TomDiggs

Member
  • Content count

    187
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TomDiggs

  1. TomDiggs

    Saquon Barkley's fantasy projection

    I'm a huge fantasy football guy but have almost no shot at Saquon in any of my leagues. That being said, the Giants' top 4 RBs last year combined for 368 carries. I'd pencil in Barkley for about 75% of that and that is if they dont run more. So I'd say 275 carries. If Darkwa and Gallman can average a combined 4.4 ypc last year, then Barkley should at least match that. So that's 1200 yds on the ground The Giants RBs totaled 97 catches last year. Let's say Barkley gets even 40% of that. That's 40 catches at a minimum of 6 yards per catch (that's what Darkwa, Gallman and Vereen averaged). So that's roughly another 250 yards. And I agree that he is around a 10 or so total TD guy. I think his floor (if healthy) is 1450 total yards, 40 receptions and 10 total scores. If he did that he would be an immediate top-15 RB and he would be knocking on the door of top-10 if they ride him even harder or if he outperforms the averages of last year's Giants' RBs. Since their line has improved, their offense will open up more w Beckham back, and the Giants did not take this man in the first round in the top 5 to sit him, I think he could approach 1750 total yards and 12 scores. That would make him around a top-8 or so RB based on last year. Sky is the limit for this kid.
  2. TomDiggs

    Mychal Kendricks released

    Looks like Kendricks chose Cleveland. So surely the idea of being close to contending was not the driving force. Good for them.
  3. TomDiggs

    Mychal Kendricks released

    I honestly gave that some thought too. But if so, you don't visit the Browns. A team that is coming off an 0-16 season w a rookie QB is not exactly the type of team you visit if you are only looking for your best chance to win. So I believe we have not reached out or that if we did we did not like what we heard. Either way it doesn't seem like he is destined to be here.
  4. TomDiggs

    Mychal Kendricks released

    The only thing i can remotely make of it is that Reich has weighed in and said something about not wanting or needing him. Otherwise the dots connecting him to us made too much sense. Maybe there was a reason the Philly staff kept him parked on the bench a lot of the time, despite what the PFF analysis says about how well he did during his time on the field. I would have liked for us to entertain him, but if we aren't I have to assume Reich has weighed in and we have purposefully decided not to pursue him. Which, if so, I am OK with.
  5. TomDiggs

    Mychal Kendricks released

    Looks like Kendricks is visiting the Vikings, Raiders and Browns. I would have liked to kick the tires on him, but if he really is supposed to make a decision this week, it looks like it would be one of these three in all likelihood.
  6. TomDiggs

    Mychal Kendricks released

    Absolutely. Would love to see him in the fold here. He would be a solid nickel guy and could pretty much play any of the 3 LB spots. He has mostly played WLB and SLB recently I believe. But I know he came in as an inside LB too. Would definitely be a solid addition if we decided to pursue him.
  7. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    All i can think of with this is that we essentially brought in two guys at the same time for one of two reasons: 1) to have them in at the same time to see them essentially side by side and see if one of them was a better fit than the other in terms of their answers, wants, etc 2) to see if one of them blinks when knowing there is competition in the building and takes a below market deal Honestly I was skeptical w all the recent visits in thinking that the Vaccaro and Boston and now Breeland visits were done to just gather info and kick the tires on guys. Basically find out what they are about and then see if they are willing to come in at our number after they linger longer and longer. Austin Howard visited and left without a deal only to sign w us after the draft when the dust settled. This could be so that if these guys are willing to sign bargain deals, we know what we need to know so we can pounce or it can be to simply have profiles on these guys and their fit based on their visit, interviews, interactions, etc in the event that injuries happen or guys like Geathers, Hooker, etc have health issues that require acquiring another vet down the line.
  8. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    Absolutely. I enjoy really any set of rankings for entertainment and conversation purposes. I just have grown to dislike PFF more and more because people are starting to use them as gospel and as the end-all be-all of rankings to say how good a player is or isn't. Some of that is on the NFL, though. They started using PFF rankings in their intros on primetime games where they show how a guy ranks at his position during his intro using the PFF system. My biggest issue is a lot of times the "eye test" doesn't coincide with the PFF ranking. I can sit there and say "Player A had a good game" or "Player B had a great season" and then when i check their rankings it basically says what I saw was wrong and that some other guy (sometimes even on the same team) vastly outperformed Player A or B. I know that's how it goes with subjective rankings, but still it can be frustrating. Either way, in terms of Breeland, I feel comfortable at least saying that I feel he would be the best CB on our roster if we did sign him. That we be based on just my opinion and no actual rankings or metrics. But i would feel better w him in the fold for sure.
  9. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    Additional stuff on Breeland rankings for folks asking. I hate PFF rankings, but they are something to simply nonsense and start conversations about so people often quote them. Interesting that Bleacher Report (another ranking I am not super fond of most times) had Breeland as the 21st best outside Corner https://www.stampedeblue.com/2018/5/16/17361592/colts-visiting-with-former-washington-cornerback-bashaud-breeland-today Edit: My bad. Didn't see that SM posted this before. Sorry for the duplicate. Must have posted while I was responding.
  10. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    I am sure he is referencing the typical PFF rankings PFF had Breeland ranked 54th amongst CBs last year and graded him as a 79.0 or an "Average" player. I'm sure that is what he is likely referencing.
  11. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    That pretty much what I would expect too. DJ Hayden got 3 years and $19M I'd much rather have Breeland. So I could definitely see him landing in that ballpark. Now to answer the other question, is a CB in our new system worth $6-$8M a year? That is hard to say. Sure, we don't put as much of an emphasis on man-to-man skills in a zone defense. But we still need active corners who can cover and tackle and who can move quickly enough to actively cover their zones and get some takeaways. There are almost 30 (28 to be exact) CBs making an average annual salary of at least $6M and 23 making $8M annually. So basically Breeland deserves that kind of money if he is a top-25 CB in the NFL. Is he? I am not sure. I would definitely feel better closer to $6M than $8M. But w our cap room that is being a bit nit-picky. If the contract is structured in the typical Ballard way w all the guarantees in the first year or so, then let the annual number be whatever makes Breeland happy. If we can get out of it after a year or two if he isn't excellent then who cares?
  12. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    Oh agreed. And not saying they're one in the same. Just saying that the first initial wave of signings, guys tend to get the best money they can. And when Grant's deal fell through he had to settle for a lot less. I wonder how much less Breeland will end up settling for now compared to his 3 year, $24M deal at an $8M annual salary.
  13. TomDiggs

    CB Bashaud Breeland likely to sign with Colts

    I'd love to land Breeland but I always hate when we have a visit and then a guy is already heading somewhere else afterwards. typically we won't get in to a bidding war over a guy, especially this late in the game. With the cap room we have and the fact that signing now do not impact comp picks for next year, I'd love to see us sign him. Ryan Grant only got 1 year and $5M from us after the Ravens backed out of his 4 year $29M deal. I wonder what Breeland will get from us or someone after his 3 year $24M deal was torn up. I'd be happy w a one year deal in the $5-$6M range or a longer term contract in the range of 3 years and $20M which would be around what DJ Hayden got when signing w Jacksonville.
  14. TomDiggs

    Your Surpise Starter(s) for 2018

    Agreed 100% Dwight Freeney is my all-time favorite player and he was 6'1" Robert Mathis was "only" 6'2" Not saying Simon is as quick or fast as them. Just that if he fits the scheme and the coaches like what they see out of him, I don't care if he is 6'1" or 6'5".
  15. Howard isn't amazing but he is better than "just a guy". In his last 3 seasons (40 games) he has 11 total penalties (4 false starts, 4 holds) and has allowed 12.0 sacks. That comes out to an average of 4.4 penalties and 4.8 sacks per season based on a pro-rated 16 game schedule Compare that to: Good- 4.7 penalties, 4.7 sacks Haeg- 4.1 penalties, 6.5 sacks Basically (at the very worst), Howard is as good as or slightly better than Good and Haeg but he has done it for longer and has held those averages over a greater number of contests. If he had a similar year to last year where he only allowed 4 sacks on the season and committed 4 penalties on the year then I would be more than content with that out of a 16 game starter at RT. I know these numbers don't tell the whole story (i.e. pressures, etc). But considering we dont have many metrics to go off of for OL and we don't have full insight into what goes into a PFF grade or any other grade for OL, I just tried to get some context. Again, not saying Howard is amazing. Not saying he is even going to unseat Good or Haeg. But he is at least in the same ballpark with more experience. And considering Good's health history, I would not want to put all my eggs in his basket.
  16. Looks like we waived Isaiah Williams (G) when we brought in Howard. My bad- looks like Stitches posted it just as I did. Sorry for the duplicate response.
  17. TomDiggs

    What did we just do

    One of the pluses about Leonard is he has been a tackling machine and that he displayed some great coverage skills at the senior bowl from what's being said. Part of his scouting report stated "He's athletic enough to compete with backs and long enough to compete with tight ends in man coverage." I have only seen a little bit of him, but from everything out there he was essentially the best remaining off-ball LB.
  18. I love love love our Nelson pick. For folks saying stuff like "we shouldn't have taken a guard. there was better valuer elsewhere", I need to strongly disagree. There was no worthy pass rusher. Smith and Edmunds are playing LB spots that are not edge rushing LBs. Guys like that never go at pick 6 just like Guards don't go at 6. Last Guard in this range was Jonathan Cooper a few years back at 7. Non rush LBs typically go around 10 or so. Aaron Curry is the only top-5 one I can think of. Guys like Kuechly and Willis and such went around 9-11 or so. Smith went at 8. Edmunds hung around till what? 16. Many on this forum debated Smith vs Edmunds with most wanting Edmunds more (I preferred Smith for what it is worth). I think taking Nelson over Smith was the right move, but taking an OG or a WLB there isn't the typical value spots you go with pick 6. I think both would have met with criticism from a bunch of our fan base. Can't please everyone i guess. This mini run on interior OL going on at the bottom of the 1st is already thinning options. Hernandez and Wynn are there but it could dry up quickly. I get people being upset about taking an OL and not a sexy spot but between Nelson and Smith I would pick Nelson over and over personally.
  19. I am still holding out slight hope that we would take Nelson. I have a feeling it may be false hope, but I am hoping nonetheless. The way I see it, yes there is depth at interior OL. No there isn't ideal depth at pass rusher. But Chubb will likely be gone. I am not sure if the depth at LB is better than interior OL or on par. That said, Jonathan Cooper is the last OG (and only one in my memory) that went super high. I think he went 7th or so. And Nelson to me looks waaaaay better as a prospect. I like Smith and Edmunds. I am good with either of them. I think I slightly prefer Smith, but that is neither here no there. Either way, I cannot think of many non-rushing LBs that went in the top-6 or so. As i said in another thread i think the last one was maybe Aaron Curry. He looked like a can't miss generational prospect at the time and we know that did not work out well lol. I hope that we don't pass up Nelson for Smith or Edmunds. But currently all signs indicate we likely will. I wonder how much of that is smoke and mirrors in lying season and how much is true.
  20. I'd be very curious to see how things went if the top-5 picks in front of us went this way. With only Josh Allen left of the big 4 QBs, I could definitely see a team like Buffalo or Miami or Az trying to move up. And even falling back to 11-12 or so wouldn't be bad since we could still land a solid player like any of the those currently listed in their top-11 or even Minkah Fitzpatrick. If we stayed at 6 in that scenario, I would hope we just take Nelson. But I know the idea of taking a LB (that isn't a pass rusher) or an OG at pick 6 is a bit unconventional. Excited to see how this shakes out in 3 days
  21. I think this is pretty spot-on generally speaking. Non pass-rushing LBs have not gone high historically. Some that have are good. Others not so much. Recent ones (first non-rushing LB taken): H.Reddick- 13th (2017) A.Barr- 9th (2014) L.Kuechly- 9th (2012) R.McClain- 8th (2010) A.Curry- 4th (2009) B.Cushing- 15th (2009) K.Rivers- 9th (2008) J.Mayo- 10th (2008) To my knowledge, those are the only LBs taken in the top-15 in the past 10 or so years that were not taken with the mindset of them being pass rushers. Guys like Vic Beasley and even (at the time) Barkevious Mingo were taken in the top-10 but were thought of as guys who would attack the QB when they were taken. This is not to say that R.Smith or Edmunds are not going to be good players. Just meant to show that a non pass rushing LB is usually going somewhere around 8-10 or later in most instances. So I can see where many folks say something like "if we are going to take Smith then we should trade back from 6".
  22. Great question. I do wonder if the Colts would see Smith as a WILL and Edmunds as a MIKE? That being said, the more important thing isn't whether we as Colts fans would want an Urlacher vs a Brooks. It is probably more important which position will be more critical to the success of Eberflus' defense. Remember that just recently (heading into the 2015 season) Eberflus (or Marinelli or whoever you wanna pin the rose on) took his very best LB in Sean Lee and purposefully moved him out of the MIKE spot into the WILL spot to feature him more and better use his skill set. Part of that was to help with Lee's injury history, but the other part was to allow him to really just attack the ball and not get caught up in any of the muck. Lee had his two best years following that and basically 3 of his 4 best years after the move. If Eberflus' D is going to feature the WILL in the way that some of our old Colts Ds did and the old TB Ds did, then I would probably lean towards Smith over Edmunds. If our D was going to feature our MLB more, then Edmunds is probably the slightly wiser move. I don't think we can go wrong w either player, but I would probably prefer Smith simply based on the historical success of the WLB in Eberflus' recent defensive scheme that he coached.
  23. Curious to see if Bears match that. It is very, very reasonable. I will be mad that we did not get him for that if they choose to not match it.
  24. TomDiggs

    Mel Kiper: Colts & Dolphins in deep discussion of trade

    Agreed on this. At least (2) 2nds to fall back if it is for a franchise QB that is lingering and there is a market. Also, if the Bills or someone else gives the equivalent of (3) 1s to move up (i.e. the Bills give 12, 22 and a future 1 for the #2 or #4 pick) then the price of #6 goes up if we know it is for a similarly rated QB prospect. I would be good with moving back for 11, a 2 this year and a 2 next year. But that would probably be the cheapest deal I'd be willing to move for personally.
  25. I still get baffled at how many mock trades these writers and experts propose that have us trading pick 6 and another pick just to get 12 and 22 with Buffalo. I suppose that'd be normal if it were to move up in a vacuum. But in this circumstance that every beat writer seems to highlight, it is to move up for one of two things (both QB scenarios): 1. A top 3 QB falls to 6 after only 2 QBs go in the top 5 2. A big run on QBs hits the top 5 with 3-4 going Both these scenarios create huge desire for our pick. Either a top-3 QB lingers (who could easily be the top or the 2nd rated QB on a team's board that is looking to move up), or the last legit prospect on a team's ranking board is remaining and they desperately need to move up to secure him. In both scenarios the premium is going to be more than the norm. I just cannot see the Colts moving back from 6 unless it is for some crazy offer. Something like 12, 22 and a second rounder this year or a first next year. I cannot see Buffalo making that offer to us unless they try with the Giants, Browns and Broncos and fail three times and we are the next ones up. But crazier stuff has happened so who knows. At this point I am actually hoping to just stay at 6 and pick unless only 2 QBs are gone. Then I say trade back and see what happens.