be played like the Patriots game with attitude and fire. 

[Solid84]

19 hours ago, Superman said:

It's also interesting (or you might call it 'head scratchingly shortsighted') that fans of a team that recently lost a franchise level QB partly because the OL couldn't protect him are so cavalier with the idea of getting rid of a great OL player.

It’s just as interesting the fans FOR paying him whatever think the rest of us are going to replace him with a sack of potatoes.

Imagine if we had Glow level performance at LG. What would that cost us? $9-11m/year? That’s a lot of cash spared that could go towards some of our numerous other needs. 

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

It’s just as interesting the fans FOR paying him whatever think the rest of us are going to replace him with a sack of potatoes.

Imagine if we had Glow level performance at LG. What would that cost us? $9-11m/year? That’s a lot of cash spared that could go towards some of our numerous other needs. 

Like LT.  Might get lucky and Pryor could turn into the gold star player that nobody expected.  But its best to not rely upon luck. 

 

Then if he plays well, what is the price for a quality starting LT 2 years from now?

 

Kicking the expense of a LT down the road, IMO.

 

 

[Myles]

I don't know that there would be many/any teams willing to give up much for Nelson.  

[groundnpound]

Q is one of the best guards I've ever watched, but he's still a guard. 20 million for a guard is a healthy chunk of cap space. If I can bank on his health, I'd pay him. Unfortunately, it's football and you can't bank on health. Glad I don't have to make the decision.