What We Could Of Had

[Coltsfan1284]

‪ http://www.1070thefan.com/blogs/brunos-blog/colts-whiffed-elite-young-talent‬

 

I'm pretty sure the comments on this will start trending toward GM ineptness.  Leading to it getting merged. I just wanted people to see the players we passed on (more so) the defensive players and what we do/don't have now.

[Dingus McGirt]

Hindsight is always 20/20. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

 Quote : "If Antonio Morrison was the highest-rated player on their board at No. 125, their system is seriously flawed".

 

That says it all.

[runthepost]

3 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 Quote : "If Antonio Morrison was the highest-rated player on their board at No. 125, their system is seriously flawed".

 

That says it all.

Same with the Dorset pick. Like only surprisingly good pick up was TY.

[Derakynn]

The past is for learning, not yearning. No point in looking at what could have been. Especially when you guys make 300 threads about how our staff is garbage and then seem to think these players who were drafted to teams with high end coaches for their respective positions would have developed the same way on this team. 

[jimmy g]

Hey, at number 22- instead of trading for Trent Richardson, we could have kept it and drafted Johnny Football like Cleveland did!

 

Bad as things are, remember: they could have always been worse...

[Coltsfan1284]

35 minutes ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Hindsight is always 20/20. 

I agree.  At the time though many experts along with many fans expected us to pick almost all the defensive players listed.  It just shows where we could be had we gone the right direction.  

[Myles]

5 minutes ago, jimmy g said:

Hey, at number 22- instead of trading for Trent Richardson, we could have kept it and drafted Johnny Football like Cleveland did!

 

Bad as things are, remember: they could have always been worse...

How would that have been worse.   They are both out of football.   I'm not sticking up for Manziel, but Richardson did nothing for us.  

 

I don't know if this is about what could have been as much looking at the players Grigson past up to draft guys like Werner.

[21isSuperman]

24 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher said:

 Quote : "If Antonio Morrison was the highest-rated player on their board at No. 125, their system is seriously flawed".

 

That says it all.

 

21 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Same with the Dorset pick. Like only surprisingly good pick up was TY.

I'm not entirely sure what the scouts/GM see when they study film.  When you look back on it, you really can't help but wonder, even if hindsight is 20/20

[aaron11]

12 minutes ago, Myles said:

How would that have been worse.   They are both out of football.   I'm not sticking up for Manziel, but Richardson did nothing for us.  

 

I don't know if this is about what could have been as much looking at the players Grigson past up to draft guys like Werner.

not having a pick at all would have been better than TR

 

we wasted a ton of hand offs on him, and it killed a lot of drives

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

29 minutes ago, Derakynn said:

The past is for learning, not yearning. No point in looking at what could have been. Especially when you guys make 300 threads about how our staff is garbage and then seem to think these players who were drafted to teams with high end coaches for their respective positions would have developed the same way on this team. 

 

It's for griggs to learn, not us. We don't make our picks, we only mock, lol.

 

I agree with you that other teams picks may have developed differently with our coaching staff and schemes.

[John Waylon]

We need a hero. Someone like...

*

[John Waylon]

We "could of had" a good thread but that didn't work out for us, did it?

*

[Everyone]

How many other teams passed on all those superstars?  If they had drafted Dak this forum would've exploded.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

11 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

We "could of had" a good thread but that didn't work out for us, did it?

*

Lol I shared this article in another thread, didn't think it was worth its own post. 

I think Grigson is terrible and if Dorsett and morrison were the BPA to him, I think that's also terrible. But some of names in the article were definitely "hindsight".

[Everyone]

Just now, Majin Vegeta said:

Lol I shared this article in another thread, didn't think it was worth its own post. 

I think Grigson is terrible and if Dorsett and morrison were the BPA to him, I think that's also terrible. But some of names in the article were definitely "hindsight".

Yeah, it probably should've been put in the Grigson complaints topic

[NewColtsFan]

 

Appreciating that Grigson has made too many poor choices and that's why we are where we are,  this is a silly story.      It could be done by some bored fan for most every team.    And it could be done every single year since the draft has been around.

 

Everything is obvious with hindsight.    Every draft is imperfect for every team.

 

And when you start putting 5th round picks like Joe Haeg on the miss-list that tells me just how little the poster knows about the draft.

 

I'm sorry,  I jumped off the Grigson bandwagon one year ago and would be fine replacing him,  but a story like this adds very little fuel to the fire.       We know enough to know that change is needed.      This barely moves the needle at all for me......

 

Of course, as always,  your mileage may vary........

 

[Superman]

You can do a list like this for literally every team in the NFL. 

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

You can do a list like this for literally every team in the NFL. 

Which doesn't distract from the point that Grigson has drafted poorly. Deflecting is the worst defense you can use.

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which doesn't distract from the point that Grigson has drafted poorly. Deflecting is the worst defense you can use.

 

My comment was not a defense of Grigson. It was a dismissal of a poorly formed argument.

[Everyone]

7 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Which doesn't distract from the point that Grigson has drafted poorly. Deflecting is the worst defense you can use.

Everyone but Irsay knows that Grigson isn't a good GM, the horse died a long time ago and list of players that most teams passed on doesn't change anything.

[Defjamz26]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

My comment was not a defense of Grigson. It was a dismissal of a poorly formed argument.

I don't see how the argument is poorly formed given the context. The argument is not "Look at all the young talent teams across the league passed on". It's the young talent that the Colts (a team that lacks young play makers) passed over for inferior talent. It's a fair argument.

 

Youre also talking about a 5 year period under Grigson as opposed to 8+ years from some random GM of a winning franchise I'm sure you're thinking of bringing up. There's nothing wrong with the argument nor is there anything wrong with most of the critical articles of the Colts that come out.

[Superman]

25 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don't see how the argument is poorly formed given the context. The argument is not "Look at all the young talent teams across the league passed on". It's the young talent that the Colts (a team that lacks young play makers) passed over for inferior talent. It's a fair argument.

 

Youre also talking about a 5 year period under Grigson as opposed to 8+ years from some random GM of a winning franchise I'm sure you're thinking of bringing up. There's nothing wrong with the argument nor is there anything wrong with most of the critical articles of the Colts that come out.

 

To the bolded, it's actually young talent that EVERY team passed over, in most cases.

 

For instance, Danielle Hunter was a third rounder because every team passed on him twice, some three times, and that's based on his scouting profile. It's judging with the benefit of hindsight to say 'the Colts could have drafted Hunter, but took Smith instead,' and that applies to every team that passed on him. 

 

You can literally do this with any team in almost any year and point out how they missed on good players for players who weren't as good. The Vikings in 2013 picked at #23, #25 and #29, and missed on two of the three. They could have taken Rhodes at #23, Hopkins at #25 and Short at #29. Instead, they took Floyd, Rhodes and Patterson. 

 

Headline: "Vikings whiffed on elite young talent"

 

Oh, and Spielman has five years as GM just like Grigson, and he's not random at all, given that he's receiving credit for drafting Hunter (as he should, they had a great draft that year), and it's arguable whether the Vikings are a "winning franchise" under him, as they're 3 games above .500.

 

This argument is entirely based on hindsight, which is not a legitimate way of judging any team's draft. (And ironically, if Tyreek Hill gets in trouble with the law again, everyone will be killing the Chiefs for drafting him when all the red flags were there. It's easy to Monday Morning Quarterback, especially 2-3 years down the line.) It's a bad argument, and that's why I'm dismissive of it.

 

It's also hypocritical. Landon Collins was one of the worst graded safeties in 2015, per PFF. Now he's highly graded. Yet, TJ Green is a bad pick after his rookie year. It would seem that the person making this argument would recognize the folly of trying to judge draft picks based on their rookie season, whether good or bad. 

 

And just for kicks, I'll point out that it's dumb to criticize the Colts for passing on Trai Turner when they had just drafted Jack Mewhort a round earlier (ignoring the fact that Moncrief was a good pick, and is still an incredible prospect), and it's even dumber to mention Dak Prescott in an article like this, especially for a team that was getting ready to pay Andrew Luck $140m. 

 

Lastly, as a disclaimer, none of this is meant to be a defense of Grigson. Again, it's a dismissal of a poor argument. This argument is poor every time it's used, no matter who it's used against. In hindsight, you can construct a perfect draft for every team, every year. 

[Colts_Fan12]

31 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

To the bolded, it's actually young talent that EVERY team passed over, in most cases.

 

For instance, Danielle Hunter was a third rounder because every team passed on him twice, some three times, and that's based on his scouting profile. It's judging with the benefit of hindsight to say 'the Colts could have drafted Hunter, but took Smith instead,' and that applies to every team that passed on him. 

 

You can literally do this with any team in almost any year and point out how they missed on good players for players who weren't as good. The Vikings in 2013 picked at #23, #25 and #29, and missed on two of the three. They could have taken Rhodes at #23, Hopkins at #25 and Short at #29. Instead, they took Floyd, Rhodes and Patterson. 

 

Headline: "Vikings whiffed on elite young talent"

 

Oh, and Spielman has five years as GM just like Grigson, and he's not random at all, given that he's receiving credit for drafting Hunter (as he should, they had a great draft that year), and it's arguable whether the Vikings are a "winning franchise" under him, as they're 3 games above .500.

 

This argument is entirely based on hindsight, which is not a legitimate way of judging any team's draft. (And ironically, if Tyreek Hill gets in trouble with the law again, everyone will be killing the Chiefs for drafting him when all the red flags were there. It's easy to Monday Morning Quarterback, especially 2-3 years down the line.) It's a bad argument, and that's why I'm dismissive of it.

 

It's also hypocritical. Landon Collins was one of the worst graded safeties in 2015, per PFF. Now he's highly graded. Yet, TJ Green is a bad pick after his rookie year. It would seem that the person making this argument would recognize the folly of trying to judge draft picks based on their rookie season, whether good or bad. 

 

And just for kicks, I'll point out that it's dumb to criticize the Colts for passing on Trai Turner when they had just drafted Jack Mewhort a round earlier (ignoring the fact that Moncrief was a good pick, and is still an incredible prospect), and it's even dumber to mention Dak Prescott in an article like this, especially for a team that was getting ready to pay Andrew Luck $140m. 

 

Lastly, as a disclaimer, none of this is meant to be a defense of Grigson. Again, it's a dismissal of a poor argument. This argument is poor every time it's used, no matter who it's used against. In hindsight, you can construct a perfect draft for every team, every year. 

Why wouldn't we want Mewhort and Turner both?

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Why wouldn't we want Mewhort and Turner both?

 

No one said there'd be anything wrong with having both of them. The argument is 'you needed a guard,' but they had just taken a guard.

 

And then there's the Moncrief factor. It's not whether you want Turner, it's whether you want Turner more than Moncrief. 

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

No one said there'd be anything wrong with having both of them. The argument is 'you needed a guard,' but they had just taken a guard.

 

And then there's the Moncrief factor. It's not whether you want Turner, it's whether you want Turner more than Moncrief. 

I definitely would with how terrible our line has been in previous years, but I also like Moncrief. I'm in the group that feels luck could make WRs look better with a better line.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I definitely would with how terrible our line has been in previous years, but I also like Moncrief. I'm in the group that feels luck could make WRs look better with a better line.

 

Hugh Thornton started 12 games the year before, they expected Thomas to come back, etc. They had just spent significant resources on interior OL, so you can see what the thinking was.

 

By the way, this board had a fit when they drafted Mewhort, so it's interesting to see someone say that we should have drafted back to back guards. You might remember, almost everyone wanted Nix (bust) or Brooks (disappointment) or Martin (bust). 

[Colts_Fan12]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Hugh Thornton started 12 games the year before, they expected Thomas to come back, etc. They had just spent significant resources on interior OL, so you can see what the thinking was.

 

By the way, this board had a fit when they drafted Mewhort, so it's interesting to see someone say that we should have drafted back to back guards. You might remember, almost everyone wanted Nix (bust) or Brooks (disappointment) or Martin (bust). 

I'm not a big fan of guards in the 1st or 2nd round but our line sucked so oh well

[Andrew Luck fan club]

I don't remember everyone being upset with the Mewhort pick.. 

I also don't understand the comparisons between Greens rookie season & Landons. There is no comparison, PFF doesn't tell that whole story.

And there's no article about the Vikings missing on talent, because they have atleast brought in some. And they've been trending upward and would have continued to do so if teddy didn't get hurt. 

[bababooey]

Could have had*

[GoColtsWin]

5 hours ago, John Waylon said:

We "could of had" a good thread but that didn't work out for us, did it?

*

Woot!! lol!!!

[mahagga73]

7 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Hindsight is always 20/20. 

Yeah right. This guys track record is terrible. 

[COLTS449]

This is kinda what I've been saying. We do not know how to find talent. And yes if Morrison was higher on our board than Jatavis Brown and Jordan Howard then we have some serious scouting issues. I'm no scout, but I didn't even pay any attention to Morrison when it came to the draft because from what I saw..... I didn't see anything special about him, but I mean, at least to me it was obvious Jatavis Brown was a very talented player who actually has coverage skills. I listed in another thread the D we could have right now, and no you aren't going to hit on every pick, but good GM's and scouts hit big a lot. So. This could be our team JUST in the last 5 years. Jackson, Stewart, Jenkins, and Incognito being FA signings.

 

Defense

DE Chris Jones

NT Brandon Williams

DE Malik Jackson

OLB Danielle Hunter

ILB Eric Kendricks

ILB Jatavis Brown

OLB Markus Golden

CB Vontae Davis

CB Xavier Rhodes

SS Darrian Stewart

FS Malcolm Jenkins

 

NCB Jason Verrett

 

Offense

QB Andrew Luck

RB Jordon Howard, Frank Gore

LT Anthony Castanzo

LG Jack Mewhort

C Cody Whitehair

RG Ritchie Incognito

RT Ryan Schraeder

WR TY Hilton

WR Dontae Moncrief

WR Stefon Diggs

TE Coby Fleener, Jack Doyle

 

 

Fleener wouldn't be my choice in a perfect world, but I'd take him over Allen. Fleener probably would have had a MUCH better season had he been with us. This was his first year away from Luck in what? 7-8 years?

 

 

 

[mahagga73]

3 hours ago, Everyone said:

Everyone but Irsay knows that Grigson isn't a good GM, the horse died a long time ago and list of players that most teams passed on doesn't change anything.

They don't have one player from the draft a couple years ago still on the roster. All the whiffs on first rounders. You look at his track record and it's astonishingly bad. 

[WoolMagnet]

You can't cherry-pick a team like this.

to be fair, you must also show ALL the picks of EVERY team.

i guess this Bruno dude is nostrafrickindamas !

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Majin Vegeta said:

I don't remember everyone being upset with the Mewhort pick.. 

I also don't understand the comparisons between Greens rookie season & Landons. There is no comparison, PFF doesn't tell that whole story.

And there's no article about the Vikings missing on talent, because they have atleast brought in some. And they've been trending upward and would have continued to do so if teddy didn't get hurt. 

 

1) You can search and find the thread when he was drafted. And I didn't say "everyone," I said this board, collectively.

 

2) What's there to not understand? They were both rated poorly by PFF as rookies. Setting aside anyone's feelings about PFF, if Collins could bounce back and have a good Year 2, why can't Green?

 

3) There's no article about the Vikings because they had a good draft last year, so everyone isn't up in arms about their GM. You can knock Grigson for poor drafting all day, that's a fair criticism. But this hindsight viewpoint of 'if you had drafted perfectly, this is what you would have done' is crazy talk. I just played the same game with the Vikings from 2013. And the Colts were "trending upward" until 2015.

 

Overall, like I said, it's not defending Grigson. It's dismissing the hindsight judgment of draft picks. You can put together an All Draft team for every team, pretty much every year. Unless you expect your team to be perfect in the draft, it's not a legitimate way to judge a draft.

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

I'm not a big fan of guards in the 1st or 2nd round but our line sucked so oh well

 

Yeah I'd rather not draft an interior OL early, but it's hard to be mad about it when you get a good player. The Cowboys went out on a limb with Frederick, but he's been really good. Kelly was a consensus top 20 player, so it wasn't exactly an unconventional pick, but it was a "safe" pick. In hindsight, I'm sure we'll be good with it.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

1) You can search and find the thread when he was drafted. And I didn't say "everyone," I said this board, collectively.

Well yeah some were upset, but I think that's because guard isn't a sexy pick. Mewhort was a good prospect and a need though. I liked the pick atleast lol.

2) What's there to not understand? They were both rated poorly by PFF as rookies. Setting aside anyone's feelings about PFF, if Collins could bounce back and have a good Year 2, why can't Green?

Watch game tape from their rookie seasons. Collins makes highlight plays, he showed you glimpses. Tj showed nothing but penalties and being lost. (I am hoping for green to have a bounce back year to though)

3) There's no article about the Vikings because they had a good draft last year, so everyone isn't up in arms about their GM. You can knock Grigson for poor drafting all day, that's a fair criticism. But this hindsight viewpoint of 'if you had drafted perfectly, this is what you would have done' is crazy talk. I just played the same game with the Vikings from 2013. And the Colts were "trending upward" until 2015.

That's all I'm doing, is knocking grigs poor drafting. I agree the viewpoint "if you had drafted perfectly"  hindsight stuff is unrealistic. 

Overall, like I said, it's not defending Grigson. It's dismissing the hindsight judgment of draft picks. You can put together an All Draft team for every team, pretty much every year. Unless you expect your team to be perfect in the draft, it's not a legitimate way to judge a draft.

I agree completely with what your saying about that. All I really disagreed with was the Green comment. 

 

[Luck is Good]

12 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah I'd rather not draft an interior OL early, but it's hard to be mad about it when you get a good player. The Cowboys went out on a limb with Frederick, but he's been really good. Kelly was a consensus top 20 player, so it wasn't exactly an unconventional pick, but it was a "safe" pick. In hindsight, I'm sure we'll be good with it.

I loved the Ryan Kelly pick at the time and still do. I think he's gonna be really good for years to come

[Luck is Good]

Man I do wish Grigson would have drafted Landon Collins over Phillip Dorsett. It was a much bigger need at the time. Hindsight is 20/20 but I think that would've been an even more safe pick than Ryan Kelly imo