What to do at 15, round 2

[Superman]

Just now, OffensivelyPC said:

I get where guys like BP are coming from, but I don't think people account enough for hte difference in playmakers.  It's an overly simplistic analysis, but trading down as BP suggest, lets say you hit on both of them, you get probably a good starter with pro bowl upside, but otherwise nothing special, and an average to good starter with the extra pick.  But if you hit on a guy at 15 (particulary who is projected as a top 5 pick), you're getting an elite player at that position.  People can argue over the difference till the sun rises, but you need difference makers on defense.  You just do - and we have none (well last year we didn't, maybe Hankins fits the bill, but he's gotta prove it first).  

 

If you believe a guy is special, you take him regardless, because you don't know where you'll be drafting next year and you don't know if you'll have that same opportunity.  I always find it a little funny when we spend so many years drafting in the 20s, and we finally get 2 years in a row where we are in a position to maybe trade up a few spots and get a player graded high enough that we'd never have a chance at 3 years ago dating back to pretty much 2000...and everyone wants to trade back.

 

Agreed all the way around.

 

I'll add that I don't see Thomas or Barnett being there at #15, and everyone else in this proposed scenario is a lower tier for me, so I'd trade back. (Jonathan Allen is the question mark, but if he falls to #15, I'm legitimately scared of whatever teams know about his medical, and I think I'd pass. I want as close to a no-doubter as possible if we pick at #15.)

 

I think it's too expensive to trade up, especially this year.

[OffensivelyPC]

18 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Agreed all the way around.

 

I'll add that I don't see Thomas or Barnett being there at #15, and everyone else in this proposed scenario is a lower tier for me, so I'd trade back. (Jonathan Allen is the question mark, but if he falls to #15, I'm legitimately scared of whatever teams know about his medical, and I think I'd pass. I want as close to a no-doubter as possible if we pick at #15.)

 

I think it's too expensive to trade up, especially this year.

Yeah that's the counterargument against me - last year and very likely this year, there's probably not anyone worth trading up to get.  If it were 2011 or 2010, maybe.  But that's 20/20 hindsight and of course we can't judge these classes for several more years.  But by most accounts, the 2016/2017 draft class' strengths are in its depth as opposed to its top tier talents. 

 

So yeah, I'm definitely not against acquiring more picks.  In this scenario I'm not (EDIT: read as, I wouldn't trade down in this scenario), but the top tier players will clear out pretty quick, particularly if no QB is drafted.  There might be some leftovers for us at 15, but no one I'm overly excited about.  After that, the tier ranges get pretty big (i.e. Mcshay's 3rd tier of players for instance spans from 20 overall to like 45).

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

In this scenario I'm not (EDIT: read as, I wouldn't trade down in this scenario), but the top tier players will clear out pretty quick, particularly if no QB is drafted.

 

My fear is that this winds up being like 2013, when the first and only QB taken in the first round was EJ Manuel at #16. I could see all the QBs sliding this year, which means the players we want are coming off the board faster, and it also muddies the trade waters, because if someone really wants a QB, they're probably only looking to get in front of Houston at #25, not all the way up to #15. 

 

Outside of QBs, I see a distinction in this draft between the top 12 and the next 20 guys. To me, in whatever order, it's Garrett, Thomas, Allen, Hooker, Adams, Howard, M. Williams, Foster, Barnett, Lamp, and then special recognition to Lattimore and Fournette (consensus, not IMO). At #15, I don't think I'd take Howard; I definitely wouldn't take Fournette. So now, you have McCaffrey, Cook, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Harris, King, Davis, Humphrey, Njoku, Peppers, Ramczyk, Cunningham, Charlton, etc., I'm sure I'm leaving out at least a handful... I don't think any of them represent a great value at #15. Any of the bolded in the 20-23 range would be nice, and we'd pick up an extra third. 

 

If you have a couple QBs go in the top 15, then it pushes one of those top 12 guys down to us (besides Fournette and Howard), and I'd just as soon make the pick. Actually, if Lattimore fell, I'd want to trade out; I'm not 100% sold on him.

 

There's also a decision to make on Foster, but I'm fine with him, assuming the medical is okay. Same on Allen.

[Defjamz26]

The question is also whether or not this coaching staff will be here after this season. I think the ability not to get the most out of players and coach guys up will also be a strike against Pagano. The Colts just don't seem to be a team that can take someone who's raw and really coach them up and turn them around. They lack the creativity IMO. Except for Philbin who I believe to be the best coach on the entire roster. 

 

It would be a shame to pass on a guy like Reddick for example, simply because we don't know how to convert raw potential into translatable on field skills. I'm not saying I think Dorsett and TJ Green could be top talents under a different staff, but if we continue to have a staff that can't get the most out of players then we put ourselves in a bind when drafting. Because now you have to reach for finished products who are perfect scheme fits just to find success.

[OffensivelyPC]

22 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

My fear is that this winds up being like 2013, when the first and only QB taken in the first round was EJ Manuel at #16. I could see all the QBs sliding this year, which means the players we want are coming off the board faster, and it also muddies the trade waters, because if someone really wants a QB, they're probably only looking to get in front of Houston at #25, not all the way up to #15. 

 

Outside of QBs, I see a distinction in this draft between the top 12 and the next 20 guys. To me, in whatever order, it's Garrett, Thomas, Allen, Hooker, Adams, Howard, M. Williams, Foster, Barnett, Lamp, and then special recognition to Lattimore and Fournette (consensus, not IMO). At #15, I don't think I'd take Howard; I definitely wouldn't take Fournette. So now, you have McCaffrey, Cook, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Harris, King, Davis, Humphrey, Njoku, Peppers, Ramczyk, Cunningham, Charlton, etc., I'm sure I'm leaving out at least a handful... I don't think any of them represent a great value at #15. Any of the bolded in the 20-23 range would be nice, and we'd pick up an extra third. 

 

If you have a couple QBs go in the top 15, then it pushes one of those top 12 guys down to us (besides Fournette and Howard), and I'd just as soon make the pick. Actually, if Lattimore fell, I'd want to trade out; I'm not 100% sold on him.

 

There's also a decision to make on Foster, but I'm fine with him, assuming the medical is okay. Same on Allen.

Lots of good points here that I want to respond to but dont think I will have time tonight. I will get to this though.

[shasta519]

20 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

My fear is that this winds up being like 2013, when the first and only QB taken in the first round was EJ Manuel at #16. I could see all the QBs sliding this year, which means the players we want are coming off the board faster, and it also muddies the trade waters, because if someone really wants a QB, they're probably only looking to get in front of Houston at #25, not all the way up to #15. 

 

Outside of QBs, I see a distinction in this draft between the top 12 and the next 20 guys. To me, in whatever order, it's Garrett, Thomas, Allen, Hooker, Adams, Howard, M. Williams, Foster, Barnett, Lamp, and then special recognition to Lattimore and Fournette (consensus, not IMO). At #15, I don't think I'd take Howard; I definitely wouldn't take Fournette. So now, you have McCaffrey, Cook, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Harris, King, Davis, Humphrey, Njoku, Peppers, Ramczyk, Cunningham, Charlton, etc., I'm sure I'm leaving out at least a handful... I don't think any of them represent a great value at #15. Any of the bolded in the 20-23 range would be nice, and we'd pick up an extra third. 

 

If you have a couple QBs go in the top 15, then it pushes one of those top 12 guys down to us (besides Fournette and Howard), and I'd just as soon make the pick. Actually, if Lattimore fell, I'd want to trade out; I'm not 100% sold on him.

 

There's also a decision to make on Foster, but I'm fine with him, assuming the medical is okay. Same on Allen.

 

I agree...not sure there is going to be a no-brainer at #15. And I have also noticed that most of the 8-9 picks directly after the Colts are offensive players (WR, TE, RB, OL)...which the Colts most likely won't be targeting. I think that will actually play out that way.

 

So that means, if the Colts trade down 8 or so spots, they will still be able to get one of the defensive guys they wanted...and maybe even their favorite guy that was available at #15. AND they would pick up at least an extra crack a top 85 pick in the process...if not more. 

 

So in the majority of mock drafts and simulations I have seen, I would want the Colts to trade down. I know people talk about trading back every draft, but the stars seem to be lining up for it...much moreso than previous years. There are teams picking after the Colts (in the 16-23 range) who will most likely be targeting one of the top WRs/RBs/TE that is still available...and will likely have to move up to get their guy. There are several ways it could play out where the Colts are in the driver's seat. And they likely won't lose much by trading back, as far as who is available...so it makes plenty of sense for them do it.

 

Because of this, I would actually be fine with just getting an additional 3rd round pick...but I actually think Ballard might have a small bidding war on his hands. ideally, the Colts get the NYG's 2nd round pick by moving back to #23. But there are other possibilities...with teams like TB and DEN. It's going to be fun to watch it play out.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree...not sure there is going to be a no-brainer at #15. And I have also noticed that most of the 8-9 picks directly after the Colts are offensive players (WR, TE, RB, OL)...which the Colts most likely won't be targeting. I think that will actually play out that way.

 

So that means, if the Colts trade down 8 or so spots, they will still be able to get one of the defensive guys they wanted...and maybe even their favorite guy that was available at #15. AND they would pick up at least an extra crack a top 85 pick in the process...if not more. 

 

So in the majority of mock drafts and simulations I have seen, I would want the Colts to trade down. I know people talk about trading back every draft, but the stars seem to be lining up for it...much moreso than previous years. There are teams picking after the Colts (in the 16-23 range) who will most likely be targeting one of the top WRs/RBs/TE that is still available...and will likely have to move up to get their guy. There are several ways it could play out where the Colts are in the driver's seat. And they likely won't lose much by trading back, as far as who is available...so it makes plenty of sense for them do it.

 

Because of this, I would actually be fine with just getting an additional 3rd round pick...but I actually think Ballard might have a small bidding war on his hands. ideally, the Colts get the NYG's 2nd round pick by moving back to #23. But there are other possibilities...with teams like TB and DEN. It's going to be fun to watch it play out.

 

All this, but I'm prepared to hear "With the 15th pick in the 2017 NFL Draft, the Indianapolis Colts select, Christian McCaffrey, running back, Stanford." Or OJ Howard, or Forrest Lamp (Lamp is the one I'd get over the easiest). 

 

To the bolded, I hope you're right, but I'm seeing it the other way around. I think consensus is that the defensive weight at the top of this draft is uncommon, while the offensive players are the typical guys you see near the top. I don't think the offensive players move the needle this year, I think the defensive guys are the most coveted. And I think, outside of those top 12, with some variation, the groupings and values favor waiting for a good defensive prospect rather than moving up for an offensive prospect. I don't expect demand to be all that high for #15, unless one of those top guys falls, in which case, I'd rather draft him than trade back. 

[shasta519]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

All this, but I'm prepared to hear "With the 15th pick in the 2017 NFL Draft, the Indianapolis Colts select, Christian McCaffrey, running back, Stanford." Or OJ Howard, or Forrest Lamp (Lamp is the one I'd get over the easiest). 

 

To the bolded, I hope you're right, but I'm seeing it the other way around. I think consensus is that the defensive weight at the top of this draft is uncommon, while the offensive players are the typical guys you see near the top. I don't think the offensive players move the needle this year, I think the defensive guys are the most coveted. And I think, outside of those top 12, with some variation, the groupings and values favor waiting for a good defensive prospect rather than moving up for an offensive prospect. I don't expect demand to be all that high for #15, unless one of those top guys falls, in which case, I'd rather draft him than trade back. 

 

That could very will be the case. Though I don't think Howard is your typical offensive player. But he might have hyped his way into the top 10, so it doesn't matter. Admittedly, part of my theory is predicated on him being available at #15.

 

My hope now is that McCaffrey has entered that area where teams are willing to move up. And I have long thought none of the top 3 WRs make it past pick 20. Once Ross set the record...I felt that was confirmed. But you never know how teams view WRs.

 

So it's really based on Howard, McCaffrey and the WRs being targets for a trade. Cook was one of those players...but I don't think so anymore.

[Bluefire4]

I'm not even going to consider Thomas as he will definitely not be there.

 

I'd go Barnett as I am really high on him and have been since my mock draft on here last month. Reddick would be a close second. 3rd option would be to trade down and consider Takk or Lamp.

[OffensivelyPC]

16 hours ago, Superman said:

 

My fear is that this winds up being like 2013, when the first and only QB taken in the first round was EJ Manuel at #16. I could see all the QBs sliding this year, which means the players we want are coming off the board faster, and it also muddies the trade waters, because if someone really wants a QB, they're probably only looking to get in front of Houston at #25, not all the way up to #15. 

This does have a lot of similarities to the 2013 class with the added wrinkle that there are no true LT prospects that warrants top 5 consideration.  I think Ballard is thinking the strength of this class is not very strong and we'd be better served with more Day 2 and 3 picks, or perhaps even a future pick rather than a 2017 #15 overall (if the rumors that we're open to trading down are in fact true and accurate).  There's a couple of WRs that might get someone to move up a handful of spots if the right guys fall.  I'm not very optimistic we find a trade partner, but we'll see.  Anything I say about trading down below is not necessarily what I think is likely, but I'm assuming it for the purpose of discussion.

 

16 hours ago, Superman said:

Outside of QBs, I see a distinction in this draft between the top 12 and the next 20 guys. To me, in whatever order, it's Garrett, Thomas, Allen, Hooker, Adams, Howard, M. Williams, Foster, Barnett, Lamp, and then special recognition to Lattimore and Fournette (consensus, not IMO). At #15, I don't think I'd take Howard; I definitely wouldn't take Fournette. So now, you have McCaffrey, Cook, Reddick, Conley, McKinley, Harris, King, Davis, Humphrey, Njoku, Peppers, Ramczyk, Cunningham, Charlton, etc., I'm sure I'm leaving out at least a handful... I don't think any of them represent a great value at #15. Any of the bolded in the 20-23 range would be nice, and we'd pick up an extra third. 

 It's hard seeing anyone in that top 12 being available.  I'm also within you on Howard and Fournette, and I'd throw in Foster and Lamp in there.  I think Foster is a special talent, but I'm scared off by his medical, which he avoided due to his incident.  With his play style and wreckless abandon, the shoulder is always going to be a worry with guys like that, and avoiding the medical on his surgically repaired shoulder, I'm not willing to take that risk at #15 if I can't get a look at it.  Mike Williams is a good player, but I'd trade down for reasons similar to Lamp - i'ts not a dire need, so get some extra for him if you can.  I wouldn't hate the pick if it were Lamp or Williams, but I wouldn't love it either.  So that leaves 6 guys that are draftable at 15 IMO - not good odds if no one reaches for a QB or any of the other guys graded after the initial list of 12.  Not great odds since 4 of them are widely considered surefire top 5 picks.

 

I like your list of bolded guys.  If we have traded down I'd even take McCaffrey or Cook, but chances are, one of those bolded guys are going to be there so we shouldn't have to.  Conley, Harris or Humphrey would be my choice - and probably in that order.

[James Ducheteau]

21 hours ago, Superman said:

Who went 1-14, so that Solomon Thomas is still available? I'm having trouble with this. If anyone dropped, it would be Jonathan Allen, and that would mean there are serious questions about his medical.

 

Accepting your premise, the only two players that I'd be excited about at #15 wold be Thomas and Barnett, and I probably wouldn't trade back because I have them a tier higher than the rest on your list (I have Thomas in my top 5, Barnett in my top 10).

This is not from the same mock, but one I ran today where it happened again, and while it's surely not realistic it does show what can happen with QB needy teams..

1: R1P1

 

EDGE MYLES GARRETT

CLEVELAND BROWNS

2: R1P2

 

CB MARSHON LATTIMORE

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

3: R1P3

 

QB DESHAUN WATSON

CHICAGO BEARS

4: R1P4

 

S JAMAL ADAMS

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS

5: R1P5

 

S MALIK HOOKER

TENNESSEE TITANS

6: R1P6

 

QB MITCH TRUBISKY

NEW YORK JETS

7: R1P7

 

WR MIKE WILLIAMS

LA CHARGERS

8: R1P8

 

RB LEONARD FOURNETTE

CAROLINA PANTHERS

9: R1P9

 

DL JONATHAN ALLEN

CINCINNATI BENGALS

10: R1P10

 

LB REUBEN FOSTER

BUFFALO BILLS

11: R1P11

 

EDGE TACO CHARLTON

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

12: R1P12

 

QB PATRICK MAHOMES II

CLEVELAND BROWNS

13: R1P13

 

QB DESHONE KIZER

ARIZONA CARDINALS

14: R1P14

 

TE DAVID NJOKU

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES

15: R1P15

 

EDGE SOLOMON THOMAS

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

[James Ducheteau]

4 minutes ago, James Ducheteau said:

This is not from the same mock, but one I ran today where it happened again, and while it's surely not realistic it does show what can happen with QB needy teams..

1: R1P1

 

EDGE MYLES GARRETT

CLEVELAND BROWNS

2: R1P2

 

CB MARSHON LATTIMORE

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

3: R1P3

 

QB DESHAUN WATSON

CHICAGO BEARS

4: R1P4

 

S JAMAL ADAMS

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS

5: R1P5

 

S MALIK HOOKER

TENNESSEE TITANS

6: R1P6

 

QB MITCH TRUBISKY

NEW YORK JETS

7: R1P7

 

WR MIKE WILLIAMS

LA CHARGERS

8: R1P8

 

RB LEONARD FOURNETTE

CAROLINA PANTHERS

9: R1P9

 

DL JONATHAN ALLEN

CINCINNATI BENGALS

10: R1P10

 

LB REUBEN FOSTER

BUFFALO BILLS

11: R1P11

 

EDGE TACO CHARLTON

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

12: R1P12

 

QB PATRICK MAHOMES II

CLEVELAND BROWNS

13: R1P13

 

QB DESHONE KIZER

ARIZONA CARDINALS

14: R1P14

 

TE DAVID NJOKU

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES

15: R1P15

 

EDGE SOLOMON THOMAS

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

And really, all of this "could" happen, except maybe the Taco pick..but that'd still leave one of Thomas/Barnett avaiable at 15.

[Superman]

3 hours ago, James Ducheteau said:

This is not from the same mock, but one I ran today where it happened again, and while it's surely not realistic it does show what can happen with QB needy teams..

1: R1P1

 

EDGE MYLES GARRETT

CLEVELAND BROWNS

2: R1P2

 

CB MARSHON LATTIMORE

SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS

3: R1P3

 

QB DESHAUN WATSON

CHICAGO BEARS

4: R1P4

 

S JAMAL ADAMS

JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS

5: R1P5

 

S MALIK HOOKER

TENNESSEE TITANS

6: R1P6

 

QB MITCH TRUBISKY

NEW YORK JETS

7: R1P7

 

WR MIKE WILLIAMS

LA CHARGERS

8: R1P8

 

RB LEONARD FOURNETTE

CAROLINA PANTHERS

9: R1P9

 

DL JONATHAN ALLEN

CINCINNATI BENGALS

10: R1P10

 

LB REUBEN FOSTER

BUFFALO BILLS

11: R1P11

 

EDGE TACO CHARLTON

NEW ORLEANS SAINTS

12: R1P12

 

QB PATRICK MAHOMES II

CLEVELAND BROWNS

13: R1P13

 

QB DESHONE KIZER

ARIZONA CARDINALS

14: R1P14

 

TE DAVID NJOKU

PHILADELPHIA EAGLES

15: R1P15

 

EDGE SOLOMON THOMAS

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

 

Yeah, I don't know about that. You have 4 QBs in the first 13 picks, plus Taco. Njoku goes ahead of Howard, which I don't get, but swap them out and you're in the same place. I don't get it, but if the board works out that way and we have to choose between Barnett and Thomas, I'll be fine.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

2 QBs will be picked in the top 12. And Mahones could go to the Cardinals. An OL could go top 10 to Cincy or Chargers. Fournette is going top 10. There will be someone waiting for us at #15. Whether it's Foster, Reddick, Conley, Lamp, White, Adams, or Barnett. It's gonna shake out fine. 

[Superman]

2 hours ago, Majin Vegeta said:

2 QBs will be picked in the top 12. 

 

Which two?

 

By the way, Bruce Arians like Kizer, I don't see them drafting Mahomes. 

[Andrew Luck fan club]

25 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which two?

 

By the way, Bruce Arians like Kizer, I don't see them drafting Mahomes. 

Watson and Trubisky. Maybe Mahones? Chicago, jets, 49ers, Bills and the browns. And maybe Arizona takes Kizer then. Either way I think 2 or 3 go before our pick, which would be awesome lol. And I see a OL going top 10 also. 

[ponyboy]

On ‎4‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 2:11 PM, OffensivelyPC said:

OK, it's not letting me fix it.  Whatevs...hope it makes sense lol.

 

If you're referring to your avatar change.. no, it's not making sense.  WTH??

 

[OffensivelyPC]

1 hour ago, ponyboy said:

 

If you're referring to your avatar change.. no, it's not making sense.  WTH??

 

Lol its the kicker in the movie The Replacements