Colts War Room Draft Strategy - Don't Have Your Heart Set On #15

[BlueShoe]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Can I do it for free? If so, I would love too!

 

You can sign up for a free trial. I did so and all they asked for was my email - no payment.

 

I propose you do several simulations first so you can get used to the trade process. It goes pretty quick once the LIVE draft starts. 

[Yoshinator]

Just now, BlueShoe said:

 

You can sign up for a free trial. I did so and all they asked for was my email - no payment.

 

I suggest that you do several simulations first so you can get used to the trade process. It goes pretty quick once the LIVE draft starts. 

I've done 10-15 of the 3 round drafts, along with a few trades, so I've got it down. Appreciate you telling me!

[BlueShoe]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

I've done 10-15 of the 3 round drafts, along with a few trades, so I've got it down. Appreciate you telling me!

 

No worries. There are also some how-to videos if you need any help.

 

Have fun man!

[Yoshinator]

5 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

No worries. There are also some how-to videos if you need any help.

 

Have fun man!

Got a 14 day free trial, thanks so much! I owe you a drink  

[BlueShoe]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Got a 14 day free trial, thanks so much! I owe you a drink  

 

Looking forward to seeing the results.

[indyagent17]

17 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

Unfortunately for Colts fans, no history exists to dissect Chris Ballard. He has never had final, or near final-say, in the War Room. Colts fans and management are still in the honeymoon phase so this is a new venture. Just as the general managers before him, lessons will be learned from his successes and failures. Ballard has willingly pulled the curtain back enough to give everyone a peak into his philosophy.

 

Some of Ballard’s basic concepts to build a football team are parallel with the approach Bill Polian took. Although, I believe he is much more defensive-minded and Bill was offensive-minded. 

 

Build through the draft, and keep you own. That philosophy has won a lot of games in Indianapolis.

 

Chris Ballard brings the added philosophy of building a team in the trenches. Unfortunately, as Bill Polian’s regime aged, he struggled to improve the front lines. It was perhaps his downfall. Ballard will need to fortify the line-of-scrimmage before he can expect any real accomplishments, and I believe Jim Irsay has bought into this. We might draft an offensive lineman in the first round every other year. It is possible, and it is probably the way we should approach the draft. 

 

When the 15th pick is on the clock, there will certainly be talented players available. Ballard, a first-time general manager, will be contemplating his first ever NFL draft pick. Every voice will have spoken, and every table pounded. For the first time in his career, history will write his decision, and stamp his signature next to the outcome.

 

On April 27th Chris Ballard, will choose to either use the seven selections on talent certainly to be available, or trade for additional picks. Let’s evaluate some of those possible prospects and plausible trade partners.

 

Leonard Fournette and Marshon Lattimore are not likely to fall to 15, but would certainly spark the Colts interest if they did. Backs like Fournette are rare and shutdown corners are nearly as valuable.

 

Linebackers Reuben Foster, Haason Reddick, and Derek Barnett, are certain possibilities, and each could also be taken before 15. However, it is not likely all three will be drafted before the Colts have an opportunity to select at least one of them.

 

Chris Ballard has made it very clear about his intentions to focus on the offensive line and front seven. Forrest Lamp could provide the toughness Ballard is looking for.

 

Any serious discussion would not be complete without mentioning running backs Dalvin Cook and Christian McCaffrey who could be taken in the middle or may fall into the end of the first round. 

 

Plausible trade partners include Tampa Bay, Denver, Detroit, Miami, New York Giants, Oakland (Vegas), Seattle, Kansas City, Dallas, Green Bay, and Pittsburgh. Moving down further than that might be too far, and it would not be wise to leave the first round as doing so removes the fifth-year option.

 

Possible Compensation for the 15th pick would be:

 

Bucs - 19, 84, 237

Broncos - 20, 82, 203

Lions - 21, 85, 128

Dolphins - 22, 97, 166

Giants - 23, 87, 140

Raiders - 24, 88, 130

Seahawks - 26, 58, 210

Chiefs - 27, 59, 132

Cowboys - 28, 60, 133

Packers - 29, 61, 134

Steelers - 30, 62, 94

 

If Ballard were to trade down into the bottom of the first round he would pick up a few extra picks and still get a good football player. Let’s hypothetically say he makes a trade with his old team Kansas City for the 27th pick. Players he could possibly target at #27 are Forrest Lamp, Dalvin Cook, Christian McCaffrey, T.J. Watt, Jarrad Davis, and Gareon Conley. At least one of those players will still be on the board at number 27.

 

I believe if Chris Ballard wants to have his first album become a hit then he needs to trade back in this draft. If he can find a suitor who is willing to give fair compensation, then moving back might allow him more opportunity to paint his first Picasso.

 

In a mock simulation, I traded the 15th pick to Seattle for the 26th, a second (58) and a sixth (210). Forrest Lamp, Jarrad Davis, and Gareon Conley were all available at #26.

 

San Francisco later offered #66, #146, and #161 for #58, and I accepted.

 

Here is how the mock went:

 

Rd 1   Pk  26 - Forrest Lamp (G) Western Kentucky

Rd 2   Pk  46 - T.J. Watt (OLB 3/4) Wisconsin

Rd 3   Pk  66 - Adoree' Jackson (CB) Southern California

Rd 3   Pk  80 - Cooper Kupp (WR) Eastern Washington

Rd 4   Pk 122 - D'Onta Foreman (RB) Texas

Rd 4   Pk 137 - George Kittle (TE) Iowa

Rd 4   Pk 144 - Vince Biegel (OLB 3/4) Wisconsin

Rd 5   Pk 146 - Shaquill Griffin (CB) UCF

Rd 5   Pk 158 - Stevie Tu'kolovatu (NT) Southern California

Rd 5   Pk 161 - Damontae Kazee (CB) San Diego State

Rd 6   Pk 210 - Tarik Cohen (RB) North Carolina A&T

 

I could not find a safety within the right reach, but I am not convinced we need to draft a safety anyway.

 

We immediately upgraded our pass rush by grabbing T.J. Watt in the second and Vince Biegel in the fourth.

 

Adoree Jacskson would start at LCB, and Kazee would be an ideal fit for the slot against 11 personnel. Griffin would be groomed to take Vontae’s spot if we could not find a reasonable number to resign him.

 

D'Onta Foreman and Tarik Cohen are the answers at running back that we have been desperately looking for.

 

Cooper Kupp catches everything thrown his way and will immediately challenge both Aiken and Dorset for playing time.

 

George Kittle is an excellent complement to Jack Doyle, and instantly gets playing time.

 

Stevie Tu'kolovatu makes David Parry expendable.

 

The idea is to move back a few times, and fix all the holes on the team. Don't just try to improve the needs, but create competition even where there are strengths. It doesn't have to be these exact trades or exact players or positions. We want youth, and to build through the draft. This would be a very good start.

 

I am not saying we will trade back, but I believe we will jump any opportunity that makes sense. 

You didnt go to work today, did you?

[shasta519]

13 hours ago, rockywoj said:

I think it absolutely was his downfall.   He waited 3 years too long to try and rebuild the OL and he also failed to upgrade the LBs and DBs.

 

Of course, the crazy timing of Manning missing the year, resulting in having the pick to get Luck, also factored in.

 

The strange thing is, and nobody seems to ever mention this, back in, I believe it was, the early summer of 2010, Irsay put out a cryptic tweet about HUGE changes coming in the next 18 months.  I remember thinking, what the heck does THAT mean!?  Then, as fate would have it, Manning missed the entire 2011 season and Polian and Caldwell were fired!  Like what the heck gives with that Irsay tweet that seems to have foretold the drastic changes we witnessed?

 

It was actually a tweet from September 2011 after the opening loss to HOU. Here is what he said:

 

"shocking, dramatic, inspiring, unimaginable things happening in Coltsland the next 18 months." He also tweeted out "Buckle up, stay faithful, BELIEVE."

 

I don't think it was Irsay foretelling the changes as much as it was him hinting that Manning was going to be moving on from the Colts, which I believe was actually decided much earlier when Irsay and Manning concocted his new deal...possibly even before that. His contract included a poison pill that made it a foregone conclusion, under the circumstances.

 

Keep in mind that this was also before the Colts went 2-14 and secured the #1 overall pick and the rights to Andrew Luck. Many people (including members of the media) thought the Colts could still be competitive that season...but then you have Irsay tweeting about drastic changes coming...before the season even played out. 

 

When Irsay was interviewed in 2015, he said this was how he had envisioned everything working out...with Manning going to another team to finish his great career on a high note and the Colts rebuilding with Andrew Luck and having long-term success. Given all of the information, I refuse to believe the events of 2011 and 2012 were all just happenstance. Not talking about tanking...just the whole premeditated transition from Manning to Luck.

[BlueShoe]

10 minutes ago, indyagent17 said:

You didnt go to work today, did you?

 

Vacation, brother. 

 

Just finished a half round of golf. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, BlueShoe said:

 

A value Chart that Jimmy Johnson gave the fans several years ago. 

 

http://www.ourlads.com/nfldraftvalue/

 

I've always been skeptical of the value chart. Although I do think it's used, I don't think it's gospel, especially for a team that really like a player and wants to move up for him. It's also hard to pinpoint how teams value future picks, which are often included in big draft trades. 

 

The fact that comp picks can now be traded throws another wrinkle in the mix. It's time for a new value chart.

[21isSuperman]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I've always been skeptical of the value chart. Although I do think it's used, I don't think it's gospel, especially for a team that really like a player and wants to move up for him. It's also hard to pinpoint how teams value future picks, which are often included in big draft trades. 

 

The fact that comp picks can now be traded throws another wrinkle in the mix. It's time for a new value chart.

I haven't read the entire paper, but their final proposed table is on page 11

 

http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/Schuckers_JQAS_NFL_Draft.pdf

[Superman]

10 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I haven't read the entire paper, but their final proposed table is on page 11

 

http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/Schuckers_JQAS_NFL_Draft.pdf

 

I think I've seen this proposed table before, but not the paper. I'll skim over it. I think their premise is the early picks are overvalued, and the gradient is too steep (which I agree with).

 

Of course, based on their intro, their study is based on drafts between '91 and '01, and the draft has changed dramatically since. They published in 2011, so the effect of the rookie wage scale isn't taken into consideration, nor the move away from RBs early in the draft. And of course, this is the first year comp picks are tradeable. Lastly, future picks are still hard to gauge, but none of the charts actually try to predict their value so maybe that's a moot point (but not one we should ignore when proposing draft trades).

 

So I like their fresh approach at its core, but they have some work to do still. 

[BlueShoe]

27 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I've always been skeptical of the value chart. Although I do think it's used, I don't think it's gospel, especially for a team that really like a player and wants to move up for him. It's also hard to pinpoint how teams value future picks, which are often included in big draft trades. 

 

The fact that comp picks can now be traded throws another wrinkle in the mix. It's time for a new value chart.

 

Agreed. What I did was average the points between the rounds. 

[BlueShoe]

27 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

I haven't read the entire paper, but their final proposed table is on page 11

 

http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/Schuckers_JQAS_NFL_Draft.pdf

 

Just took a quick peek at this. Going to read more later. 

 

Very nice find!

[BlueShoe]

1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

I haven't read the entire paper, but their final proposed table is on page 11

 

http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/Schuckers_JQAS_NFL_Draft.pdf

 

I like the idea of making a change, but I am not a fan of the proposed table. 

 

The picks do not have plausible values.

 

For example; according to the chart, a team could trade #32 and #96 for the first overall pick. 

[shasta519]

 

1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

I haven't read the entire paper, but their final proposed table is on page 11

 

http://statsportsconsulting.com/main/wp-content/uploads/Schuckers_JQAS_NFL_Draft.pdf

 

I think that is the current trade value chart they evaluated. Their alternative chart is on page 9. It seems way off. It assumes, in theory, that the team picking #2 overall could bundle their 2nd and 3rd round picks and get the #1 overall pick. Or that the Colts could move up to #1 by giving up a 5th round pick. Maybe I am reading it wrong.

 

[shasta519]

19 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I like the idea of making a change, but I am not a fan of the proposed table. 

 

The picks do not have plausible values.

 

For example; according to the chart, a team could trade #32 and #96 for the first overall pick. 

 

I just used that example as well. I agree it seems way off. I understand the purpose of the exercise...but it seems like they ended up much further away than they started...or better yet they ended up much further in the opposite direction on the value spectrum.

[BlueShoe]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

 

I think that is the current trade value chart they evaluated. Their alternative chart is on page 9. It seems way off. It assumes, in theory, that the team picking #2 overall could bundle their 2nd and 3rd round picks and get the #1 overall pick. Or that the Colts could move up to #1 by giving up a 5th round pick. Maybe I am reading it wrong.

 

 

Yeah. I think they are assigning value based on production. 

[BlueShoe]

Just now, shastamasta said:

 

I just used that example as well. I agree it seems way off. I understand the purpose of the exercise...but it seems like they ended up much further away than they started...or better yet they ended up much further in the opposite direction on the value spectrum.

 

Agreed.

 

i do believe the first overall pick in the draft is overvalued with the current chart.

 

I think with the new chart, they are assigning value based on production of past players taken at those spots. Which brings up a whole new interesting discussion. 

[shasta519]

41 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

Agreed.

 

i do believe the first overall pick in the draft is overvalued with the current chart.

 

I think with the new chart, they are assigning value based on production of past players taken at those spots. Which brings up a whole new interesting discussion. 

 

It appears they are using Games Started as the metric for the APVC. I just can't agree with that. Not all starters are created equal and it doesn't account for positional value.

 

Also, many players move to different teams at some point in their careers, so those games started on a different team are irrelevant to their value on draft day...because the drafting team doesn't get that production AND because that starter was available outside of the draft.

 

The current system does overvalue top picks. But then again, it probably should. Those are players that teams (typically in the back half of the draft) would otherwise not have a chance to draft...so they have to pay a premium. But once you reach the 2nd round, every team has had a chance to draft a player...so trade value starts to decrease dramatically. If the Falcons wanted to move up from #31 to #15, it should cost more than wanting to trade up from #63 to #33...because whichever player they wanted at #33 they could have just drafted at #31...but trading up from #31 to #15 gives them a shot at potentially 15 players they wouldn't have otherwise been able to draft.

[BlueShoe]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

It appears they are using Games Started as the metric for the APVC. I just can't agree with that. Not all starters are created equal and it doesn't account for positional value.

 

Also, many players move to different teams at some point in their careers, so those games started on a different team are irrelevant to their value on draft day...because the drafting team doesn't get that production AND because that starter was available outside of the draft.

 

The current system does overvalue top picks. But then again, it probably should. Those are players that teams (typically in the back half of the draft) would otherwise not have a chance to draft...so they have to pay a premium. But once you reach the 2nd round, every team has had a chance to draft a player...so trade value starts to decrease dramatically. If the Falcons wanted to move up from #31 to #15, it should cost more than wanting to trading up from #63 to #33...because whichever player they wanted at #33 they could have just drafted at #31...but trading up from #31 to #15 gives them a shot at potentially 15 players they wouldn't have otherwise been able to draft.

 

Agreed.

 

The market has dictated the current chart. I would assume any new chart would be similar to the current chart. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

Agreed. What I did was average the points between the rounds. 

 

I don't understand... 

[BlueShoe]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't understand... 

 

Check out 97-107.

 

While it is not perfect, it is a way to allow the current Value Chart to work. 

Overall	Round	R-Pick	Value	Team
1	1	1	3000.0	Cleveland Browns
2	1	2	2600.0	San Francisco 49ers
3	1	3	2200.0	Chicago Bears
4	1	4	1800.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
5	1	5	1700.0	Tennessee Titans
6	1	6	1600.0	New York Jets
7	1	7	1500.0	Los Angeles Chargers
8	1	8	1400.0	Carolina Panthers
9	1	9	1350.0	Cincinnati Bengals
10	1	10	1300.0	Buffalo Bills
11	1	11	1250.0	New Orleans Saints
12	1	12	1200.0	Cleveland Browns
13	1	13	1150.0	Arizona Cardinals
14	1	14	1100.0	Philadelphia Eagles
15	1	15	1050.0	Indianapolis Colts
16	1	16	1000.0	Baltimore Ravens
17	1	17	950.0	Washington Redskins
18	1	18	900.0	Tennessee Titans
19	1	19	875.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
20	1	20	850.0	Denver Broncos
21	1	21	800.0	Detroit Lions
22	1	22	780.0	Miami Dolphins
23	1	23	760.0	New York Giants
24	1	24	740.0	Oakland Raiders
25	1	25	720.0	Houston Texans
26	1	26	700.0	Seattle Seahawks
27	1	27	680.0	Kansas City Chiefs
28	1	28	660.0	Dallas Cowboys
29	1	29	640.0	Green Bay Packers
30	1	30	620.0	Pittsburgh Steelers
31	1	31	600.0	Atlanta Falcons
32	1	32	590.0	New Orleans Saints
33	2	1	580.0	Cleveland Browns
34	2	2	560.0	San Francisco 49ers
35	2	3	550.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
36	2	4	540.0	Chicago Bears
37	2	5	530.0	Los Angeles Rams
38	2	6	520.0	Los Angeles Chargers
39	2	7	510.0	New York Jets
40	2	8	500.0	Carolina Panthers
41	2	9	490.0	Cincinnati Bengals
42	2	10	480.0	New Orleans Saints
43	2	11	470.0	Philadelphia Eagles
44	2	12	460.0	Buffalo Bills
45	2	13	450.0	Arizona Cardinals
46	2	14	440.0	Indianapolis Colts
47	2	15	430.0	Baltimore Ravens
48	2	16	420.0	Minnesota Vikings
49	2	17	410.0	Washington Redskins
50	2	18	400.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
51	2	19	390.0	Denver Broncos
52	2	20	380.0	Cleveland Browns
53	2	21	370.0	Detroit Lions
54	2	22	360.0	Miami Dolphins
55	2	23	350.0	New York Giants
56	2	24	340.0	Oakland Raiders
57	2	25	330.0	Houston Texans
58	2	26	320.0	Seattle Seahawks
59	2	27	310.0	Kansas City Chiefs
60	2	28	300.0	Dallas Cowboys
61	2	29	292.0	Green Bay Packers
62	2	30	284.0	Pittsburgh Steelers
63	2	31	276.0	Atlanta Falcons
64	2	32	270.0	Carolina Panthers
65	3	1	265.0	Cleveland Browns
66	3	2	260.0	San Francisco 49ers
67	3	3	255.0	Chicago Bears
68	3	4	250.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
69	3	5	245.0	Los Angeles Rams
70	3	6	240.0	New York Jets
71	3	7	235.0	Los Angeles Chargers
72	3	8	230.0	New England Patriots
73	3	9	225.0	Cincinnati Bengals
74	3	10	220.0	Philadelphia Eagles
75	3	11	215.0	Buffalo Bills
76	3	12	210.0	New Orleans Saints
77	3	13	205.0	Arizona Cardinals
78	3	14	200.0	Baltimore Ravens
79	3	15	195.0	Minnesota Vikings
80	3	16	190.0	Indianapolis Colts
81	3	17	185.0	Washington Redskins
82	3	18	180.0	Denver Broncos
83	3	19	175.0	Tennessee Titans
84	3	20	170.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
85	3	21	165.0	Detroit Lions
86	3	22	160.0	Minnesota Vikings
87	3	23	155.0	New York Giants
88	3	24	150.0	Oakland Raiders
89	3	25	145.0	Houston Texans
90	3	26	140.0	Seattle Seahawks
91	3	27	136.0	Kansas City Chiefs
92	3	28	132.0	Dallas Cowboys
93	3	29	128.0	Green Bay Packers
94	3	30	124.0	Pittsburgh Steelers
95	3	31	120.0	Atlanta Falcons
96	3	32	116.0	New England Patriots
97	3	33	115.7	Miami Dolphins
98	3	34	115.3	Carolina Panthers
99	3	35	115.0	Baltimore Ravens
100	3	36	114.7	Tennessee Titans
101	3	37	114.3	Denver Broncos
102	3	38	114.0	Seattle Seahawks
103	3	39	113.7	New Orleans Saints
104	3	40	113.3	Kansas City Chiefs
105	3	41	113.0	Pittsburgh Steelers
106	3	42	112.7	Seattle Seahawks
107	3	43	112.3	New York Jets
108	4	1	112.0	Cleveland Browns
109	4	2	108.0	San Francisco 49ers
110	4	3	104.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
111	4	4	100.0	Chicago Bears
112	4	5	96.0	Los Angeles Rams
113	4	6	92.0	Los Angeles Chargers
114	4	7	88.0	Washington Redskins
115	4	8	86.0	Carolina Panthers
116	4	9	84.0	Cincinnati Bengals
117	4	10	82.0	Chicago Bears
118	4	11	80.0	Philadelphia Eagles
119	4	12	78.0	Arizona Cardinals
120	4	13	76.0	Minnesota Vikings
121	4	14	74.0	Indianapolis Colts
122	4	15	72.0	Baltimore Ravens
123	4	16	70.0	Washington Redskins
124	4	17	68.0	Tennessee Titans
125	4	18	66.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
126	4	19	64.0	Denver Broncos
127	4	20	62.0	Detroit Lions
128	4	21	60.0	Minnesota Vikings
129	4	22	58.0	Oakland Raiders
130	4	23	56.0	Houston Texans
131	4	24	54.0	New England Patriots
132	4	25	52.0	Kansas City Chiefs
133	4	26	50.0	Dallas Cowboys
134	4	27	49.0	Green Bay Packers
135	4	28	48.0	Pittsburgh Steelers
136	4	29	47.0	Atlanta Falcons
137	4	30	46.0	Indianapolis Colts
138	4	31	45.0	Cincinnati Bengals
139	4	32	44.0	Philadelphia Eagles
140	4	33	43.8	New York Giants
141	4	34	43.7	Los Angeles Rams
142	4	35	43.5	Houston Texans
143	4	36	43.3	San Francisco 49ers
144	4	37	43.2	Indianapolis Colts
145	5	1	43.0	Cleveland Browns
146	5	2	42.0	San Francisco 49ers
147	5	3	41.0	Chicago Bears
148	5	4	40.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
149	5	5	39.5	Los Angeles Rams
150	5	6	39.0	New York Jets
151	5	7	38.5	Los Angeles Chargers
152	5	8	38.0	Carolina Panthers
153	5	9	37.5	Cincinnati Bengals
154	5	10	37.0	Washington Redskins
155	5	11	36.5	Philadelphia Eagles
156	5	12	36.0	Buffalo Bills
157	5	13	35.5	Arizona Cardinals
158	5	14	35.0	Indianapolis Colts
159	5	15	34.5	Baltimore Ravens
160	5	16	34.0	Minnesota Vikings
161	5	17	33.5	San Francisco 49ers
162	5	18	33.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
163	5	19	32.6	New England Patriots
164	5	20	32.2	Tennessee Titans
165	5	21	31.8	Detroit Lions
166	5	22	31.4	Miami Dolphins
167	5	23	31.0	New York Giants
168	5	24	30.6	Oakland Raiders
169	5	25	30.2	Houston Texans
170	5	26	29.8	Kansas City Chiefs
171	5	27	29.4	Buffalo Bills
172	5	28	29.0	Green Bay Packers
173	5	29	28.6	Pittsburgh Steelers
174	5	30	28.2	Atlanta Falcons
175	5	31	27.8	Cleveland Browns
176	5	32	27.4	Cincinnati Bengals
177	5	33	27.4	Denver Broncos
178	5	34	27.3	Miami Dolphins
179	5	35	27.3	Arizona Cardinals
180	5	36	27.2	Kansas City Chiefs
181	5	37	27.2	Cleveland Browns
182	5	38	27.1	Green Bay Packers
183	5	39	27.1	New England Patriots
184	5	40	27.0	Miami Dolphins
185	6	1	27.0	Cleveland Browns
186	6	2	26.6	Baltimore Ravens
187	6	3	26.2	Jacksonville Jaguars
188	6	4	25.8	Cleveland Browns
189	6	5	25.4	Los Angeles Rams
190	6	6	25.0	Los Angeles Chargers
191	6	7	24.6	New York Jets
192	6	8	24.2	Carolina Panthers
193	6	9	23.8	Cincinnati Bengals
194	6	10	23.4	Philadelphia Eagles
195	6	11	23.0	Buffalo Bills
196	6	12	22.6	New Orleans Saints
197	6	13	22.2	Arizona Cardinals
198	6	14	21.8	San Francisco 49ers
199	6	15	21.4	Minnesota Vikings
200	6	16	21.0	New England Patriots
201	6	17	20.6	Washington Redskins
202	6	18	20.2	San Francisco 49ers
203	6	19	19.8	Denver Broncos
204	6	20	19.4	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
205	6	21	19.0	Detroit Lions
206	6	22	18.6	Los Angeles Rams
207	6	23	18.2	New York Giants
208	6	24	17.8	Oakland Raiders
209	6	25	17.4	Washington Redskins
210	6	26	17.0	Seattle Seahawks
211	6	27	16.6	Dallas Cowboys
212	6	28	16.2	Green Bay Packers
213	6	29	15.8	Pittsburgh Steelers
214	6	30	15.4	Tennessee Titans
215	6	31	15.0	Detroit Lions
216	6	32	14.6	Kansas City Chiefs
217	6	33	14.5	Cincinnati Bengals
218	6	34	14.4	Kansas City Chiefs
219	7	1	14.2	San Francisco 49ers
220	7	2	13.8	Washington Redskins
221	7	3	13.4	Chicago Bears
222	7	4	13.0	Jacksonville Jaguars
223	7	5	12.6	Miami Dolphins
224	7	6	12.2	New York Jets
225	7	7	11.8	Los Angeles Chargers
226	7	8	11.4	Seattle Seahawks
227	7	9	11.0	Cincinnati Bengals
228	7	10	10.6	Dallas Cowboys
229	7	11	10.2	New Orleans Saints
230	7	12	9.8	Philadelphia Eagles
231	7	13	9.4	Arizona Cardinals
232	7	14	9.0	Minnesota Vikings
233	7	15	8.6	Carolina Panthers
234	7	16	8.2	Los Angeles Rams
235	7	17	7.8	Washington Redskins
236	7	18	7.4	Tennessee Titans
237	7	19	7.0	Tampa Bay Buccaneers
238	7	20	6.6	Denver Broncos
239	7	21	6.2	New England Patriots
240	7	22	5.8	Jacksonville Jaguars
241	7	23	5.4	New York Giants
242	7	24	5.0	Oakland Raiders
243	7	25	4.6	Houston Texans
244	7	26	4.2	Oakland Raiders
245	7	27	3.8	Kansas City Chiefs
246	7	28	3.4	Dallas Cowboys
247	7	29	3.0	Green Bay Packers
248	7	30	2.6	Pittsburgh Steelers
249	7	31	2.3	Atlanta Falcons
250	7	32	2.0	Detroit Lions
251	7	33	2.0	Cincinnati Bengals
252	7	34	2.0	Denver Broncos
253	7	35	2.0	Denver Broncos

[21isSuperman]

3 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

Just took a quick peek at this. Going to read more later. 

 

Very nice find!

 

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

 

I think that is the current trade value chart they evaluated. Their alternative chart is on page 9. It seems way off. It assumes, in theory, that the team picking #2 overall could bundle their 2nd and 3rd round picks and get the #1 overall pick. Or that the Colts could move up to #1 by giving up a 5th round pick. Maybe I am reading it wrong.

 

 

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think I've seen this proposed table before, but not the paper. I'll skim over it. I think their premise is the early picks are overvalued, and the gradient is too steep (which I agree with).

 

Of course, based on their intro, their study is based on drafts between '91 and '01, and the draft has changed dramatically since. They published in 2011, so the effect of the rookie wage scale isn't taken into consideration, nor the move away from RBs early in the draft. And of course, this is the first year comp picks are tradeable. Lastly, future picks are still hard to gauge, but none of the charts actually try to predict their value so maybe that's a moot point (but not one we should ignore when proposing draft trades).

 

So I like their fresh approach at its core, but they have some work to do still. 

 

It could be an interesting fan forum project.  After a quick read of the paper, they said the original pick value chart was based off of historical trades.  However, in their method, they base it off of production.  It could be an interesting project for a few forum members to work on and see if we can develop a more accurate draft pick value chart.

[Yoshinator]

 
Trades:
(27, 59, 132) from KC  for (15)
 
Picks:
Rd 1   Pk  27 - Malik Hooker (SS) Ohio State
Rd 2   Pk  46 - Chidobe Awuzie (CB) Colorado
Rd 2   Pk  59 - Pat Elflein (G) Ohio State
Rd 3   Pk  80 - Raekwon McMillan (ILB) Ohio State
Rd 4   Pk 122 - Gerald Everett (TE) South Alabama
Rd 4   Pk 132 - Cameron Sutton (CB) Tennessee
Rd 4   Pk 137 - Jeremy McNichols (RB) Boise State
Rd 4   Pk 144 - Avery Moss (DE) Youngstown St.
Rd 5   Pk 158 - Isaac Rochell (DE 3/4) Notre Dame

 

Here is my draft on draftwired. Did one trade and got some solid players. Went heavy on defense and the secondary.

[throwing BBZ]

23 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

Unfortunately for Colts fans, no history exists to dissect Chris Ballard. He has never had final, or near final-say, in the War Room. Colts fans and management are still in the honeymoon phase so this is a new venture. Just as the general managers before him, lessons will be learned from his successes and failures. Ballard has willingly pulled the curtain back enough to give everyone a peak into his philosophy.

 

Some of Ballard’s basic concepts to build a football team are parallel with the approach Bill Polian took. Although, I believe he is much more defensive-minded and Bill was offensive-minded. 

 

Build through the draft, and keep you own. That philosophy has won a lot of games in Indianapolis.

 

Chris Ballard brings the added philosophy of building a team in the trenches. Unfortunately, as Bill Polian’s regime aged, he struggled to improve the front lines. It was perhaps his downfall. Ballard will need to fortify the line-of-scrimmage before he can expect any real accomplishments, and I believe Jim Irsay has bought into this. We might draft an offensive lineman in the first round every other year. It is possible, and it is probably the way we should approach the draft. 

 

When the 15th pick is on the clock, there will certainly be talented players available. Ballard, a first-time general manager, will be contemplating his first ever NFL draft pick. Every voice will have spoken, and every table pounded. For the first time in his career, history will write his decision, and stamp his signature next to the outcome.

 

On April 27th Chris Ballard, will choose to either use the seven selections on talent certainly to be available, or trade for additional picks. Let’s evaluate some of those possible prospects and plausible trade partners.

 

Leonard Fournette and Marshon Lattimore are not likely to fall to 15, but would certainly spark the Colts interest if they did. Backs like Fournette are rare and shutdown corners are nearly as valuable.

 

Linebackers Reuben Foster, Haason Reddick, and Derek Barnett, are certain possibilities, and each could also be taken before 15. However, it is not likely all three will be drafted before the Colts have an opportunity to select at least one of them.

 

Chris Ballard has made it very clear about his intentions to focus on the offensive line and front seven. Forrest Lamp could provide the toughness Ballard is looking for.

 

Any serious discussion would not be complete without mentioning running backs Dalvin Cook and Christian McCaffrey who could be taken in the middle or may fall into the end of the first round. 

 

Plausible trade partners include Tampa Bay, Denver, Detroit, Miami, New York Giants, Oakland (Vegas), Seattle, Kansas City, Dallas, Green Bay, and Pittsburgh. Moving down further than that might be too far, and it would not be wise to leave the first round as doing so removes the fifth-year option.

 

Possible Compensation for the 15th pick would be:

 

Bucs - 19, 84, 237

Broncos - 20, 82, 203

Lions - 21, 85, 128

Dolphins - 22, 97, 166

Giants - 23, 87, 140

Raiders - 24, 88, 130

Seahawks - 26, 58, 210

Chiefs - 27, 59, 132

Cowboys - 28, 60, 133

Packers - 29, 61, 134

Steelers - 30, 62, 94

 

If Ballard were to trade down into the bottom of the first round he would pick up a few extra picks and still get a good football player. Let’s hypothetically say he makes a trade with his old team Kansas City for the 27th pick. Players he could possibly target at #27 are Forrest Lamp, Dalvin Cook, Christian McCaffrey, T.J. Watt, Jarrad Davis, and Gareon Conley. At least one of those players will still be on the board at number 27.

 

I believe if Chris Ballard wants to have his first album become a hit then he needs to trade back in this draft. If he can find a suitor who is willing to give fair compensation, then moving back might allow him more opportunity to paint his first Picasso.

 

In a mock simulation, I traded the 15th pick to Seattle for the 26th, a second (58) and a sixth (210). Forrest Lamp, Jarrad Davis, and Gareon Conley were all available at #26.

 

San Francisco later offered #66, #146, and #161 for #58, and I accepted.

 

Here is how the mock went:

 

Rd 1   Pk  26 - Forrest Lamp (G) Western Kentucky

Rd 2   Pk  46 - T.J. Watt (OLB 3/4) Wisconsin

Rd 3   Pk  66 - Adoree' Jackson (CB) Southern California

Rd 3   Pk  80 - Cooper Kupp (WR) Eastern Washington

Rd 4   Pk 122 - D'Onta Foreman (RB) Texas

Rd 4   Pk 137 - George Kittle (TE) Iowa

Rd 4   Pk 144 - Vince Biegel (OLB 3/4) Wisconsin

Rd 5   Pk 146 - Shaquill Griffin (CB) UCF

Rd 5   Pk 158 - Stevie Tu'kolovatu (NT) Southern California

Rd 5   Pk 161 - Damontae Kazee (CB) San Diego State

Rd 6   Pk 210 - Tarik Cohen (RB) North Carolina A&T

 

I could not find a safety within the right reach, but I am not convinced we need to draft a safety anyway.

 

We immediately upgraded our pass rush by grabbing T.J. Watt in the second and Vince Biegel in the fourth.

 

Adoree Jacskson would start at LCB, and Kazee would be an ideal fit for the slot against 11 personnel. Griffin would be groomed to take Vontae’s spot if we could not find a reasonable number to resign him.

 

D'Onta Foreman and Tarik Cohen are the answers at running back that we have been desperately looking for.

 

Cooper Kupp catches everything thrown his way and will immediately challenge both Aiken and Dorset for playing time.

 

George Kittle is an excellent complement to Jack Doyle, and instantly gets playing time.

 

Stevie Tu'kolovatu makes David Parry expendable.

 

The idea is to move back a few times, and fix all the holes on the team. Don't just try to improve the needs, but create competition even where there are strengths. It doesn't have to be these exact trades or exact players or positions. We want youth, and to build through the draft. This would be a very good start.

 

I am not saying we will trade back, but I believe we will jump any opportunity that makes sense. 

 

 Or how about trading Cleveland the 15 for
33

52

swap 4th`s our 137 for their 108.
33 
46

52

80

108
121

144

[BlueShoe]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

 
Trades:
(27, 59, 132) from KC  for (15)
 
Picks:
Rd 1   Pk  27 - Malik Hooker (SS) Ohio State
Rd 2   Pk  46 - Chidobe Awuzie (CB) Colorado
Rd 2   Pk  59 - Pat Elflein (G) Ohio State
Rd 3   Pk  80 - Raekwon McMillan (ILB) Ohio State
Rd 4   Pk 122 - Gerald Everett (TE) South Alabama
Rd 4   Pk 132 - Cameron Sutton (CB) Tennessee
Rd 4   Pk 137 - Jeremy McNichols (RB) Boise State
Rd 4   Pk 144 - Avery Moss (DE) Youngstown St.
Rd 5   Pk 158 - Isaac Rochell (DE 3/4) Notre Dame

 

Here is my draft on draftwired. Did one trade and got some solid players. Went heavy on defense and the secondary.

 

Lots of fun. 

[BlueShoe]

25 minutes ago, throwingbbzz said:

 

 Or how about trading Cleveland the 15 for
33

52

swap 4th`s our 137 for their 108.
33 
46

52

80

108
121

144

 

The only issue I have is losing the fifth year option. 

[dgambill]

Omg!!! First it was well the trade worked on madden....then it was fantasy football and now its these draft mock sites...it would be great if people would just not believe everything they find on the internet. Those draft simulators are about as realistic as a fake news page....I'm surprised you don't get a virus when you get on there.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Omg!!! First it was well the trade worked on madden....then it was fantasy football and now its these draft mock sites...it would be great if people would just not believe everything they find on the internet. Those draft simulators are about as realistic as a fake news page....I'm surprised you don't get a virus when you get on there.

Except on draftwired you are drafting with real people, and unless they have a temporary free trial, they are paying to draft on here in a 32 team mock with real people. If people are using their real teams, it makes it all the more realistic since they have knowledge of what they need. People on draftwired are legit, otherwise they'd draft for free on first-pick or fanspeak with simulations only and get unrealistic results.

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Except on draftwired you are drafting with real people, and unless they have a temporary free trial, they are paying to draft on here in a 32 team mock with real people. If people are using their real teams, it makes it all the more realistic since they have knowledge of what they need. People on draftwired are legit, otherwise they'd draft for free on first-pick or fanspeak with simulations only and get unrealistic results.

You speak as if I believe someone stupid enough to pay to play pretend GM is any more realistic a draft simulator than the crappy free ones. You realize most of The computer generated ones are based as much on fan input as this one having live fans. It's all set up for fan satisfaction and based on very limited very poor NFL GM input. It's all conjecture and let's be honest...about as realistic as madden player ratings.

[Yoshinator]

24 minutes ago, dgambill said:

You speak as if I believe someone stupid enough to pay to play pretend GM is any more realistic a draft simulator than the crappy free ones. You realize most of The computer generated ones are based as much on fan input as this one having live fans. It's all set up for fan satisfaction and based on very limited very poor NFL GM input. It's all conjecture and let's be honest...about as realistic as madden player ratings.

So in other words, everyone that does mock drafts, including the people on this forum who discuss the NFL Drafts, are stupid !diots? Is that what you're saying? Go ahead and admit it.

[dgambill]

2 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

So in other words, everyone that does mock drafts, including the people on this forum who discuss the NFL Drafts, are stupid !diots? Is that what you're saying? Go ahead and admit it.

Not in those words but if you do it and you believe you can extrapolate some kind of trend or something that will somehow play out in real life just because a bunch of wanna be arm chair GMs picked some guys on a website...well I've got some ocean front property I'd like to sell you. I mean everyone believes is global warming so it's gotta be just a matter of a few years and this land will be prime real estate I promise you. Trust me I'm using basically the same scientific tools I'm sure these kids on this website are using to base their draft picks on....I mean CB needs to be informed about these websites because he can gain valuable information on what every team is going to do in the draft. I mean I bet it predicted we would take Dorsett in the first rd a couple years ago I'm sure. If we all got on there we should have been able to see the genius in Grigson. 

Im sure it's fun to play with...I look at mocks and player bios too..,but I don't pretend to think there is any link or science to any of it and especially listening to other teams fans pretend to know what their GM will do....we've sit here for months trying to predict CB and we ain't got a clue under the sun. We got the Cooks, Lamps, Fosters, Reddicks, Tacos I can go on and on and people have about as many opinions which way CB will go as their are picks in the first rd....and we are suppose to think other teams fans are any more in the know. Have fun play the game just don't think it means anything at the end of the day. You have a better chance picking every singe NCAA bracket game then all 7 of our picks. I'm an butt I know for ruining the fun...but you know it's true.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, dgambill said:

Not in those words but if you do it and you believe you can extrapolate some kind of trend or something that will somehow play out in real life just because a bunch of wanna be arm chair GMs picked some guys on a website...well I've got some ocean front property I'd like to sell you. I mean everyone believes is global warming so it's gotta be just a matter of a few years and this land will be prime real estate I promise you. Trust me I'm using basically the same scientific tools I'm sure these kids on this website are using to base their draft picks on....I mean CB needs to be informed about these websites because he can gain valuable information on what every team is going to do in the draft. I mean I bet it predicted we would take Dorsett in the first rd a couple years ago I'm sure. If we all got on there we should have been able to see the genius in Grigson. 

Im sure it's fun to play with...I look at mocks and player bios too..,but I don't pretend to think there is any link or science to any of it and especially listening to other teams fans pretend to know what their GM will do....we've sit here for months trying to predict CB and we ain't got a clue under the sun. We got the Cooks, Lamps, Fosters, Reddicks, Tacos I can go on and on and people have about as many opinions which way CB will go as their are picks in the first rd....and we are suppose to think other teams fans are any more in the know. Have fun play the game just don't think it means anything at the end of the day. You have a better chance picking every singe NCAA bracket game then all 7 of our picks. I'm an butt I know for ruining the fun...but you know it's true.

Just remember this, all real GMs are former armchair GMs, and a handful still draft like Armchair GMs. Everyone in the beginning is a fan. They have no special powers, they are not superheroes, they got there by putting in hard work and effort, sort of like what some people do on here. A lot of the time, the GMs are wrong and normal fans are right, and that's why there is so much GM turnover and why the same teams remain bad for so long. In the future, people like you and I will be GMs, just normal fans.

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Just remember this, all real GMs are former armchair GMs, and a handful still draft like Armchair GMs. Everyone in the beginning is a fan. They have no special powers, they are not superheroes, they got there by putting in hard work and effort, sort of like what some people do on here. A lot of the time, the GMs are wrong and normal fans are right, and that's why there is so much GM turnover and why the same teams remain bad for so long. In the future, people like you and I will be GMs, just normal fans.

While I understand your point there is not a lot of turnover in the GM position in the NFL. That position is so hard to fill and very few are fired.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

While I understand your point there is not a lot of turnover in the GM position in the NFL. That position is so hard to fill and very few are fired.

It happens less than coaches, but there definitely is turnover. I will agree there are less GM's than coaches as well. More often than not, they move from team to team rather than get replaced with a completely new one.

[CoachLite]

6 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Just remember this, all real GMs are former armchair GMs, and a handful still draft like Armchair GMs. Everyone in the beginning is a fan. They have no special powers, they are not superheroes, they got there by putting in hard work and effort, sort of like what some people do on here. A lot of the time, the GMs are wrong and normal fans are right, and that's why there is so much GM turnover and why the same teams remain bad for so long. In the future, people like you and I will be GMs, just normal fans.

 

Maybe. All the charts, models and stats are merely trends - they don't necessarily apply to the team fit of individual players - and this may have been Grigson's problem. Each team probably runs many simulations of their "integration models" - how particular individuals become a team (or not).

 

Or, it could be that most folks (even GMs) just don't understand statistics very well. IOW, it's complicated, and most people tend to go with simple scenarios.

[throwing BBZ]

14 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

The only issue I have is losing the fifth year option. 

 

 I would enjoy seeing you, anyone mock this scenario.

[jvan1973]

10 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Just remember this, all real GMs are former armchair GMs, and a handful still draft like Armchair GMs. Everyone in the beginning is a fan. They have no special powers, they are not superheroes, they got there by putting in hard work and effort, sort of like what some people do on here. A lot of the time, the GMs are wrong and normal fans are right, and that's why there is so much GM turnover and why the same teams remain bad for so long. In the future, people like you and I will be GMs, just normal fans.

They do far more work than any fan.   Most didn't start as armchair gms.  Most are former players or scouts .  They put in years of work before getting a gm job

[Yoshinator]

Just now, jvan1973 said:

They do far more work than any fan.   Most didn't start as armchair gms.  Most are former players or scouts .  They put in years of work before getting a gm job

Some were players, but even in between after they retired and became scouts, they were armchair GM's, learning the ins and outs in how to draft. The scouts that weren't players were just like us, fans of the game that put in a serious effort to get into the NFL business and learn how to scout players. They have one underlying theme though, they were all doing the same thing we are doing on the forum, studying players off scouting reports and tape. They just have more resources now than us, so they should be better in their work.

[jvan1973]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

Some were players, but even in between after they retired and became scouts, they were armchair GM's, learning the ins and outs in how to draft. The scouts that weren't players were just like us, fans of the game that put in a serious effort to get into the NFL business and learn how to scout players. They have one underlying theme though, they were all doing the same thing we are doing on the forum, studying players off scouting reports and tape. They just have more resources now than us, so they should be better in their work.

They were doing far more than anyone here is doing.  Certainly far more than pay to play draft mock sites