How would you feel drafting Forrest Lamp 15th overall?

[Yoshinator]

I've seen a lot of mocks saying we may take him at 15 overall. With Ballard also being set on improving the trenches, I'm realizing this could be a possibility come draft time. So I was wondering, how would you guys feel if he was our pick at 15?

[Smonroe]

I'd be happy and mad.  Happy that Luck is going to have a potentially better line.  Mad that the defense is missing out on a potential starter.  Heck, there's a chance Robinson falls to us, or OJ Howard.  Could we pass up either of them?

 

I could see us taking any position except QB and WR.  Either of those and I would question my grip on reality.  Sort of like I did after the first day of the 2015 draft.

[NewColtsFan]

 

Lamp is the ONLY offensive player I'd be happy with in the first round.

 

Not, the only O-lineman,   the ONLY O-player.

 

Otherwise,  if we pass on him, or don't trade down to take him,  then I want defense, defense and more defense.

 

The RB can come in R3 or R4.      I'd prefer R4,  but wouldn't rule out R3.

 

Lamp is so good,  that he's the best O-lineman in the draft.    When was the last time that was said about any guard?       Didn't happen for Warmack or Cooper.     

 

If Ballard says he wants to solidify things in front of Luck, then fine,  plus Lamp in at guard,  Clark is the RT and Haeg inherits the Reitz position as the Jack of all Trades,   and the line looks really, really good.

 

[Buck Showalter]

Yeah I also saw a mock on Yard Barker today that had Garret Boles going 15 to the Colts. So, I'm not sure how surprising it would be if Colts go OL, especially since Ballard stressed bulking up the lines, however, all that may be coming from the generic outlook predicated on past seasons where the teams glaring weakness was the o-line & it may be overlooking how heavily the line was addressed in last years draft... 

 

I don't pretend to be a draft guru, as I haven't  watched much college ball in the past 3-4 years, and I know next to nothing about Lamp or Boles. Does anyone think either would be BPA at 15??? From much of the discussion on the forum here, it sounds like this draft class is considerably thin at top end OL talent...

[Yoshinator]

3 minutes ago, Buck Showalter said:

Yeah I also saw a mock on Yard Barker today that had Garret Boles going 15 to the Colts. So, I'm not sure how surprising it would be if Colts go OL, especially since Ballard stressed bulking up the lines, however, all that may be coming from the generic outlook predicated on past seasons where the teams glaring weakness was the o-line & it may be overlooking how heavily the line was addressed in last years draft... 

 

I don't pretend to be a draft guru, as I haven't  watched much college ball in the past 3-4 years, and I know next to nothing about Lamp or Boles. Does anyone think either would be BPA at 15??? From much of the discussion on the forum here, it sounds like this draft class is considerably thin at top end OL talent...

Lamp might be BPA at 15, but Bolles would not be IMO. In fact, he would be a huge reach to me.

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Lamp is the ONLY offensive player I'd be happy with in the first round.

 

Not, the only O-lineman,   the ONLY O-player.

 

Otherwise,  if we pass on him, or don't trade down to take him,  then I want defense, defense and more defense.

 

The RB can come in R3 or R4.      I'd prefer R4,  but wouldn't rule out R3.

 

Lamp is so good,  that he's the best O-lineman in the draft.    When was the last time that was said about any guard?       Didn't happen for Warmack or Cooper.     

 

If Ballard says he wants to solidify things in front of Luck, then fine,  plus Lamp in at guard,  Clark is the RT and Haeg inherits the Reitz position as the Jack of all Trades,   and the line looks really, really good.

 

Agree with this 100%. I'm sort of on board with Lamp as I'm checking him out. Wouldn't want anyone else on offense in the 1st either. At defense, I'm looking at Reddick or Harris, but Lamp I would be ok with if we took him because of how deep this draft is on defense.

[Track Guy]

I'd love it. I think he's almost another Zach Martin. He'd help us finally be able to run the offense we should be running, be able to punch other teams in the mouth and control the clock. A good ground game is a big plus to the defense, too. 

[bananabucket]

I wouldnt choose him but if Ballard likes him enough to take him,I could get on board with it.  

 

We'd be one man away from a ... gasp ... good offensive line 

[richard pallo]

I could easily get behind this pick and he could actually be the BPA when it's our turn.  Instant starter at RG which is what I want from our 1st. pick, an immediate starter.  I am hoping our 2nd. pick is also an immediate starter. 

[Superman]

I'd come to terms with it, but I would feel like it's a missed opportunity to add a stud defender. This draft being so deep defensively, we could probably still add a couple high level guys in later rounds, and I'm not sure I'm going to be that excited about anyone there at #15 anyway. But using top 20 picks on interior OL two years in a row is not preferable. I'd rather trade back.

[#12.]

It would be hard to get upset.  One, Luck's shoulder is currently in a sling, and two, you can't fix it all in one offseason.  Not sure it matters which direction you go in at #15.

 

The fact that Ballard showed interest in Zeitler early but, outside of Schweinke, hasn't addressed the O-line, tells me it's a good possibility.

[Tmoney]

I would love the pick the guy really is a stud. I'd prefer a stud defender but if he's BPA I'm all for it. If not Lamp tho, idk if Any other G is beating out Joe Haeg in this class. And I really dont like any T in this draft.

[NorthernBlue]

Lamp is an excellent OG. The best interior guy in the draft, and potentially the best O linemen in the draft. 

 

Put him on the Colts, he becomes an instant starter at RG, and gives Indy arguably one of the best interior O lines in the league moving forward (Mewhort-Kelly-Lamp). And if Castonzo returns to form and Clark develops well, they may very well have an O line that can rival Dallas'. Obviously the players gotta develop + stay healthy, but there'd be a ton of talent and depth there. 

 

On the other hand, I doubt his value would nearly equate to the value of adding a stud on the defensive side of the ball (granted, the odds of one being there is still up in the air). But either way, this defense needs talent and it's been neglected for too long. Only 1 first round pick in the Luck era has been spent on defense. This is a defense rich draft class, so they shouldn't continue to put it off.

 

Either way, I'm just gonna trust Ballard. At least for now, there's no point in doing anything else. I guess that's the good part of getting a new GM . It resets the fans outlook on roster decisions.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

34 minutes ago, Superman said:

I'd come to terms with it, but I would feel like it's a missed opportunity to add a stud defender. This draft being so deep defensively, we could probably still add a couple high level guys in later rounds, and I'm not sure I'm going to be that excited about anyone there at #15 anyway. But using top 20 picks on interior OL two years in a row is not preferable. I'd rather trade back.

 

[aReggie7]

I'd be happy if the Colts add one of the best offensive lineman in the draft. Lamp is supposed to be a plug and player similar to how Kelly was last year. 

 

I don't think the Colts are likely to take Lamp, though. There is likely to be multiple very good defensive prospects to choose from at 15. I don't think that Lamp is likely to be seen as that much better of a prospect where the Colts will take him over someone on defense. I will not be upset if they do but I don't think it is likely to happen.

[throwing BBZ]

Nothing wrong with adding excellence and giving Lucky a cleaner pocket and a better running game.
Heck, take Mixon in the 2nd and we can draft D with the rest of this years draft and next years. 
So many options!

[LockeDown]

Haeg and Clark should be our future LT and RT imo, so if we draft Lamp, then we are not only good now, but we have depth and the future for when Castanzo is done.  

[FalseStart]

No O in the 1st RUND!!!!!  Defense in the first. Mixon would be an interesting 2nd...

[crazycolt1]

I wouldn't have a problem with it. As said earlier Luck is in a sling right now and just a season away from missing almost a whole season. As it stands right now without Luck we are s..t out of luck.

 We have had a long run at not even having an average running game so maybe it wouldn't be a bad pick at all.

 

[Smonroe]

20 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I wouldn't have a problem with it. As said earlier Luck is in a sling right now and just a season away from missing almost a whole season. As it stands right now without Luck we are s..t out of luck.

 We have had a long run at not even having an average running game so maybe it wouldn't be a bad pick at all.

 

 

Stocking up on good Olinemen worked pretty well for the Cowboys.  Even with the Romo injuries.   

[Shepman]

I all a about this and don't think that Luck couldn't just get tired of getting beat up and retire early.  If Pat can do it so can Luck and a check of a lot easier with all that money.  Let Haeg and Clark battle for RT and run the ball and sling it with extra time.

[Happy2BeHere]

I would say it really depends on how "bright" Lamp is muhahah

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

I would be fine with it. We need Defense but protecting Luck is top priority.

[our_dbs_rock]

This thread title reminds me of an old Mitch Hedberg joke.  "How do you feel about frilly toothpicks?"  My answer to both is the same.....

 

[Bluefire4]

I'd be able to get behind anything besides QB, WR, or TE if there is a reasonable explanation and we fill other holes in the draft.

[GwinnettColt]

I would be ok with the pick but not devastated if we didn't pick him.  My name's Forrest....Forrest Lamp.  I want to hold a sign in the stands that reads, "Block, Forrest!"    Ok...Forrest Gump jokes are out of my system.  Well, mostly.

 

I think protecting Luck and getting a ground game going needs to be addressed and Lamp would do that.  We could take an RB in the 3rd, possibly (though I'm leaning on building the defense from 2nd pick and so on).  Plus, we have Gore and Turbin, who would benefit from a greatly improved line.  I also like the idea that someone mentioned earlier about Clark and Haeg being our future tackles.  This move makes Haeg available to do that.  

 

The downside to the pick is that we need defense.  Brock Osweiler looked like Joe Montana against us....twice.  Osweiler.   We have no pass rush, we cannot stop the run.  You can throw up the middle all day long against the Defense.  We haven't addressed NT, OLB/Rush, and CB in Free Agency, which means that we have to do so in the draft.  

 

 

[WoolMagnet]

There are several players i would like.  I get myself worked up thinking (worrying?) about it.  I'm just gonna let Ballard do what he does and hope for the best. Its so hard to project these guys to the next level, by no means an exact science.

i plead the fifth!

[dw49]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

I'd come to terms with it, but I would feel like it's a missed opportunity to add a stud defender. This draft being so deep defensively, we could probably still add a couple high level guys in later rounds, and I'm not sure I'm going to be that excited about anyone there at #15 anyway. But using top 20 picks on interior OL two years in a row is not preferable. I'd rather trade back.

 

I'd probably trade down or use a 4th to move to 13.Maybe it would take a 2018 pick added to that. IMO , that was a big coin flip we lost. Philly's biggest needs are CB and outside pass rusher. Look familiar ?

[tvturner]

5 hours ago, Smonroe said:

I'd be happy and mad.  Happy that Luck is going to have a potentially better line.  Mad that the defense is missing out on a potential starter.  Heck, there's a chance Robinson falls to us, or OJ Howard.  Could we pass up either of them?

 

I could see us taking any position except QB and WR.  Either of those and I would question my grip on reality.  Sort of like I did after the first day of the 2015 draft.

We'd pass on OJ.

[2006Coltsbestever]

13 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

I'd probably trade down or use a 4th to move to 13.Maybe it would take a 2018 pick added to that. IMO , that was a big coin flip we lost. Philly's biggest needs are CB and outside pass rusher. Look familiar ?

There are many CB's and Pass Rushers to choose from. If they take 1 we will still have our pick of the litter who we want and may even take Lamp so who knows? IMO it's no big deal that we pick 15th instead of 14th. I just dont see it as a problem.

[Finball]

5 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Lamp is so good,  that he's the best O-lineman in the draft.    When was the last time that was said about any guard?       Didn't happen for Warmack or Cooper.    

 

 

2015, I think. Brandon Scherff. He was technically drafted as tackle but many had pegged him as a guard.

[dw49]

19 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

There are many CB's and Pass Rushers to choose from. If they take 1 we will still have our pick of the litter who we want and may even take Lamp so who knows? IMO it's no big deal that we pick 15th instead of 14th. I just dont see it as a problem.

 

It's no problem as long as we don't have a CB or Pass Rusher rated much higher than the next player on their board. If there is an obvious stick out and the team picking in front of you has the same needs , it can be a problem. Thats why you see teams moving up 1 or 2 spots very often in drafts. I can't say for sure it will bite us in the butt if we stay at 15 anymore than you saying it's no problem. 

[Yoshinator]

22 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

There are many CB's and Pass Rushers to choose from. If they take 1 we will still have our pick of the litter who we want and may even take Lamp so who knows? IMO it's no big deal that we pick 15th instead of 14th. I just dont see it as a problem.

To Ballard, it's a BIG difference, I guarantee you. It restricts his options, and even though we don't want Dalvin Cook on the forum, he may of been interested and now it takes him off the table. Trade options up and down are weaker for us as well at 15 than 14. It doesn't seem like much, but it is in the 1st round where each pick is assigned a point value and they have a lot of meaning trade-wise.

[2006Coltsbestever]

14 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

To Ballard, it's a BIG difference, I guarantee you. It restricts his options, and even though we don't want Dalvin Cook on the forum, he may of been interested and now it takes him off the table. Trade options up and down are weaker for us as well at 15 than 14. It doesn't seem like much, but it is in the 1st round where each pick is assigned a point value and they have a lot of meaning trade-wise.

I really don't see us taking Cook anyway. Drafting 15th is a good slot. We will either get a Solid Pass Rusher, solid CB, or maybe even Draft Lamp is my point. I just don't think drafting 1 slot lower will make a difference, JMO.

[2006Coltsbestever]

16 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

It's no problem as long as we don't have a CB or Pass Rusher rated much higher than the next player on their board. If there is an obvious stick out and the team picking in front of you has the same needs , it can be a problem. Thats why you see teams moving up 1 or 2 spots very often in drafts. I can't say for sure it will bite us in the butt if we stay at 15 anymore than you saying it's no problem. 

We will see how it pans out but I think everything will workout and we will get a good player regardless.

[ztboiler]

There is a better chance that we draft Hassan Reddick at 15 than Lamp, IMO.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, ztboiler said:

There is a better chance that we draft Hassan Reddick at 15 than Lamp, IMO.  

That's what I mean even picking 15th we will get someone good. I would love to pickup Reddick.

[crazycolt1]

16 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We will see how it pans out but I think everything will workout and we will get a good player regardless.

I agree. No matter who is taken there is going to be a negative response like always.

We can all have our choice on who we would take but ultimately we are not Ballard.

Ballard's big board may not even be close as to what we think. GM's have a tendency to go off the so called experts expected orders of drafts.

 

[dw49]

23 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We will see how it pans out but I think everything will workout and we will get a good player regardless.

 

Yes , we certainly have a good chance to get a nice player at 15 . The Colts did inquire about moving up with Cinn , so they could have a draft board that drops off after certain players are gone. We can only speculate to this stuff.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

6 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I agree. No matter who is taken there is going to be a negative response like always.

We can all have our choice on who we would take but ultimately we are not Ballard.

Ballard's big board may not even be close as to what we think. GM's have a tendency to go off the so called experts expected orders of drafts.

 

I would be a happy with a number of players at 15, whether it be Reddick, Lamp, or Takk, or Barnett. I just named 4 players of who all have the potential to be great. Takk wont be healthy until October but he would still be a great option. There are other players we could take as well. I just through 4 names out there for the heck of it. Ballard may have his eyes on McCaffrey for all we know too.