Phillip Dorsett will have a better season than Donte Moncrief.

[Archangel]

IMO The colts have good quality WR, Montcrief will do fine in his second season much improved due to understanding of the play book and the speed of the game. Dorsett will play more ST until he can understand the playbook and the quickness of the game. Then you got carter he is the one I want to see and how he performs on the field if he is worth all the hype that everyone is talking about. I think their will be a lot of rotations to keep them fresh for the year. But it will all come down to it can any of them read a defense

[Chucklez]

Phillip Dorsett is not our "4th wide receiver at best." He is our 3rd WR target, and the heir apparent to Andre Johnson two or three years down the road.

 

How on earth is a 5 ft 10" speedy WR the heir apparent to a 6ft 3" WR.... Dorsett is almost a carbon copy of TY.... Moncrief is 6ft 2" and has way more similarities to Johnson. If anyone is going to get more playing time to replace him it would in fact be Moncrief.

 

[shakedownstreet]

[TKnight24]

Not entirely sure why it matters who has the better year long as they both stay healthy and contribute but glad you got that off your chest cause it seems like that's been bothering you for quite some time now

[TKnight24]

How on earth is a 5 ft 10" speedy WR the heir apparent to a 6ft 3" WR.... Dorsett is almost a carbon copy of TY.... Moncrief is 6ft 2" and has way more similarities to Johnson. If anyone is going to get more playing time to replace him it would in fact be Moncrief.

I guess any WR taken in the 1st is the heir apparent.

Next CB we take in the 1st will be Vontae apparent I suppose

[horseshoeblue22]

I am not calling Moncrief a lousy receiver, or even knocking him, I am just pointing out the facts. He had less than 450 yards in his rookie season, thats fact. Over a 1/4 of his yardage came from TWO of his 32 catches, thats fact.

People "loathe" the Dorsett pick because we already have Moncrief and Carter. Why? All indications are that Dorsett is a better route runner, faster and a more natural hands catcher than either Moncrief or Carter. Whats the problem?

Moncrief is not a "beast"...not any more than any other NFL receiver that has had a 450 yard season. As a Colts fan I hope every WR on the team goes for 2,000 yards and Luck throws for 20,000 yards a season...but thats not realistic.

As far as I am concerned, the team doesnt have to "justify the pick" to anyone. Dorsett's performance will do that, whether they are complimenting his progress in OTAs or not. By picking Dorsett, it is an indication that they don't trust Moncrief to develop past WR4 status this year, and they don't trust Carter to contribute this year. If either of these things happen, thats great for the team...I just dont understand the hype surrounding Moncrief any time Dorsett is brought up.

Our offensive production tailed off last year when Reggie got hurt and Nicks was being phased out. This is not a "first rd pick vs third rd pick" thing. When Moncrief was asked to take on a larger role, our offense took a step back. Thats not trashing him, thats fact. We had injuries to deal with at the same time, but it seems the coaching staff views Moncrief as better suited for a WR4 role than as a WR3. Andre was brought in to replace Reggie. Phillip was brought in to replace Hakeem. Moncrief's role will stay the same, probably around 500 rec yards and 3 to 5 TDs. Carter will have to prove he has NFL talent to even make the team.

The defenses that shut us down were able to man up on Moncrief, Nicks and an injured Wayne, bracket Hilton and mix in a heavy dose of blitzes at Trent and Luck. With a beefed up WR group and Gore in the back field, we are much better equipped against the blitzes that shut us down at times last year.

The Dorsett pick makes us a much better offense. Our line will have an easier time because they wont be facing blitzes all of the time. Dorsett excels at beating man coverage, where Moncrief struggled. If defenses have to put an extra guy or two deep, our running lanes will be wide open.

Why "loathe" the Dorsett pick? Moncrief is a decent young prospect, but its not like he is so good there is no way Dorsett will pass him on the depth chart. Arguably, he has already passed him. Thats not a knock on Moncrief, thats a testament to how talented Dorsett is...don't get it twisted.

[horseshoeblue22]

How on earth is a 5 ft 10" speedy WR the heir apparent to a 6ft 3" WR.... Dorsett is almost a carbon copy of TY.... Moncrief is 6ft 2" and has way more similarities to Johnson. If anyone is going to get more playing time to replace him it would in fact be Moncrief.

I was referring to the fact Andre is 33 or 34 years old, not that he is 6'3". Dorsett is our 3rd WR now, likely our KR/PR now and will be the no. 2 target behind Hilton when we move on from Andre in a few years. That is worth the investment the FO has put into Dorsett. It just seems like Colts fans around here are ready to discredit the Dorsett pick because he isn't an offensive guard or nose tackle. Give me a break.

Seriously, why is it so much to ask fans here to look at the team objectively? People were going bananas over Da'Rick Rogers and now going gaga over Moncrief. Why cant we all just admit our players are what they are? No Dolphins fans are complaining they drafted DeVante Parker when they already had Kenny Stills, Jarvis Landry and Greg Jennings. We are all Colts fans, but we don't have to pretend each and every player on the back end of our roster are all superstars.

[Malakai432]

I think Dorsett will eventually compete with TY as a #1. That being said I think they will also have the combination of Dorsett, TY & Moncrief on the team for years to come. I think Moncrief and Carter will bring added height and jump skill abilities while TY and Dorsett will bring their blazing speed. I think Dorsett will be similar to Antonio Brown IMO, while TY will be, welp TY.

[BOTT]

Dunno if that's really true. I think the amount drafted in first round even trumps the # of O Linemen as you have 5 startingO linemen on each team. In any event very significant # of WR's taken early

 

2015   First 41 picks included 9 WR's. ( 6 in first round)

 

2014   First 45  picks included 8 WR's (5in first round)

 

Franchise tags seem to indicate teams value the position as much as any other excluding QB and DE....

 

 

Quarterbacks: $18.51 million (That's up significantly from $16.91 million last year). 

Running backs: $10.93 millionWide receivers: $12.80 millionTight ends: $8.33 millionOffensive linemen: $12.93 millionDefensive tackle: $11.17 millionDefensive ends: $14.78 millionLinebackers: $13.17 millionCornerbacks: $13.05 millionSafeties: $9.60 millionKickers/Punters: $4.12 million

Not sure the flawed franchise tag proves anything.....especially when you see that a tagged RB makes only slightly less than a tagged DT......which is insane.

And they can go ahead and keep drafting receivers early, and I will continue to roll my eyes.

[Ryan Pelley]

Always nice to claim a guy will do this or that before even playing an NFL game.

[dw49]

Not sure the flawed franchise tag proves anything.....especially when you see that a tagged RB makes only slightly less than a tagged DT......which is insane.

And they can go ahead and keep drafting receivers early, and I will continue to roll my eyes.

 

 

Well I guess you're eyes really have been worn out badly during the two most recent NFL drafts as this is what the people that are being paid millions are doing in the draft. Like I said 9 of the first 41 players selected this year were WR's . Last year 5 in the first round.

Just because Pittsburgh drafted Antonio Brown in the late rounds does not prove your point. How is that anymore convincing than say Jason Peters not being drafted at all ? But you're entitled to your opinion.

 

As far as the tag going , I could say that guys like Demarco Murray did not get tagged and signed for around 8 mill per year. No RB was tagged this year while Thomas and Bryant were tagged. If you want to see what NFL salaries really tell you about how the different positions are valued go to overthepap.com. Then toward the top of the page , just under the 2 columns listing the 32 teams , you will see the different positions. Then just click on WR . You'll see 10 WR's making over 10 mill per year. Now click on Left tackle and you'll see 5 making 10 mill per year. So Lt gets more ( 1 per team vs at least 2 staring WR's(  but pretty close. Right Tackle the contracts are 8 mill and down. I'm shocked at that one. Check your LB's out .. the top WRs make way more. Check out the Dt's ...Again top WR's earn more. I didn't bother doing safeties or RB's as we know they are lower n the pay scale. So I think my statement regarding the tag is pretty valid . In any event just look at what the top Wr's make compared to the other position and it just blows apart any argument that "WR's are getting close to being a dime a dozen." I do understand that it only proves my point as far as what the people that own and manage these teams think ..  money usually talks. Take a look at the site I gave you and tell me what you think .

[Gavin]

Great players at ANY position can be found in later rounds...There should be no debate about that

 

Bad players can be drafted in early rounds...Again there should be no debate about that

 

Regardless if your Andrew Luck or Blaine Freakin Gabbert you need good to great WR's.

 

If Andrew Luck had to throw to 3-4 DHB's only then it does not matter how good Luck is he along with the rest of the team is screwed

 

You need good wr's just like you need a great QB......Nobody has said this or will but back when Peyton and Marvin was a Colt Marvin did have to come up with plenty of circus like catches as did other wr's.....It takes BOTH but it does obviously START with a QB

[horseshoeblue22]

Always nice to claim a guy will do this or that before even playing an NFL game.

Isn't that what everyone does? That's why we get draft grades the day after the draft is over. Some people are going nuts over Carter, hyping up the guy based on what he did in the CFL the last two years after going undrafted. Dorsett is much more talented than Carter. Duron couldn't even make an NFL roster two years ago, but now we are to believe he's a superstar because hes got the size?

Dorsett is about the same size as Marvin Harrison. Hes not too small. With the rule changes regarding defensive contact against WRs, the small, quick WR with ankle breaking agility will become more of the norm. Antonio Brown and TY Hilton were arguably two of the most productive WRs in the league last year, and neither are bigger than Dorsett.

I've spent a lot of time defending the Dorsett pick this offseason, from several different angles. I've been called stupid, a fool, and even a troll. The front office thought he was worth the pick, and were ecstatic about adding him to our offense.

Why do some fans have the be so negative? Its not like Dorsett has been our only addition this offseason. We've added two RBs, three other WRs, three o linemen, a pass rusher, three down linemen, two safeties and a corner. Thats not even mentioning any UDFAs that might make the squad. Dorsett is just one piece of the puzzle.

Why is it fans are so quick to throw the o line, the run defense and Trent Richardson under the bus, but run to the defense of a player like Moncrief?

You'll believe what you want to believe, I guess I can't convince you otherwise. But if you want to believe Dan Herron and Donte Moncrief are elite talents because they have catchy nicknames, then perhaps you are the stupid one, the fool or the troll...or a homer at best.

[NewColtsFan]

Great players at ANY position can be found in later rounds...There should be no debate about that

 

Bad players can be drafted in early rounds...Again there should be no debate about that

 

Regardless if your Andrew Luck or Blaine Freakin Gabbert you need good to great WR's.

 

If Andrew Luck had to throw to 3-4 DHB's only then it does not matter how good Luck is he along with the rest of the team is screwed

 

You need good wr's just like you need a great QB......Nobody has said this or will but back when Peyton and Marvin was a Colt Marvin did have to come up with plenty of circus like catches as did other wr's.....It takes BOTH but it does obviously START with a QB

 

I think we've danced this dance before....

 

But there are far fewer great players drafted in later rounds than there are bad players taken in earlier rounds.

 

In your words -- there should be no debate about that.

 

That's why teams are much more willing to trade late picks than they are willing to trade earlier picks.

 

Yes,   there are some great players found in later rounds.

 

Yes,  there are plenty of bad players taken in early rounds.

 

But it's not the same number.    Not even close.    One far outweighs the other.....

[dw49]

Great players at ANY position can be found in later rounds...There should be no debate about that

 

Bad players can be drafted in early rounds...Again there should be no debate about that

 

Regardless if your Andrew Luck or Blaine Freakin Gabbert you need good to great WR's.

 

If Andrew Luck had to throw to 3-4 DHB's only then it does not matter how good Luck is he along with the rest of the team is screwed

 

You need good wr's just like you need a great QB......Nobody has said this or will but back when Peyton and Marvin was a Colt Marvin did have to come up with plenty of circus like catches as did other wr's.....It takes BOTH but it does obviously START with a QB

 

Other than Brady , I can't think of too many good QB's drafted in the late rounds . Years ago yes.. plenty of them. Can't really count R Wilson in the 3rd I don't think. But maybe that's because they are so "over drafted " to begin with. We all do agree that it does indeed start with the QB.

[dw49]

I think we've danced this dance before....

 

But there are far fewer great players drafted in later rounds than there are bad players taken in earlier rounds.

 

In your words -- there should be no debate about that.

 

That's why teams are much more willing to trade late picks than they are willing to trade earlier picks.

 

Yes,   there are some great players found in later rounds.

 

Yes,  there are plenty of bad players taken in early rounds.

 

But it's not the same number.    Not even close.    One far outweighs the other.....

 

 

I think he's referring to the premise that you can get all the good WR's you want later in the draft.

[Gavin]

I think we've danced this dance before....

 

But there are far fewer great players drafted in later rounds than there are bad players taken in earlier rounds.

 

In your words -- there should be no debate about that.

 

That's why teams are much more willing to trade late picks than they are willing to trade earlier picks.

 

Yes,   there are some great players found in later rounds.

 

Yes,  there are plenty of bad players taken in early rounds.

 

But it's not the same number.    Not even close.    One far outweighs the other.....

Sure but round also does not dictate the kind of career you will have in the NFL

[CanuckColt]

Moncrief has learned a lot last year about being a pro receiver....Dorsett still needs to learn it.

And if Luck really needs a completion this year he will throw to Moncrief before Dorsett.

This is a learning year for Dorsett with 'some' contributions, probably in the 2nd half of the season.

[BOTT]

Well I guess you're eyes really have been worn out badly during the two most recent NFL drafts as this is what the people that are being paid millions are doing in the draft. Like I said 9 of the first 41 players selected this year were WR's . Last year 5 in the first round.

Just because Pittsburgh drafted Antonio Brown in the late rounds does not prove your point. How is that anymore convincing than say Jason Peters not being drafted at all ? But you're entitled to your opinion.

 

As far as the tag going , I could say that guys like Demarco Murray did not get tagged and signed for around 8 mill per year. No RB was tagged this year while Thomas and Bryant were tagged. If you want to see what NFL salaries really tell you about how the different positions are valued go to overthepap.com. Then toward the top of the page , just under the 2 columns listing the 32 teams , you will see the different positions. Then just click on WR . You'll see 10 WR's making over 10 mill per year. Now click on Left tackle and you'll see 5 making 10 mill per year. So Lt gets more ( 1 per team vs at least 2 staring WR's(  but pretty close. Right Tackle the contracts are 8 mill and down. I'm shocked at that one. Check your LB's out .. the top WRs make way more. Check out the Dt's ...Again top WR's earn more. I didn't bother doing safeties or RB's as we know they are lower n the pay scale. So I think my statement regarding the tag is pretty valid . In any event just look at what the top Wr's make compared to the other position and it just blows apart any argument that "WR's are getting close to being a dime a dozen." I do understand that it only proves my point as far as what the people that own and manage these teams think ..  money usually talks. Take a look at the site I gave you and tell me what you think .

Oh wow, the ever popular "they get paid millions of dollars to make these decisions and you don't" argument. Thanks for that. Yes, these are the same guys who all agreed that Trent Richardson was a can't miss prospect and passed on Tom Brady half a dozen times and continually make horrible decisions in free agency. But considering the groupthink mentality if the NFL, none of this should be surprising.

And it's not just Antonio Brown. The high school and college game are pass happy and there are more and more receivers entering the league than ever before. Meanwhile, there are only so many 6'6 315 left tackles walking the earth.

I get that that receivers are getting paid and and are getting drafted high.....I just don't agree with it.

And you keep posting what the NFL thinks they are worth. Thing is, I don't care....because I disagree with them. Doesn't mean I'm right, but me thinks I am.

[BOTT]

Great players at ANY position can be found in later rounds...There should be no debate about that

Bad players can be drafted in early rounds...Again there should be no debate about that

Regardless if your Andrew Luck or Blaine Freakin Gabbert you need good to great WR's.

If Andrew Luck had to throw to 3-4 DHB's only then it does not matter how good Luck is he along with the rest of the team is screwed

You need good wr's just like you need a great QB......Nobody has said this or will but back when Peyton and Marvin was a Colt Marvin did have to come up with plenty of circus like catches as did other wr's.....It takes BOTH but it does obviously START with a QB

wow, way to state the obvious. Yes, you can find players everywhere, but GM's having different values on different positions when it's comes to drafting.

[Surge89]

I am not calling Moncrief a lousy receiver, or even knocking him, I am just pointing out the facts. He had less than 450 yards in his rookie season, thats fact. Over a 1/4 of his yardage came from TWO of his 32 catches, thats fact.

People "loathe" the Dorsett pick because we already have Moncrief and Carter. Why? All indications are that Dorsett is a better route runner, faster and a more natural hands catcher than either Moncrief or Carter. Whats the problem?

Moncrief is not a "beast"...not any more than any other NFL receiver that has had a 450 yard season. As a Colts fan I hope every WR on the team goes for 2,000 yards and Luck throws for 20,000 yards a season...but thats not realistic.

As far as I am concerned, the team doesnt have to "justify the pick" to anyone. Dorsett's performance will do that, whether they are complimenting his progress in OTAs or not. By picking Dorsett, it is an indication that they don't trust Moncrief to develop past WR4 status this year, and they don't trust Carter to contribute this year. If either of these things happen, thats great for the team...I just dont understand the hype surrounding Moncrief any time Dorsett is brought up.

Our offensive production tailed off last year when Reggie got hurt and Nicks was being phased out. This is not a "first rd pick vs third rd pick" thing. When Moncrief was asked to take on a larger role, our offense took a step back. Thats not trashing him, thats fact. We had injuries to deal with at the same time, but it seems the coaching staff views Moncrief as better suited for a WR4 role than as a WR3. Andre was brought in to replace Reggie. Phillip was brought in to replace Hakeem. Moncrief's role will stay the same, probably around 500 rec yards and 3 to 5 TDs. Carter will have to prove he has NFL talent to even make the team.

The defenses that shut us down were able to man up on Moncrief, Nicks and an injured Wayne, bracket Hilton and mix in a heavy dose of blitzes at Trent and Luck. With a beefed up WR group and Gore in the back field, we are much better equipped against the blitzes that shut us down at times last year.

The Dorsett pick makes us a much better offense. Our line will have an easier time because they wont be facing blitzes all of the time. Dorsett excels at beating man coverage, where Moncrief struggled. If defenses have to put an extra guy or two deep, our running lanes will be wide open.

Why "loathe" the Dorsett pick? Moncrief is a decent young prospect, but its not like he is so good there is no way Dorsett will pass him on the depth chart. Arguably, he has already passed him. Thats not a knock on Moncrief, thats a testament to how talented Dorsett is...don't get it twisted.

Moncrief was the 4th receiver. To get almost as much as Nicks says more about him than anything. Your view is skewed and biased.

We loathe the pick because it was a dumb pick. I have no doubt Dorsett will put up numbers just like Reggie and Marv did. But we will again lose early in the playoffs due to the exact same issues. I don't care if Brown or Goldman flaked out of the league I just wanted Grigs to at least try and put 1st round talent to the DLine. And again we picked a receiver who will not have effecient impact on the team. He will just inflate an already inflated position.

Again you're view on Moncrief is extremely biased. He's a 3rd rounder and completely outplayed his depth and draft position. Which is why he kept getting more play time.

They most certainly have to justify that pick. It's all about winning SuperBowls and if we again get ran on for 200 yards or get blown out by the Patriots that pick will be scrutinized by its fan base who pays for the entertainment.

We struggled because Luck needed to adjust life without Reggie. Imo it was a blessing in disguise. Luck depended on Reg way too much and it showed.

"The Dorsett pick makes us a much better offense. Our line will have an easier time because they wont be facing blitzes all of the time. Dorsett excels at beating man coverage, where Moncrief struggled. If defenses have to put an extra guy or two deep, our running lanes will be wide open"

This whole paragraph is just rediculous. Talk about hypocritical.

[dw49]

Oh wow, the ever popular "they get paid millions of dollars to make these decisions and you don't" argument. Thanks for that. Yes, these are the same guys who all agreed that Trent Richardson was a can't miss prospect and passed on Tom Brady half a dozen times and continually make horrible decisions in free agency. But considering the groupthink mentality if the NFL, none of this should be surprising.

And it's not just Antonio Brown. The high school and college game are pass happy and there are more and more receivers entering the league than ever before. Meanwhile, there are only so many 6'6 315 left tackles walking the earth.

I get that that receivers are getting paid and and are getting drafted high.....I just don't agree with it.

And you keep posting what the NFL thinks they are worth. Thing is, I don't care....because I disagree with them. Doesn't mean I'm right, but me thinks I am.

 

 

"Oh wow " is not a nice way to carry on a discussion. I thought I was very respectful of your opinion and was just giving statistical evidence that the league as a whole does not share your views. 

 

As far as "you keep posting what the NFL thinks" , I posted more evidence as to the claims I made. If I'm not mistaken , we can go back and look if you like , I think you said my showing the franchises tag prices was "useless" because of where the RB's were  franchised at. So I gave you a very clear picture of how the pay scale seems to value WR's vs other positions. So if you had not just posted garbage , I would not have had to "keep posting." That said you show very little class by coming back like you have here. So adios... done with you.

[BOTT]

"Oh wow " is not a nice way to carry on a discussion. I thought I was very respectful of your opinion and was just giving statistical evidence that the league as a whole does not share your views. 

 

As far as "you keep posting what the NFL thinks" , I posted more evidence as to the claims I made. If I'm not mistaken , we can go back and look if you like , I think you said my showing the franchises tag prices was "useless" because of where the RB's were  franchised at. So I gave you a very clear picture of how the pay scale seems to value WR's vs other positions. So if you had not just posted garbage , I would not have had to "keep posting." That said you show very little class by coming back like you have here. So adios... done with you.

I posted "oh, wow" because it's an extremely lazy argument and frankly, I think you are better than than that. If you are "done with me" because of it, oh well, I won't lose any sleep over it.

I know the league disagrees.....that's obvious if one pays attention the NFL and really didn't need to be stated. And pointing out where receivers are drafted and and then pointing out how much they are paid is just being redundant.

[dw49]

I posted "oh, wow" because it's an extremely lazy argument and frankly, I think you are better than than that. If you are "done with me" because of it, oh well, I won't lose any sleep over it.

I know the league disagrees.....that's obvious if one pays attention the NFL and really didn't need to be stated. And pointing out where receivers are drafted and and then pointing out how much they are paid is just being redundant.

 

 

I don't think it's a lazy argument at all. The NFL is now a passing league and you need outstanding WR's to be better than what the top defenses are going to throw at you. To point out that teams value them greatly is IMO a valid point in the discussion . I saw Andrew Luck struggle a whole lot when Wayne and Allen were crippled up with injuries. Thus I'm OK with the selection of what might be a great WR selected at the very end of round 1. I'm not saying that because 9 out of the first 41 players were WR's slams the door on your argument. I just think that you were pretty weak in your argument pointing to Pitt and GB. The whole fright and wrong of this can't be determined without seeing the Colts board. That's my opinion.   If yours is WR's are becoming a dime a dozen .. you're entitled to it. But you didn't bring anything to the table to support it other ( IMO) than pointing outAntonio Brown was a let rounder. 

 

I would suggest we just agree to disagree and maybe we can have a more fun and productive discussion on another issue at another time. My bad saying I'm done with you.. not nice.

[horseshoeblue22]

Moncrief was the 4th receiver. To get almost as much as Nicks says more about him than anything. Your view is skewed and biased.

Moncrief was the 4th receiver and still is. The fact he produced "almost as much as Nicks" isn't a testament to how incredible Moncrief is, its a testament to how dissapointing Nicks was in Indy. Thats why we moved on from him, he wasnt giving us the production we expected out of him when we signed him as a FA. We drafted Dorsett, in part, because Hakeem Nicks failed to make an impact.

So in most Colts fans opinion it seems Hakeem's year here = a bad season...

But Moncrief, who produced "almost as much as Nicks" had a great season and has a tremendous future ahead of him.

So is 444 yards (an average of roughly 27 ypg) a great season or a poor season? You cant have it both ways and then turn around and call ME hypocritical.

[Gavin]

Moncrief was the 4th receiver and still is. The fact he produced "almost as much as Nicks" isn't a testament to how incredible Moncrief is, its a testament to how dissapointing Nicks was in Indy. Thats why we moved on from him, he wasnt giving us the production we expected out of him when we signed him as a FA. We drafted Dorsett, in part, because Hakeem Nicks failed to make an impact.

So in most Colts fans opinion it seems Hakeem's year here = a bad season...

But Moncrief, who produced "almost as much as Nicks" had a great season and has a tremendous future ahead of him.

So is 444 yards (an average of roughly 27 ypg) a great season or a poor season? You cant have it both ways and then turn around and call ME hypocritical.

Moncrief played roughly 411 offensive snaps and was only targeted 49 times, Nicks on the other hand played roughly 576 offensive snaps and was targeted 70 times...Nicks still only had 6 more receptions and Moncrief had 35 less yards then Nicks and only 1 less TD on 165 less snaps http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/snapcounts

 

Its quite clear who had the better season in my opinion

[horseshoeblue22]

Moncrief had a better season than Nicks, all things considered...I am not disputing that.

But 411 offensive snaps and only 49 targets, 32 catches, 444 yards and 3 TDs to show for it...I don't see how anyone can say that is a great season by any means.

[akcolt]

Moncrief had a better season than Nicks, all things considered...I am not disputing that.

But 411 offensive snaps and only 49 targets, 32 catches, 444 yards and 3 TDs to show for it...I don't see how anyone can say that is a great season by any means.

It wasn't a great season and the opportunity was there to over take anyone in the depth chart except TY.

He had exactly ZERO catches vs NE both games. He has all the makings to be a really good WR. He is like most WR that come in the league you will see him really put it all together year 3. Then we will have a beast IMO.

Dorsett IMO much like TY is going to make a seamless transition to the NFL. He's a more polished WR. He has speed runs good routes and great hands. He will be very popular on here by week 4.

[BOTT]

I don't think it's a lazy argument at all. The NFL is now a passing league and you need outstanding WR's to be better than what the top defenses are going to throw at you. To point out that teams value them greatly is IMO a valid point in the discussion . I saw Andrew Luck struggle a whole lot when Wayne and Allen were crippled up with injuries. Thus I'm OK with the selection of what might be a great WR selected at the very end of round 1. I'm not saying that because 9 out of the first 41 players were WR's slams the door on your argument. I just think that you were pretty weak in your argument pointing to Pitt and GB. The whole fright and wrong of this can't be determined without seeing the Colts board. That's my opinion.   If yours is WR's are becoming a dime a dozen .. you're entitled to it. But you didn't bring anything to the table to support it other ( IMO) than pointing outAntonio Brown was a let rounder. 

 

I would suggest we just agree to disagree and maybe we can have a more fun and productive discussion on another issue at another time. My bad saying I'm done with you.. not nice.

I pointed to GB and Pitt as examples.....that doesn't mean there aren't others......if I wanted to make a list I could have started right here with TY. And I never mentioned Antonio Brown.....I used Pitt as an example, because like GB, none of there receivers are first rounders and both have great passing attacks.

But you are right, we should just agree to disagree. And I apologize if I offended you earlier.....things written out often appear much harsher than when they appear in my head.....but I should know that by now.

[akcolt]

I pointed to GB and Pitt as examples.....that doesn't mean there aren't others......if I wanted to make a list I could have started right here with TY. And I never mentioned Antonio Brown.....I used Pitt as an example, because like GB, none of there receivers are first rounders and both have great passing attacks.

But you are right, we should just agree to disagree. And I apologize if I offended you earlier.....things written out often appear much harsher than when they appear in my head.....but I should know that by now.

Green Bay's top WR's Jordy Randall and Adams are all 2nd rounders.

Dorsett was 5 picks from being a 2nd rounder.

[BOTT]

Green Bay's top WR's Jordy Randall and Adams are all 2nd rounders.

Dorsett was 5 picks from being a 2nd rounder.

Thanks for clarifying that GB didn't spend a first on any of their receivers. I kid.....

[dw49]

I pointed to GB and Pitt as examples.....that doesn't mean there aren't others......if I wanted to make a list I could have started right here with TY. And I never mentioned Antonio Brown.....I used Pitt as an example, because like GB, none of there receivers are first rounders and both have great passing attacks.

But you are right, we should just agree to disagree. And I apologize if I offended you earlier.....things written out often appear much harsher than when they appear in my head.....but I should know that by now.

 

Bottom line is we have Luck and I think all Grigson needs to do is something above average and we should get a couple of SB's. 

[RockThatBlue]

Moncrief was the 4th receiver and still is. The fact he produced "almost as much as Nicks" isn't a testament to how incredible Moncrief is, its a testament to how dissapointing Nicks was in Indy. Thats why we moved on from him, he wasnt giving us the production we expected out of him when we signed him as a FA. We drafted Dorsett, in part, because Hakeem Nicks failed to make an impact.

So in most Colts fans opinion it seems Hakeem's year here = a bad season...

But Moncrief, who produced "almost as much as Nicks" had a great season and has a tremendous future ahead of him.

So is 444 yards (an average of roughly 27 ypg) a great season or a poor season? You cant have it both ways and then turn around and call ME hypocritical.

You do realize Moncrief barely saw the field at all til week 7 or 8? Moncrief barely played the first half of the season, thus his numbers would be higher(maybe a lot higher) if he got more snaps through the first part of the season.

You're greatly undervaluing Moncrief.

[horseshoeblue22]

Thanks for clarifying that GB didn't spend a first on any of their receivers. I kid.....

You realize there is very small difference between a 1st and 2nd round pick, right? A 1st is one of 32 of the best players out of thousands of players. The 2nd round is one of the 64 best players out of thousands of players. The difference may be an inch or two in height or a tenth of a second in the 40 yard dash. A second round pick is a very valuable pick, especially when you spend three of them.

Grigson has never spent a first round pick on a WR before Dorsett. The scouts felt he was far and away the best value pick available. Malcom Brown, Eddie Goldman or whatever defensive pick wasn't a first round pick on their board. You can disagree with the scouts, but they have much more resources available to them to make these kinds of selections. They are the ones with their necks (and a possible Superbowl berth) on the line if the picks don't turn out. Maybe they thought Anderson and Parry would be just as effective as Brown and Goldman.

I am a Colts fan, so I am inclined to trust the people making the decisions for our team. If they feel Moncrief, Carter, Whalen and Brown aren't going to get us to the Superbowl, and Dorsett is the key...I trust them. I might not always agree, but we'll see what happens.

I'd rather have a carbon copy of TY than a carbon copy of Werner or Josh Chapman. I feel like other fans should feel the same way. Grigson couldn't justify using that pick on a defender with a 2nd round grade when he felt like there was an elite talent staring him back in the face. I am sure he didnt go into the draft thinking he was going to draft the best available WR no matter what. I am sure he looked at all the defensive guys on the board and figured Dorsett was just too talented to pass up.

[bananabucket]

I tend to agree with you OP, but I do think you are being too hard on Moncrief.  He was a third rounder in his rookie season, it's not like he has to blow up the stat sheets in order to show his worth.  Just from watching him play on Sundays, I think it's pretty clear that he has great potential and has a chance to be a pretty damn good WR in this league.

[Surge89]

Moncrief was the 4th receiver and still is. The fact he produced "almost as much as Nicks" isn't a testament to how incredible Moncrief is, its a testament to how dissapointing Nicks was in Indy. Thats why we moved on from him, he wasnt giving us the production we expected out of him when we signed him as a FA. We drafted Dorsett, in part, because Hakeem Nicks failed to make an impact.

So in most Colts fans opinion it seems Hakeem's year here = a bad season...

But Moncrief, who produced "almost as much as Nicks" had a great season and has a tremendous future ahead of him.

So is 444 yards (an average of roughly 27 ypg) a great season or a poor season? You cant have it both ways and then turn around and call ME hypocritical.

You are completely absorbed into your own world it's rediculous. Yes it's different for a 3rd round pick rookie to have a year like he did than a 1st round 5 year vet. Do you even read what you post? In what way is that hypocritical? You are valuing a rookie receiver who has ZERO experience in the NFL and already has a college rep of less than stellar route skills to a PROVEN 1 year 4th receiver who not only performed but performed enough to take playing time from a 5? (I think) year vet and previous 1st round receiver...

Again... you are under valuing Moncreif and over valuing Dorsett to extremes.

[Robert Johnson]

I kinda hope they both do well,since they are both Colts.

[Dark Superman]

I don't care who puts up better numbers..

I just want a ring.

[crazycolt1]

Some of you seem to think that Moncrief and Dorsett are seasoned veterans the way you talk about them. On an average it takes a receiver three years to learn how to be a receiver in the NFL. There are exceptions to the rule but not many. We have yet to see what either one of them are going to be capable of. As it stands right now we have 3 veteran receivers in Johnson, Hilton and Brown with Hilton entering his third year. You seem to forget that Dorsett has yet faced a NFL caliber defense so saying he is going to have a better year than anyone at this point is wishful thinking. IMO he will have his moments but he is still a rookie and will look lost at times just like Moncrief did last season. I liked the drafting of Dorsett but IMO he is more for the future than the present. He could make a bigger impact in returning kicks more so the catching the football. I hope I am wrong but only time will tell.

[horseshoeblue22]

You are completely absorbed into your own world it's rediculous. Yes it's different for a 3rd round pick rookie to have a year like he did than a 1st round 5 year vet. Do you even read what you post? In what way is that hypocritical? You are valuing a rookie receiver who has ZERO experience in the NFL and already has a college rep of less than stellar route skills to a PROVEN 1 year 4th receiver who not only performed but performed enough to take playing time from a 5? (I think) year vet and previous 1st round receiver...

Again... you are under valuing Moncreif and over valuing Dorsett to extremes.

 

 

Hakeem Nicks was replaced, he wasn't doing a good job here. There's a hundred 5 year vets that get replaced in the NFL every year. Even former first round picks. It's not really that big of a deal any more. DHB was a first rounder too, but no one said it was impossible to beat him out. There were several rookies that had a better year than Moncrief. This is the same forum where a poster says he's tired of "hearing about Odell Beckham" and another poster claims Donte Moncrief is a beast. There were several wide receivers in that draft class last year that out-produced Moncrief. I like the guy, he's on my favorite team...but lets be honest, he is nothing special. The front office feels like Dorsett is something special. Can we trust them on this and stop being so narcissistic? 

 

 

You do realize Moncrief barely saw the field at all til week 7 or 8? Moncrief barely played the first half of the season, thus his numbers would be higher(maybe a lot higher) if he got more snaps through the first part of the season.

You're greatly undervaluing Moncrief.

 

That's just not true, and is mis-information at best. Look at the stats for yourself, I am not making anything up. While he was on the field more in the second half of the season, his production didn't get any better.

 

First 8 games: 23 targets, 16 catches, 216 yards, 1 TD = 27 yards a game

Last 8 games: 26 targets, 16 catches, 228 yards, 2 TD = 28.5 yards a game

 

He produced 54 yards, 32 yards and 0 yards in three playoff games, with 0 postseason TDs.

 

In fact, while Moncrief got on the field more, it coincided with the offense's collapse over the last couple weeks of the regular season.

 

I am sure the coaching staff noticed this, and decided to limit his role like they did early in the season.

 

Towards the end of the season he was on the field almost every play, but he struggled to get open and he struggled to beat man coverage. That's not a knock, that's not undervaluing him...it is what it is.

 

Put it this way: You work at a clock factory, it is your job to assemble clocks. You are a part time worker (20 hours a week) and you produce, on average 27 clocks a week. You get brought in to work full-time hours (40 hours a week), and now you are making 28 clocks a week.

 

By working more, your production plummeted. This is exactly the case with Moncrief. The more we asked him to be on the field, the more we expanded his role, the less productive he got.