FanPost

Free Agents Ballard Should Target

Hello Stampeders. Today we are going to look at some Free Agents that I believe the Colts should target. With those options I will dive deeper into the decision making process behind them. We will go over three things that could lead to them being a good addition to the team or not. In no particular order, those are 1) the team's cap situation they are coming from, 2) the player's value and 3) the overall market conditions. So buckle up for the ride and let's get going!

Introduction

First off, to cut to the chase, here are the players I am targeting. This way if you just want to read the conclusion first and scroll straight to the bottom and scream, "these guys all suck!", you can. Please note, this is the complete list of players I think Ballard should target. It doesn't mean I think he should sign all of them. That of course would be silly. If he grabs any one of these guys plus Anthony Castonzo, I'll be pretty happy. Also, in case you don't read the whole thing, if you see a big name UFA missing from the list it is because I believe the team they are coming from will likely resign them. The logic is all described below.

Team Player Position Age Salary/Year Years
Colts Anthony Castonzo LT 32 $13.9M 4
Vikings Anthony Harris FS 28 $11.9M 3
Falcons Austin Hooper TE 25 $9.9M 5
Jaguars Yannick Ngakoue DE 25 $17.2M 5
Saints Vonn Bell SS 25 $3.3M 3
Steelers Javon Hargrave DT 26 $14.7M 4
49ers Arik Armstead DE 26 $18.8M 4
Chiefs Chris Jones DT 25 $19.3M 5
Packers Bryan Bulaga RT 31 $8.9M 2
Ravens Josh Bynes ILB 31 $3.1M 2
Bears HaHa Clinton-Dix FS 27 $7.9M 2
Rams Michael Brockers DT 29 $9.2M 3
Panthers Tre Boston FS 28 $8.9M 2
Gerald McCoy DT 32 $9.0M 1
Eagles Vinny Curry DE 31 $3.8M 1

So, what do we have here? Well first let's state an assumption that should be fairly obvious to all. Every NFL team WANTS to keep their best players. However, because of the unique structure of the salary cap and player market values, that often times is not possible. In some cases, teams have too many good players and they can no longer afford to pay them all when they have the chance to test the free market. In other cases, teams have made poor investments and tied up lots of money in one or more players that are underperforming. There is a full spectrum of other situations in between. Every team tries to create a balanced and competitive roster that is cap friendly but not all teams are successful at doing it. Let's dig in a bit more.

The first team we should look at is our own of course, the Indianapolis Colts. If I stop and look at things objectively, Chris Ballard has done an absolutely amazing job in how he has built this team purely from the cap point of view. There are two things you want to look at when evaluating how well a team is doing in their cap management - 1) how much money do they have free to spend under the cap, and 2) how many players do they already have under contract? In the Colts case, those numbers are both near the top. The Colts have a whopping 60 players under contract (51 is league average) and $96.5M to spend ($45.6M is league average). For some perspective, that ranks 5th and 1st in the NFL respectively. This is quite an advantageous position to be in, but only if you do something with it. So what can be done? Let's see.

As I mentioned above, the number of players a team has signed and the amount of money they have to spend are what you want to look for when trying to target players. The players in question are no longer part of the team they just played for, so the trick is determining A) if the team they are coming from wants them back and can pay them what they seek, and B) if they want to go back to the team they just came from, or are more focused on a better deal (more lucrative, longer term, better chance to win, be a starter, etc.). Now we aren’t just trying to target any old players here. We are trying to find impact players, guys that will be starters on the Colts and make a significant contribution. We also are trying to gauge how likely they are to not be resigned by their previous team, because as I said above, all teams WANT to keep their best players if at all possible. So the natural approach here is to look for teams that have a below average number of players under contract and a below average amount of money to spend - it's the perfect storm! This is the main approach, but you can also look at the extremes which are 1) a team that has lots of players under contract but simply no money left to spend (the Steelers) or 2) a team that has a slightly below average amount of money to spend, but tons of players still to sign (nobody this year, though Seattle would be the closest team to that situation). Now this isn’t a fail proof method because sometimes you can have just a couple guys to sign that are your most expensive guys too (think the Dallas Cowboys with Dak Prescott and Amari Cooper). However, I do think this is a good place to begin.

From this starting point I have set a basic threshold looking for a good mix of players remaining to be signed and cap space left to spend. Some teams are more weighted in one direction or the other, but the general rule leads to the following ranking of the teams we want to try and pillage (Group 1 = extremely strapped, Group 2 = very strapped and Group 3 = moderately strapped). From that grouping, you obviously will note that all teams are below average in terms of cap space, so they all have an issue, just some a lot worse than others. Here is the breakdown:

Team Players Under Contract Cap Space
Group 1 Minnesota Vikings 40 -$4,312,586
Atlanta Falcons 50 -$2,821,328
Jacksonville Jaguars 58 $1,254,754
New Orleans Saints 52 $4,860,277
Pittsburgh Steelers 60 $978,824
Group 2 San Francisco 49ers 48 $16,034,333
Kansas City Chiefs 46 $21,295,495
Green Bay Packers 42 $31,787,184
Baltimore Ravens 41 $34,673,537
Group 3 Chicago Bears 51 $20,924,296
Los Angeles Rams 53 $23,716,864
Carolina Panthers 54 $26,359,620
Philadelphia Eagles 54 $33,655,046

Excellent, now we've identified the teams that we can expect to be the source of some high impact players. Before we get into the players from other teams though let’s do our own housekeeping first which starts with the Colts UFAs. The big question of course is Anthony Castonzo. Not so much as can we resign him but will he want to resign? That is, does he really want to retire at this point in his career as has been recently rumored? If so, our hands are tied, but let’s assume for argument’s sake that he is just posturing for a good deal. Given his age, he won’t likely get a max deal in terms of years from any other team, but the Colts could possibly have reason to do so as long as the money is competitive too. For this to happen, I am thinking his market value starts at $13.9M/year and the Colts could probably do that for 4 years. The concern here is other teams might be able to do north of $14M for shorter periods and he may like that. We’ll have to see, but I don’t think Ballard moves much off the first number, and I am not entirely sure how comfortable he'd be going longer than 2 years given AC's age. As a fan, I think AC has earned it, but will Ballard see it the same way?

What about Joe Haeg, and Devin Funchess you ask, they are UFAs too, right? Yes they are, but they don’t make my "impact player" threshold, so all players that don’t qualify will not be considered or covered in this article. We are looking for proven difference makers. How do I define that? Basically I am using a two year average of positional ranking on PFF for any UFAs in question, with a minimum threshold of a 70+ overall rank. I know PFF has its issues, but in my case, I want to focus on how players compare relative to each other, and it is a good place to start. The guys at the top of any position in their database are rarely ever, if at all, guys you’d say no way, he isn’t that good. It may not be perfect to rank guys by, but I think it serves as a good tool to start with for my purposes. Your mileage may vary. One other point to note on our candidates is that we are looking for youth. I used AC’s age of 32 as the absolute upper bounds for any target players, but the age I’d really like to focus on is 28 and under. So those that fall between 29 and 32 should be given extra scrutiny due to age. Now let's break down which teams are losing who.

The Teams and Players

Minnesota Vikings: A quick look at their cap situation and you can see they are in big trouble. They are in fact projected to be over the cap and only have 40 players signed to boot. You’d think there would be a windfall of guys here that we could pluck, but only one meets our criteria for a high impact player.

  • Anthony Harris, FS, 28 - Arguably the best FS in the NFL over the last two years, Harris would seem to give us more of what Malik Hooker is supposed to be giving us, which is a ballhawk, but without the propensity of getting burned. That of course is a hard pill to swallow as one is a 1st round pick and the other a UDFA. Regardless, as a GM you have to have a short memory and do what is best for your roster. Sliding Hooker into depth and instilling Harris as your starter would do the team wonders. His age makes his next contract a bit funky though. The Vikings only extended him one year last year, and now getting 4+ years could be hard. I think Ballard’s approach would be 3 years starting at $11.9M/year. A huge pay increase for him, but still a bargain for us. I am not too sure there won’t be higher bidders, but I suspect this is Ballard’s ceiling.

Atlanta Falcons: Like the Vikings, the Falcons project to be over the cap as well. They are a little better off however because they aren’t as far over and they have more players already under contract. That being said, they still have big problems. Like most of the teams on this list, we find one player in particular to target.

  • Austin Hooper, TE, 25 - Hooper presents an interesting case. I don't think his numbers fully support the hype he is getting for his next contract. As a receiving TE he is quite capable, but that is basically all he brings to the table. He is pretty ineffective in the run game and just mediocre in pass protection, two things that typically add up to a well-rounded TE. In the end though it is the reception abilities that earn the big bucks I suppose, especially in the red zone, so Ballard will have to offer market value and length if he wants to get him. That would equate to roughly $9.9M/year for 5 years. Unfortunately, I am not sure if Ballard's idea of market value is in lock step with the league's. Especially if he notices the same things I mentioned above. I hope I am very wrong here though. Lastly, and to state the obvious, for Jacoby Brissett, Austin Hooper would be a welcomed addition.

Jacksonville Jaguars: Jacksonville has very little money to spend but hey, at least they are on the plus side of the ledger unlike the two teams above. With so little money however, they also have plenty of guys to still sign and that is a big problem. Getting a Jags player is a double win for the Colts because we take them away from a division rival also. Who is that player? One that has most likely been on your radar for quite some time now.

  • Yannick Ngakoue, DE, 25 - We'll hate him as a Jag, but love him as a Colt. Ngakoue is a pass rush specialist, and God knows we need help putting pressure on opposing QBs from the outside. He checks the box in that regard for sure. The down side is he isn’t the best edge setter, but an unexpected bonus from him is his excellent athleticism allows him to peel off into coverage and do some good things. Not many DEs can do that really. He is young, effective and will demand a pretty steep price. Ballard’s offer likely needs to be 5 years at $17.2M/year to have a chance at him.

New Orleans Saints: The Saints have more money to spend than either the Jags above or the Steelers below but are still in the red. Why? Because they have too many guys unsigned. It isn't a ton per se, but one of those unsigned players is a whopper in Drew Brees. My gut says they will figure out how to keep him, which means there will be other casualties that are not UFAs in the form of money-saving releases later on, where opportunistic teams like the Colts can also feast. That is out of the scope of this write-up however, so we’ll save that for a later discussion, and just focus on the Saint we like.

  • Vonn Bell, SS, 25 - Bell is a talented young player in a crowded safety group that includes Chauncey Gardner-Johnson who just may make Bell the odd man out. Good for the Colts though as Bell would be an upgrade for them. He hits like a mule kicks and has excellent blitzing instincts. Added with Willis, we would have a pretty good group of our own at the strong safety position. Imagine if you will, adding both Harris and Bell to pair with Hooker and Willis. Now that would be something. Bell shouldn’t be too expensive and might cooperate on a deal of 3 years at $3.3M/year if he projects to be the starter, something he may not get to be in New Orleans, assuming they'd even want him back. Getting this deal done of course signals the end of the line for Clayton Geathers as a Colt.

Pittsburgh Steelers: Technically the first team to finally get on the plus side of the cap is the Steelers, but just barely with not even $1M to spend, which is less than either the Saints or the Jags. Good news for them however is they have 60 players under contract already. Of course that doesn't help their UFAs. One guy outside their 60 is a player that really intrigues us.

  • Javon Hargrave, DT, 26 - Hargrave plays NT for the Steelers base 3-4 but that doesn’t disqualify him from being a good fit with the Colts. In fact it gives him some excellent flexibility. He has the power and leverage to play as a 1T but the explosiveness to be a 3T in our system also. He is solid in both run defense and pass rush. He could really help our front in collapsing the pocket from the interior even though there are better options out there for that. Doesn’t have the best radius to grab runners as they run by, but that’s about the only knock I have on the guy. The question with him will be about the money. He is young and deserving. I can see Ballard needing to offer him 4 years at $14.7M/year to get his attention.

San Francisco 49ers: The 49ers are the first team not in crippling cap shape. Still not good, or even decent really, but not dire. They have under 50 players locked up, and less than $20M to do the rest of their work with, so there will be some casualties, and we like one of them, again a guy you’ve likely had on your radar already.

  • Arik Armstead, 26, DE - When you look at the 49ers front four, you can’t help but be impressed. While Solomon Thomas has not yet lived up to his potential, Armstead, Nick Bosa, DeForest Buckner and Dee Ford are playing lights out. You might think releasing Thomas would solve the problem of signing Armstead, but it won't. Even as a first round pick still under his rookie contract, his cap relief wouldn’t be enough. You’d have to combine that with a major chunk of the rest of the cap money they have to meet Armstead’s likely market value, and then still be left with many other guys left to sign. So he might just end up being a cap casualty. Armstead is a true edge setter with plus pass rush skills too. A perfect replacement for Jabaal Sheard. It won’t be cheap though. Will Ballard offer him a deal for 4 years at $18.8M/year? That’s likely what it will take to sign him.

Kansas City Chiefs: Now we come to Ballard’s old team, the Chiefs. They have 46 guys under contract already, not terrible, and $21M to spend, again not terrible. Problem is that amount is not likely enough to feed all the mouths they have to feed. Let’s looks at the one guy we hope goes hungry.

  • Chris Jones, 25, DT - Yeah, I am with you. I can’t see the Chiefs letting this mouth go unfed, but sometimes the cap game just works that way. Jones, like Hargrave is the kind of guy that can give us the interior push we need to collapse the pocket and give QBs no place to step up into when our heat comes from the edges. Except Jones is even better at it. Much better at it actually, with not much of a fall off in the run game compared to Hargrave either. Since that is what we need more than anything from a DT, I’d prefer him over Hargrave. That being said, you’re going to have to really marry him ala Mike Ditka and Ricky Williams. The deal will likely need to be no less than $19.3M/year for 5 years. Yikes!

Green Bay Packers: The Packers continue a trend here. More to spend than the team above, but less guys under contract than the team above too. Still, the situations are very close. For them, like any other team, it is going to boil down to where on your roster you want to invest what you have. The Packer O-line is probably better than average, and we hope one casualty comes from there.

  • Bryan Bulaga, 31, RT - I know what you are thinking, that’s an interesting choice, right? It is, and I personally don’t expect it, but hear me out. Our current RG is average at best, though I actually think he is below average. His deficiencies I believe are just covered up by the guy on each side of him. Meanwhile, our RT is pretty much a very solid lineman with positional flexibility to move inside. Say we do move Braden Smith to RG and insert Bulaga at RT. Now you have a line for the ages, with Mark Glowinski, and maybe Haeg as added depth. Additionally, in case AC does bolt, Bulaga is more than serviceable to take over at LT also, in which case this notion goes from "that’s interesting" to "man we really need him". I hope it doesn’t come to that obviously. Being a bit older, Ballard would focus on a shorter deal for Bulaga, like $8.9M/year for 2 years.

Baltimore Ravens: So again, the Ravens follow the above pattern with a little more money to spend (still not a lot though) and a few less guys under contract compared to the team above them. Like the Packers, we might expect a casualty from them to be a player that is a bit older too. While this player may be the least impressive in name brand, he could really present the biggest bang for the buck.

  • Josh Bynes, 31, ILB - First, it should be noted that the Ravens LB group is pretty thin. I thought our group wasn’t very deep but then saw theirs and it is definitely worse. So I don’t hold out much hope for this signing to happen, but it is still worth discussing. Bynes is a thumper that would project well to the SAM in our defense. The immediate benefit right there is that would free up Okereke to take over the MLB position, and relegate Walker to good solid depth. Bynes is not a one trick pony however. He may not be superb in coverage, but he certainly is not a liability there either. He’s been holding down the role of MLB in the Raven defense admirably this past year. Either way, he gives the Colts some needed options in the LB group. Ballard could do worse than offering him a 2 year contract worth $3.1M/year.

Chicago Bears: The Monsters of the Midway have a bit of a monster on their hands with their cap situation, but certainly not as bad as the predecessors on this list. Like the Ravens, the one casualty we’d like to see is from a group not all that deep or talented to begin with, so odds are slim it happens as well. That being said, it is a player I liked a lot the first time he hit the market. Maybe the second time around will be different.

  • Ha Ha Clinton-Dix, FS, 27 - The main thing I like about Clinton-Dix, besides the hyphenated name, is his flexibility. He reminds me of poor man's Landon Collins, who we coveted quite a bit last off season, and with good reason. Clinton-Dix has that flexibility to play either FS or SS, and while he is not exceptional at either, he is good at both. In the Colts system I could easily see him replacing either Hooker or Geathers, but my preference would be the latter. Ballard wouldn’t want to do anything too long, which is something Clinton-Dix will probably be looking for, so a deal for 2 years at $7.9M/year may or may not work out. Given that Ballard didn't move on him last time he was a FA has me thinking he may not this time either, but we'll see.

Los Angeles Rams: The Rams are better off than the Bears in terms of having more money to spend and more players under contract. They are here however because they still have quite a bit less than the league average to spend and quite a few less players signed than the league average. As I said in the beginning, when you have that scenario, there is the potential for cap casualties, and as is a theme at this end of the list, it could be an age related one.

  • Michael Brockers, DT, 29 - Let’s not pretend that 29 is over the hill because it is not. It is old enough however to be a bit awkward in terms of getting the deal for the time frame that fits both the player's desire as well as the team's. That is the case with Brockers. Additionally, he is a run-stopping specialist, and doesn’t present nearly as much in the way of pass rush, something the Colts sorely need. For that reason his value might be lower in my mind, but I still believe Ballard would have to offer 3 years at $9.2M/year to land him. Not because he is worth it, but because the market for DTs has spiked since Aaron Donald’s massive deal. Even if he is over spent on, he'd still be an upgrade to our front four and a good addition. Just wouldn't feel like the best win we could get.

Carolina Panthers: Continuing the trend of finding teams with more players under contract and more money to spend, we have the Panthers. The Panthers are at an interesting crossroads. They did the seemingly right thing in locking Cam Newton up long term when the time came to do so, but now it isn't clear they still see him as the guy going forward. It is interesting because Kyle Allen is a UFA, and they will need to decide if they stick with Newton, Allen or Will Grier, none of which seem all that appetizing to me, so glad that isn’t the Colts issue. Regardless, the Panthers are the one and only team where we will look for two players to sign from.

  • Tre Boston, FS, 28 - Boston was newly acquired in the off-season last year, and truthfully has been the only positive development for the Panther’s secondary group. Sidebar...it may amuse you to know that T.J. Green sucks as a Panther too, but I digress. Given the fact that Boston is still young enough to keep around but old enough to provide veteran leadership, I think the Panthers will try to resign him, but Ballard can try his hand with a 2 year deal worth $8.9M/year. Boston's last two contracts were 1 year deals, and 2 years might just do the trick, plus he'd be getting another raise.
  • Gerald McCoy, DT, 32 - McCoy is quickly becoming like Ndamukong Suh. He still has "it", but you can’t fathom signing him to anything more than a year at a time because the skill set is dwindling and you just don't know when it could fall off the proverbial cliff. It might be wise for Ballard to kick the tires for a short term DT solution aimed at run stopping while still bringing serviceable pass rushing skills too, but then again, with the level of risk included, maybe not. It's a pretty close call. I believe McCoy will think he is worth it regardless, and only would call Ballard back if his one year offer came at around $9M/year or more and was incentive laden too.

Philadelphia Eagles: Finally we have the last of our teams that we might look towards for UFA collection, that being the Eagles. As with the teams above that are in the "green" category, we are likely looking at a veteran rather than a younger player. The one we find reminds us of one we already have.

  • Vinny Curry, DE, 31 - Being the last guy on this list it should come as no surprise that we might think him to be the least likely signing to happen. We’ve already got Justin Houston, right? Well, you’d be right. Similar to Clinton-Dix, I think of Curry as a poor man's Houston in fact. You really can’t have too many pass rushers though, and neither one of them is a liability for setting the edge either, so my real concern is just keeping them fresh and I'd welcome Curry for the right price. Of course this likely impedes the development of the younger guys, something Ballard obviously has been stressing, but it is also an upgrade to Sheard, something we'll need a solid plan for, because we will be letting him walk. Not sure Ballard would do it, but if he wanted to, a one year deal worth $3.8M could be enough to say, "the Eagle has landed".

Conclusion

OK, so you made it to the end, congratulations. What does it all mean? Well, that is for us to discuss obviously. As I stated at the beginning this list represents the targets, not the "let's get them all" effort. Obviously if you get one CB or DT, the others looks a lot less shiny. A quick two disclaimers - 1) I use the term "cap casualty" very loosely, and really not appropriately, but I wasn't interested in finding a better term. I think true casualties are guys that get released for cap reasons, not UFAs that just aren't resigned, but I used the term anyway because we are targeting good players, and like I said before, NFL teams WANT to keep their good talent whenever they can afford to. So in that regard, it is a bit of a casualty for them. 2) The salary suggestions written "per year" are meant to reflect average yearly cost and not solely base salary. I didn't want to get too deep into this much guaranteed, and this much signing bonus or roster bonus or whatever, so I just went with an average which should pretty well reflect the expected overall cap hit yearly for any particular player.

Now, I leave you with this final thought. My idea of the specific guys Ballard should really target line up with how I think he sees things, and how likely their teams are to not be able to resign them. I could see him actually signing (in addition to AC hopefully) one or two of these guys...

  • Austin Hooper
  • Vonn Bell
  • Javon Hargrave
  • Josh Bynes
  • Vinny Curry
Yeah, not overwhelming is it? But to be honest, it would be the best FA group to date from Ballard. Until he actually proves he can open up the wallet though, I'm not expecting him to bring in a player that is high dollar AND long term, no matter how good they are, or even if it is a guy he's very knowledgable about like Chris Jones. He'll have to show me differently for me to think there is ever a chance for a guy like Armstead, Jones or Ngakoue. Hooper is about the biggest stretch I can imagine at this point in time. Hargrave would really impress me. Any of the bigger names or more short term solutions would make me ask, what did you do with the real Chris Ballard? So...what do you think?

EDIT: After some discussion with another poster on salaries, I made some changes, which most notably affected the Safeties in the list. Other I had overvalued a bit too. I found a nifty tool on OTC that helped me dial in the numbers a lot more accurately, and from there I gave some players bumps based on age and length of contract. Hope that feels more in line with reality. It actually makes the discussion a lot more interesting too because the overall amount Ballard would be spending goes up.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Stampede Blue's writers or editors.