Colts Extend Buckner. **Contract Details Updated Page 2, Spoiler it's Really BIG Savings**

[CR91]

 

[Solid84]

Does this have an influence on our cap this season?

[stitches]

Nice. Looks like a reasonable deal. Interesting to see how they structured it and whether they freed any money for this year?(I doubt it)

 

 

[Indyfan4life]

19 minutes ago, stitches said:

Nice. Looks like a reasonable deal. Interesting to see how they structured it and whether they freed any money for this year?(I doubt it)

 

 

He was already on the books for a $22.75M cap hit, so it changes little to nothing. 

[twfish]

15 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

He was already on the books for a $22.75M cap hit, so it changes little to nothing. 

So it essentially just extended his contract with the same money?

[GoColts8818]

Figured an extension was coming after they re-signed Grover.

[AwesomeAustin]

Go Colts!  The front office is telling us fans this roster is ready to compete with AR. This team looks like it’s being setup for a three year run. I fully believe they will do some moves during the draft to add quality players instead of acquiring more picks on day 3. Pure speculation on my end but I’m anticipating 4 players will be taken in the first three rounds.   

[w87r]

40 minutes ago, Indyfan4life said:

He was already on the books for a $22.75M cap hit, so it changes little to nothing. 

His cap hit this year will be reduced.

[w87r]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

Nice. Looks like a reasonable deal. Interesting to see how they structured it and whether they freed any money for this year?(I doubt it)

 

 

Why would you doubt it?

 

His cap hit this year will probably drop $3-$5m

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, w87r said:

Why would you doubt it?

 

His cap hit this year will probably drop $3-$5m

So doing it now to free up some space for a safety… is that what you are saying? 
 

 

[stitches]

12 minutes ago, w87r said:

Why would you doubt it?

 

His cap hit this year will probably drop $3-$5m

Because Ballard doesn't seem to like pushing money into the future, unless it's absolutely required... which at this moment doesn't seem to be the case. 

[lester]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Because Ballard doesn't seem to like pushing money into the future, unless it's absolutely required... which at this moment doesn't seem to be the case. 

 

Usually. Yes. I agree. That is for sure how Ballard operates (and it is the reason this team is usually in a good position in regards to cap space).

 

But but but...

 

They did this now for a reason. There will be some benefit they felt they needed to secure. I'm very curious to learn what that might be. This is fun!

[Yoshinator]

I like this extension quite a bit. Our DT position is set, and we don't have to worry about it now in a weak draft class for DT. I feel besides CB and S now, we can go BPA at positions of need. Mostly like where we are at now, though we need to get a bit of luck on our side in the draft.

 

Good job on this one Ballard! 

[Solid84]

23 minutes ago, stitches said:

Because Ballard doesn't seem to like pushing money into the future, unless it's absolutely required... which at this moment doesn't seem to be the case. 

This. I think the only reason to push that bill ahead of us is if they have a trade target in mind.

[GoColts8818]

29 minutes ago, stitches said:

Because Ballard doesn't seem to like pushing money into the future, unless it's absolutely required... which at this moment doesn't seem to be the case. 

Thats more an issue with restructuring contracts than extensions.  Restructuring is when you push money into the future that you already agreed to pay.  That’s a trick to free up money with the salary cap.  Extensions are new money and are normally done to make sure you keep the player than to push money into the future.

[lollygagger8]

 

 

[throwing BBZ]

 

 Buckner is a great player. I was hoping the Bears might want him as part of a trade for #9. 

[Solid84]

7 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Thats more an issue with restructuring contracts than extensions.  Restructuring is when you push money into the future that you already agreed to pay.  That’s a trick to free up money with the salary cap.  Extensions are new money and are normally done to make sure you keep the player than to push money into the future.

If it frees up space this season those money will count somewhere else - 2025 and/or 2026.

[GoColts8818]

2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

If it frees up space this season those money will count somewhere else - 2025 and/or 2026.

It will be absorbed into the new money they are giving him.  Extensions are much less about freeing up cap space and more about keeping the player which was my point.  It’s restructuring where you get into issues with pushing money down the road because it often results in a player having a huge year against the cap that makes their contract unpayable.  With extensions you can prevent that because you are adding more years to the contract to spread it out with the new money and the hits are more reasonable which is why it’s not out of character for Ballard.  He’s handed out extensions just about every year he’s been here.  What he avoids is restructuring.  

[Solid84]

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

It will be absorbed into the new money they are giving him.  Extensions are much less about freeing up cap space and more about keeping the player which was my point.  It’s restructuring where you get into issues with pushing money down the road because it often results in a player having a huge year against the cap that makes their contract unpayable.  With extensions you can prevent that because you are adding more years to the contract to spread it out with the new money and the hits are more reasonable which is why it’s not out of character for Ballard.  He’s handed out extensions just about every year he’s been here.  What he avoids is restructuring.  

I get what you're saying, but the money freed up still count in future years even if they get absorbed. There's little difference (money-wise) in extending a guy two years and restructuring a guy with two-three years left on his contract. It's still spreading out the money over more years - essentially pushing the bill. That's how I understand it at least?

 

I know extending and restructuring isn't the same thing functionally.

[w87r]

49 minutes ago, stitches said:

Because Ballard doesn't seem to like pushing money into the future, unless it's absolutely required... which at this moment doesn't seem to be the case. 

I'll be quick to come back and own it if I'm wrong. (I doubt it)

 

21 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Thats more an issue with restructuring contracts than extensions.  Restructuring is when you push money into the future that you already agreed to pay.  That’s a trick to free up money with the salary cap.  Extensions are new money and are normally done to make sure you keep the player than to push money into the future.

You don't restructure expiring contracts, you extend them 

[chad72]

Good extension!!! Had the cap space, had the right fit, had the vet presence that could still give us a good couple of years at a high level. It made sense at all levels. 

[GoColts8818]

Just now, w87r said:

I'll be quick to come back and own it if I'm wrong. (I doubt it)

 

You don't restructure expiring contracts, you extend them 

Yes that’s what I was saying.  I was pointing out the differences in them.  You don’t generally do extensions to free up money.  You do it to keep the player.  You do restructuring to free up money.  

[Solid84]

New DL coach happy about the extension.

[w87r]

59 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

So doing it now to free up some space for a safety… is that what you are saying? 
 

 

I don't know what the plan is, but I know it doesn't hurt to push $5m down the road from this year. $2.5m per year.

 

And if it isn't used it will just roll over, so there is no downfall. Just gives more versatility this season.

[w87r]

3 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Yes that’s what I was saying.  I was pointing out the differences in them.  You don’t generally do extensions to free up money.  You do it to keep the player.  You do restructuring to free up money.  

But extending Buckner is the only way to free up money.

 

 

Look around the league on many extensions, they are to keep the player yes, but they usually always free up money in the current season.

[Solid84]

I suppose the Colts COULD extend Buckner without moving any money into future seasons?

[richard pallo]

1 minute ago, w87r said:

I don't know what the plan is, but I know it doesn't hurt to push $5m down the road from this year. $2.5m per year.

 

And if it isn't used it will just roll over, so there is no downfall. Just gives more versatility this season.

Yeah I expect his cap hit to go down this year.  People forget the cap is gong up every year.  So pushing some down the road is not a big deal.  

[GoColts8818]

Just now, w87r said:

But extending Buckner is the only way to free up money.

 

 

Look around the league on many extensions, they are to keep the player yes, but they usually always free up money in the current season.

That’s a side effect of extending a player more than the reason they are extending the player.  They are extending the player because they want to keep him, not to free up the money.  Again, the point I was weighing in on was the idea that extending players is out of the norm for Ballard because he doesn’t like to push money into the future.  He’s extended players about every year he’s been here because he’s wanted to keep the players.  What he avoids is restructuring which is where you can get into real trouble with pushing the money into the future.  
 

Does it happen to free up some money?  Yes it does but that’s normally not the reason to do it.  Teams don’t just hand out extensions to players they don’t plan on keeping when their contracts are up to free up space.  

[VikingsFanInChennai]

28 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Thats more an issue with restructuring contracts than extensions.  

Ballard will be forced to restructure, adding void years, etc., to manage cap economics once he gets to pay many players elite money in the roster, especially when QB position needs to be paid huge.

 

It's easy to say Ballard doesn't do such stuff when the roster is young and when Ballard shies away from signing big FAs, but he'll be in a situation to do all of that soon.

 

Past occurrences cannot be cited as examples of how he'll be managing cap in near future. 

[w87r]

6 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I suppose the Colts COULD extend Buckner without moving any money into future seasons?

It could, but he represents one of the last options to free up money this year.

 

 

Now we extended Franklin and gave him more money this year, but there is a big difference in a $3m deal and $20m+.

 

No money to save on Franklin, his was strictly to lock up.

 

Colts can take Buckners contract reduce it by $5m easily.

 

2024 - $17.5m

2025 - $25.5m

2026 - $25.5m.

 

 

 

This wasn't all for you, just a little busy at the moment. So I'm on and off here.

 

 

I will be beyond shocked if the Colts do not save some money this season. Like I said, even if we don't use it, it will just roll over to next year 

[w87r]

Side bar:

 

Then I will probably wait for a while to respond to some other things.

 

 

Yes the Colts are in decent shape at the moment.

 

$14-$14.6m in space.

 

But have $2.8m(ish) for draft picks.

$2.5m(ish) for practice squad.

 

That leaves with $8-$9m(ish).

 

 

That extra money just gives us more versatility in case we wanted to make another move. Not saying we are, but if not it will just roll over, pushing the money back isn't that big a deal. Even less so, when looking at what the cap is supposed to do the next couple years.

[richard pallo]

It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he does Kelly as well.  His contract also expires this year.

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, w87r said:

Side bar:

 

Then I will probably wait for a while to respond to some other things.

 

 

Yes the Colts are in decent shape at the moment.

 

$14-$14.6m in space.

 

But have $2.8m(ish) for draft picks.

$2.5m(ish) for practice squad.

 

That leaves with $8-$9m(ish).

 

 

That extra money just gives us more versatif we wanted to make another move. Not saying we are, but if not it will just roll over, pushing the money back isn't that big a deal. Even less so, when looking at what the cap is supposed to do the next couple years.

I think this actually increases the likelihood another meaningful acquisition is on the horizon.  Ballard is working.

[stitches]

36 minutes ago, w87r said:

I'll be quick to come back and own it if I'm wrong. (I doubt it)

 

You don't restructure expiring contracts, you extend them 

Either way, at this point the important thing is the extension is done, the details are largely for bookkeeping purposes. I don't really expect us to go after any of the big names either in FA or in trade at this point. 

[Stephen]

1 hour ago, Yoshinator said:

I like this extension quite a bit. Our DT position is set, and we don't have to worry about it now in a weak draft class for DT. I feel besides CB and S now, we can go BPA at positions of need. Mostly like where we are at now, though we need to get a bit of luck on our side in the draft.

 

Good job on this one Ballard! 

As long as we address wr, cb, s, and ol depth we should be fine

[Scott Pennock]

Again, an extension for a star and another starter. Meaning that 24 of the 25 starters are returning from last year, plus:

 

AR5 returning from IR

Flowers returning from IR

Woods returning from IR

Dulin returning from IR

Free Draft Picks who redshirted last season on the IR

Witt - OT

Scott - Safety

Leo - DE

Hull - RB

I lump these guys in with this years draft and UDFA class. 
 

What this all tells me that the FO can choose BPA during the draft knowing there will be internal improvements based on experience (Downs, Mallory) and (Jones, Brents) plus the 4 rookies who rehabbed, learned and got stronger through mental reps, film work and an NFL strength and conditioning program. 
 

Just my $0.02

[w87r]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

Either way, at this point the important thing is the extension is done, the details are largely for bookkeeping purposes. I don't really expect us to go after any of the big names either in FA or in trade at this point. 

Definitely agree with this. That's the most important part.

[w87r]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

I think this actually increases the likelihood another meaningful acquisition is on the horizon.  Ballard is working.

Definitely helps if he wants to.

 

 

Ballard is always working.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Good move, we got him through his prime now. He was very good (semi-great) last year, so he looks like he has at least 2 good years left in the tank at worse.