Pro-Football 2015 depth charts / pre-FA and draft

[rock8591]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/02/24/2015-depth-charts-indianapolis-colts/

 

A very premature postulation and they're at it already...

 

Vick Ballard who hasn't played in 2 seasons...Average starter?

Coby Fleener - deserves upgrade to Good starter.

Khaled Holmes as Poor starter...yet Harrison at Below average and Shipley at Average...

Arthur Jones is a Good starter, not Below average. Injuries were the only factor that kept him down last year.

Erik Walden and D'Quell Jackson should be upgraded to Average starter.

Greg Toler should be upgraded to Average starter (factoring in injury history).

Bjoern Werner should be upgraded to Average starter - not 1st round material, but a Jarrett Johnson at worst. If he was a 4th rounder, people would be calling him a steal.

 

People can speculate all they want about our "easy" schedule, but for a team that was 1 game away from making the Super Bowl, to have 75% of the roster as Average, Below, Poor, or Unknown seems awfully strange. Maybe to make it, we should have 100% of the roster as Poor.

[NBColtsFanatic]

That is a dumb list. They do not know any of thos players I guess

...

[rock8591]

P.S. I reviewed the website some more...

 

They (along with us fans) blast Bjoern Werner...yet they list Dion Jordan as an Average Starter. DJ is an ATHLETE with a good combine, not a football player. He does not remotely have a track history of success in the football world, even in NCAA days. Most number of sacks in a season is 7.5

 

Same website also has Dontari Poe as simply Good Starter and not Elite, where he is. Name a NT that is better right now than him.

 

Also had Connor Barwin (14.5 sacks, made the Pro-Bowl) as AVERAGE. LOL.

 

 

 

P.S. This is the chart I would use. Click to enlarge.

 

[scooter4910]

That is a dumb list. They do not know any of thos players I guess

...

I doubt Gordon McGuinness knows anything about the Colts personally. It appears he's a numbers cruncher. But with that, based upon the numbers he probably has a semblance of credibility.

[Superman]

I doubt Gordon McGuinness knows anything about the Colts personally. It appears he's a numbers cruncher. But with that, based upon the numbers he probably has a semblance of credibility.

 

They watch every game, and grade every player. Then they rewatch the coaches' film and adjust their grades. Some fans on these boards can't even watch every game, much less rewatch. These charts are based on those grades, not stats. 

 

I often disagree with PFF's grades, but they aren't numbers crunchers who don't know anything about football.

[rock8591]

I find myself skeptical that anyone outside of coaches and players watch the game in detail, much less some online magazine that's in the business of selling premium subscriptions. I've seen the games without missing a single down (bathroom breaks during commercials), and I can say that some stuff on PFF is so hilarious, it feels like they've trying to be as outrageous as possible to spark controversy.

 

It just seems far more believable that they skim the games, and then write whatever they need to write for their product, much of the time using stats to lean on.

 

e.g. according to PFF, our team is about the same as the Jags, Titans, and Raiders.

[COLTS449]

A lot of PFF's stuff is accurate, but stuff like this is just stupid to me.

[Superman]

I find myself skeptical that anyone outside of coaches and players watch the game in detail, much less some online magazine that's in the business of selling premium subscriptions. I've seen the games without missing a single down (bathroom breaks during commercials), and I can say that some stuff on PFF is so hilarious, it feels like they've trying to be as outrageous as possible to spark controversy.

 

It just seems far more believable that they skim the games, and then write whatever they need to write for their product, much of the time using stats to lean on.

 

e.g. according to PFF, our team is about the same as the Jags, Titans, and Raiders.

 

Not only do they grade every play, they chart every game. You can't build a website like theirs by skimming the games and making stuff up. They even sell some of their stuff to NFL teams. They can't just make up how many times a DB was matched up against a WR; they can't make up how many times an edge rusher rushed the passer vs how many times he dropped into coverage. None of that is in a box score.

 

Grades, however, are totally subjective. They admit as much. Two people who know the game very well can watch the same game, maybe even together, and come up with entirely different grades from each other. But they can chart the same game, and they'll probably be very close to each other.

 

It's cool to dislike their product. But it's entirely another to pretend like they're faking their product. It's an untenable position. It's not even a conspiracy theory; it's just a petty gripe.

 

As for this particular criticism -- our team being rated similar to cellar dwellers -- well, that's a legit criticism. And it exposes the biggest flaw in their approach. Football is a team game, so individual grades are often irrelevant. For example, if you have a QB who can escape pressure, it's less of an issue when your line gives up pressure. So you can have two linemen take a negative grade on one play, and the QB takes a positive grade on the same play, yet the linemen skew the grade in the negative even though your QB scrambled for a first down. That's a simplistic take, but it should illustrate why a total of individual grades aren't a good way to grade an entire team.

 

That's why I don't pay attention to these charts, as it pertains to the product on the field. They are applying an individual player grading system to a team game, and even if their grading was completely above reproach and I agreed with every grade they give, that would still be a poor application of their grades.

[Superman]

A lot of PFF's stuff is accurate, but stuff like this is just stupid to me.

 

That's because they're applying individual player grades to team performance, or at least these charts give that impression. 

[scooter4910]

They watch every game, and grade every player. Then they rewatch the coaches' film and adjust their grades. Some fans on these boards can't even watch every game, much less rewatch. These charts are based on those grades, not stats. 

 

I often disagree with PFF's grades, but they aren't numbers crunchers who don't know anything about football.

I didn't say they didn't know anything about football Superman...overexaggerate much.

[Superman]

I didn't say they didn't know anything about football Superman...overexaggerate much.

 

Okay, you said you doubt the article writer knows anything about the Colts. Pretend that's what I said. 

 

The chart is a compilation of their grades, which come from watching the games. That's all I'm saying. My daughter could have written the article, and it wouldn't matter. I'm saying the people who grade the games watch them very carefully.

[scooter4910]

Okay, you said you doubt the article writer knows anything about the Colts. Pretend that's what I said. 

 

The chart is a compilation of their grades, which come from watching the games. That's all I'm saying. My daughter could have written the article, and it wouldn't matter. I'm saying the people who grade the games watch them very carefully.

So your assuming that the writer is familiar enough with all the Colts players to accurately judge their worth in not only the league but on the Colts.....and it's not about number/stat crunching? hmmmm

[Superman]

So your assuming that the writer is familiar enough with all the Colts players to accurately judge their worth in not only the league but on the Colts.....and it's not about number/stat crunching? hmmmm

No.

All the "writer" did is post a chart.

[Flash7]

I find myself skeptical that anyone outside of coaches and players watch the game in detail, much less some online magazine that's in the business of selling premium subscriptions. I've seen the games without missing a single down (bathroom breaks during commercials), and I can say that some stuff on PFF is so hilarious, it feels like they've trying to be as outrageous as possible to spark controversy.

It just seems far more believable that they skim the games, and then write whatever they need to write for their product, much of the time using stats to lean on.

e.g. according to PFF, our team is about the same as the Jags, Titans, and Raiders.

You can make an argument that if Luck was on the Jaguars or the Titans, that they would contend for the AFC South conference.

Imagine Bortles or Mettenberger on the Colts. We would finish at the bottom of the league.

We really are not a talented roster. We have a few elite and very good players and a lot of positions that need vast improvement. I would contend that our talent level overall actually is below average.

[SteelCityColt]

Let's all face it.. people disregard PFF because it's based in the UK and what do we know about football  

[Dustin]

All of those seem accurate.

[Valpo2004]

How in the world is Trent Richardson not listed as poor?  

 

Isn't it a little early to put Moncrief as average?  He had good moments last year but not enough of them to list him as average IMO.

 

Fleener should be good.  He was top 10 in receiving yards among TE's.  

 

Cherilus should be average

 

Art Jones should be good

 

Walden and D'qwell average

 

Mathis is more of an unknown right now if you ask me.  

 

Toler should be average

 

Vinitari should be very good.  He was an all pro at his position.  

 

Don't know how Overton got listed as below average.  

 

Agree it's very odd that a team that made the conference championship game has a third of it's starters listed as below average or poor.

[mattceinicram]

I find a pre-draft and FA depth chart a bit pointless

[Dustin]

 

e.g. according to PFF, our team is about the same as the Jags, Titans, and Raiders.

 

Yep. Which is probably the case. We have a franchise QB though. 

[rock8591]

Here's my own updated chart. I am assuming no other FA signings (to be on the conservative side). e.g. assuming no Knighton, Dan Williams, Stefan Wisniewski, etc. Also, I declined to speculate rounds 3-7 of the draft, but listed us as taking a DE in round 1 and Safety in round 2.

 

I upgraded Coby Fleener to Good because almost 800 yards receiving and 8 TDs warranted being more than Average.

Andre Johnson and Frank Gore - I listed at Good for now due to age being an uncertain factor.

Robert Mathis - I listed as Good (PUP) with uncertainty there, and slid Trent Cole into the starting lineup.

Walden and Werner - I kept at Below Average, not Poor.

D'Qwell Jackson - I upgraded to Average.

Gosder Cherilus is a question mark with his injury, so I struck a medium and upgraded him to Average.

 

I highly predict we will draft in the first 3 rounds a DL, OL, and Safety (no particular order).

 

[Warhorse]

Walden is better than average.