Ongoing Colts 2018 draft talk........

[WoolMagnet]

Has anyone seen Barkley compared to Cook and Fournette from last year. Like  If the three were in same draft, how they would rank?

im wondering how they rank barkley compared to those top backs from last year.

[NewColtsFan]

15 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Does kiper have Barkley as #1 player (talent wise) or #1 player (draft eise)?

i imagine its talent wise.  But as we know, and some are pointing out about Nelsons "rating", being the best player, doesnt mean you'll go #1 for many reasons including position.  BPA is relative.  

#1 "player" in the draft doesnt mean (necessarily) #1 selected.

 

Yeah....

 

I think it's BPA, regardless of position...    and yes,  Kiper is not trying to suggest this is the order in which they will be drafted...

 

As of today Kiper thinks Barkley is the top talent...    it's subject to change, so who knows who it will be come April...   

 

[NewColtsFan]

6 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

Exactly so if we trade back with a team for a QB Nelson wouldn't be a reach so there is no issue like everyone thinks 

 

I wanted to follow up....

 

I just double checked ESPN.....

 

Kiper has Nelson 7th overall.      McShay has him 17th,  but going 14th in his first mock.

 

Just wanted to keep that straight since you were curious......

 

[ty4atd]

2 hours ago, WoolMagnet said:

Has anyone seen Barkley compared to Cook and Fournette from last year. Like  If the three were in same draft, how they would rank?

im wondering how they rank barkley compared to those top backs from last year.

Barkley would likely be the top ranked back slightly above Fournette but some might have Fournette and ahead of Cook for sure. 

[The Peytonator]

I think a lot of us want Nelson, but none of us want to draft him 3rd overall. Probably 90% of the board agrees with the trade down scenarios and the ideal position would be for us to get 2nd overall so we can trade to a QB needy team. 

 

An an even greater mistake would be drafting McGlinchey at number 3 than drafting the superior Nelson. OTs are so often overdrafted because they are a premier position and that is exactly what that would be. Not to try to play the ‘appeal to authority’ card, but I’m an Irish fan, and Nelson is a far better prospect than McGlinchey and if an overdraft were to occur, I would prefer it to be him. Still gonna stay firmly in the ‘trade down’ camp. Nobody is really sticking out yet. I fear it’s a 2013 type of draft. 

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, The Peytonator said:

I think a lot of us want Nelson, but none of us want to draft him 3rd overall. Probably 90% of the board agrees with the trade down scenarios and the ideal position would be for us to get 2nd overall so we can trade to a QB needy team. 

 

An an even greater mistake would be drafting McGlinchey at number 3 than drafting the superior Nelson. OTs are so often overdrafted because they are a premier position and that is exactly what that would be. Not to try to play the ‘appeal to authority’ card, but I’m an Irish fan, and Nelson is a far better prospect than McGlinchey and if an overdraft were to occur, I would prefer it to be him. Still gonna stay firmly in the ‘trade down’ camp. Nobody is really sticking out yet. I fear it’s a 2013 type of draft. 

Drafts like 2009 and 2013 are very bad, but even in those, there are guys who will hit. I have no right to judge this draft yet, as I have not watched any film yet, and won't until the bowl games are over. I may do a few mock drafts on first-pick in order to learn player names though and get a general feel for where everyone is going in the draft. Nelson is the early guy I want at this point, and I'd love to trade down for him if possible. It all comes down to if Ballard is intelligent enough to get max value out of a trade down WHILE still getting the guy he originally wanted. If he can do that this year a couple times in the draft while adding some picks, he'll have my respect. Hooker fell to us last year, now I want to see him use our draft capital with probably a top 5 pick at least to put together a solid draft.

[The Peytonator]

18 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Drafts like 2009 and 2013 are very bad, but even in those, there are guys who will hit. I have no right to judge this draft yet, as I have not watched any film yet, and won't until the bowl games are over. I may do a few mock drafts on first-pick in order to learn player names though and get a general feel for where everyone is going in the draft. Nelson is the early guy I want at this point, and I'd love to trade down for him if possible. It all comes down to if Ballard is intelligent enough to get max value out of a trade down WHILE still getting the guy he originally wanted. If he can do that this year a couple times in the draft while adding some picks, he'll have my respect. Hooker fell to us last year, now I want to see him use our draft capital with probably a top 5 pick at least to put together a solid draft.

 

 

Yeah I can't disagree with you on that. I'm either in favor of Nelson or Hurst, but I think both can be had between 8-12. The 2013 draft was among the worst we've seen in a while, but there were still plenty of good players drafted, Grigson just missed. There were like 20 of us here that wanted Xavier Rhodes in the first, we don't need to rehash that, but Grigson just plain missed, just as he did on a lot of his picks. I believe Ballard will be much better. He killed it in free agency, and while his draft class hasn't exactly lit it up yet, I still liked most of the picks and you really can't judge them on one year with a lame duck coach. Until he gives me reason to doubt him, I'm putting my faith in Ballard to right this ship. Love that dude.

[Mr_486lo]

Ballard is not your typical GM. Remember...he stated that he wouldnt make draft picks based on NEED. He said he would draft based on BPA because he prefers depth at every position  (like in Kansas City).

Sitting at #3 the best player available is Barkley. Everyone knows this. It's not an offensive lineman, defensive player or QB. What Ballard does would be fine with me. Our number 1 goal is to find a head coach that can get our team back to its winning ways. 2nd goal is/can be a #1 goal, but seeing that Luck had the entire season to heal up after surgery, I see that as a problem solved. I really think Luck will come back strong, despite what others believe. I like to think positive. Everything will fall into place. Let's just trust the process Ballard is installing. 

[crazycolt1]

While I have not been a big fan of trading back it might work this coming draft just because of the many needs this roster has. If we end up with pick 3 or 4 and another team wanted to give us good value I could see it happening.

[richard pallo]

2 hours ago, Mr_486lo said:

Ballard is not your typical GM. Remember...he stated that he wouldnt make draft picks based on NEED. He said he would draft based on BPA because he prefers depth at every position  (like in Kansas City).

Sitting at #3 the best player available is Barkley. Everyone knows this. It's not an offensive lineman, defensive player or QB. What Ballard does would be fine with me. Our number 1 goal is to find a head coach that can get our team back to its winning ways. 2nd goal is/can be a #1 goal, but seeing that Luck had the entire season to heal up after surgery, I see that as a problem solved. I really think Luck will come back strong, despite what others believe. I like to think positive. Everything will fall into place. Let's just trust the process Ballard is installing. 

If we can't trade back and Ballard has to draft at #3 then Ballard should take Barkley like you referenced.  That's assuming we have him rated as the BPA. The good news is it is also a position of need.  I'm also expecting a few OL additions in FA as well.  So I could really get excited about a Barkley pick but my first choice would be to trade back. 

[Cynjin]

3 hours ago, Mr_486lo said:

 

Sitting at #3 the best player available is Barkley. Everyone knows this. 

 

 

There are multiple people that would disagree with this, so no, not everyone knows this.

[Defjamz26]

22 hours ago, ar7 said:

 

I don't disagree that the lack of talent will get exposed at some point. Coaching will not address all of the issues. I just think that the Colts can use free agency to improve the offensive line. Plus, i'd rather have a top defensive prospect than a top guard.

It isn’t going to be a great FA class for tackles, but Pugh and Norwell might both be available. I don’t think the Colts sign both, and there’s a chance they sign neither. However, if they do sign one, you still have a hole at the other guard spot as I don’t expect Mewhort to be back. We’ll have to draft an OG/OT high regardless of how you slice it.

[OffensivelyPC]

23 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Not everybody sees the best player as the same.

 

With 32 teams you have 32 different Big Boards of priority.     No two boards look the same.

 

You could rate most any player different than another team based on who your coach is and the type of system that the team runs....

 

The original comment was, go 1st pick with whichever the coach's history was. I.E., go offense if the new HC is offensive minded, or go defense if HC is defensive minded. It didn't even touch on scheme.

 

I'm aware draft boards look different from one team to another, but whatever our draft board looks like, take the best guy provided he is a fit. That's what a good GM does.

[IinD]

Let's go Eli, help us get that #2 pick..

[NewColtsFan]

3 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

The original comment was, go 1st pick with whichever the coach's history was. I.E., go offense if the new HC is offensive minded, or go defense if HC is defensive minded. It didn't even touch on scheme.

 

I'm aware draft boards look different from one team to another, but whatever our draft board looks like, take the best guy provided he is a fit. That's what a good GM does.

 

I'm sorry.....

 

I thought someone (you?) commented that you wouldn't base your pick around who your coach is.     I took that to mean not just offense or defense,  but to scheme as well.      So, a defensive minded coach might want a certain lineman depending on if he runs a 3-4 or a 4-3.     Different requirements.

 

You might want a different quarterback depending on what you ask a QB to do.    Same with other positions.

 

That's all I was referring to......

 

[dgambill]

On 12/15/2017 at 2:27 PM, dw49 said:

 

Agree  with your thoughts However if you mentioned Washington and if they end up needing a QB , you'd have to put Cousins in the mix which would make the end number of teams needing a QB the same.

 

 

Oh indeed...I think it’s all but certain Alex Smith, Eli Manning, and Tyrod Taylor will in all likelihood be playing somewhere else...maybe Cousins too...but I don’t think that stops 4 qbs going first rd and maybe even Jackson too.

[dgambill]

2 hours ago, Cynjin said:

 

 

There are multiple people that would disagree with this, so no, not everyone knows this.

Indeed he might not even be my #3 RB on my draft board...so yeah saying he is the clear #3 overall prospect is VERY debatable.

[dw49]

2 hours ago, dgambill said:

Oh indeed...I think it’s all but certain Alex Smith, Eli Manning, and Tyrod Taylor will in all likelihood be playing somewhere else...maybe Cousins too...but I don’t think that stops 4 qbs going first rd and maybe even Jackson too.

 

Talk is Giants want Manning to play another year to groom the rookie. Problem with NY is they will never want to win the finale vs AZ... I don't think anyway. I'm not sure Tyrod Taylor is going to QB one of those QB needy teams. Alex Smith could fill a void as you say. Miami might pick up Smith or Taylor ? I think the likelihood is we pick 3rd or 4th as Houston is a hot mess and we probably win that one. So we stay at 3 or go to 4 if SF doesn't beat Tenn. today. Very unlikely you get a mother load for the 3rd pick. Still could trade down is Ballard wants to go O line in the first I guess.

 

[Coltfreak]

8 hours ago, Mr_486lo said:

Ballard is not your typical GM. Remember...he stated that he wouldnt make draft picks based on NEED. He said he would draft based on BPA because he prefers depth at every position  (like in Kansas City).

Sitting at #3 the best player available is Barkley. Everyone knows this. It's not an offensive lineman, defensive player or QB. What Ballard does would be fine with me. Our number 1 goal is to find a head coach that can get our team back to its winning ways. 2nd goal is/can be a #1 goal, but seeing that Luck had the entire season to heal up after surgery, I see that as a problem solved. I really think Luck will come back strong, despite what others believe. I like to think positive. Everything will fall into place. Let's just trust the process Ballard is installing. 

Actually I will disagree with you.  Most GM's base draft picks on BPA and not need.   So that would make him more typical....  BTW.  BPA is always the best way to draft.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, dgambill said:

Oh indeed...I think it’s all but certain Alex Smith, Eli Manning, and Tyrod Taylor will in all likelihood be playing somewhere else...maybe Cousins too...but I don’t think that stops 4 qbs going first rd and maybe even Jackson too.

I think this talk of Eli Manning's demise is way too premature. He threw for 434 yards and 3 TDs today. That is without a running game and 5 of his receivers on IR.

[dgambill]

45 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I think this talk of Eli Manning's demise is way too premature. He threw for 434 yards and 3 TDs today. That is without a running game and 5 of his receivers on IR.

Oh I do too...just not sure if NY ruined things beyond repair with the benching. I could see a team like Denver or Minnesota or Jacksonville being willing to take a couple years or Eli.

[crazycolt1]

5 minutes ago, dgambill said:

Oh I do too...just not sure if NY ruined things beyond repair with the benching. I could see a team like Denver or Minnesota or Jacksonville being willing to take a couple years or Eli.

I am quite sure Eli will be picked up if the Giants cut him. He has a contract that is signed till 2019 and if they cut him the dead cap space would be over 12 million dollars. If they waited till the end of next season the dead cap space would be a touch over 6 million.

They would have to trade him if they wanted him gone. John Mara said publically he wanted Eli next season and is repairing the damage done by McAdoo and Reese.

That don't mean they wouldn't pick a QB with their pick be no means.

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, dw49 said:

 

Talk is Giants want Manning to play another year to groom the rookie. Problem with NY is they will never want to win the finale vs AZ... I don't think anyway. I'm not sure Tyrod Taylor is going to QB one of those QB needy teams. Alex Smith could fill a void as you say. Miami might pick up Smith or Taylor ? I think the likelihood is we pick 3rd or 4th as Houston is a hot mess and we probably win that one. So we stay at 3 or go to 4 if SF doesn't beat Tenn. today. Very unlikely you get a mother load for the 3rd pick. Still could trade down is Ballard wants to go O line in the first I guess.

 

Rumor mill here in Western NY is saying Bills will go after Smith.  They have a couple of No.1's.  Will move on from Taylor. 

[crazycolt1]

6 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Rumor mill here in Western NY is saying Bills will go after Smith.  They have a couple of No.1's.  Will move on from Taylor. 

That is an interesting option to think about. Now we just have to wait and see where it all ends.

[dw49]

With a loss Saturday , we'll clinch the 3rd pick. Good chance we could beat Houston and then pick as low as 7th in the 2nd round. 

[WoolMagnet]

3 minutes ago, dw49 said:

With a loss Saturday , we'll clinch the 3rd pick. Good chance we could beat Houston and then pick as low as 7th in the 2nd round. 

So we lose our 1st round pick if we beat Houston?

[dw49]

26 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

So we lose our 1st round pick if we beat Houston?

 

No , if we beat Houston , we would pick 3rd in round one and as low as 7th in round 2. This assumes a loss at Baltimore.

 

Sorry for the confusion.

[WoolMagnet]

38 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

No , if we beat Houston , we would pick 3rd in round one and as low as 7th in round 2. This assumes a loss at Baltimore.

 

Sorry for the confusion.

Is that because we would have same number of wins with other teams i guess?

Hopefully no more coin tosses.

[dw49]

6 minutes ago, WoolMagnet said:

Is that because we would have same number of wins with other teams i guess?

Hopefully no more coin tosses.

 

 

Yes , it's very possible that the Colts , Houston ,TB , SF and Chicago could all finish with 4 wins. No coin flips unless Strength of schedule ends up tied. Chicago , Houston and the Colts each have a winnable game. 

 

Colts win strength of schedule tie breaker with all these teams. So they clinch 3rd pick with 1 loss.  Now when you go to the second round , the order reverses. So the team that picked 7th i the 1st round would pick 3rd in the 2nd round and the team that picked 3rd would pick 7th. Pretty sure it just reverses order. 

[krunk]

9 hours ago, richard pallo said:

If we can't trade back and Ballard has to draft at #3 then Ballard should take Barkley like you referenced.  That's assuming we have him rated as the BPA. The good news is it is also a position of need.  I'm also expecting a few OL additions in FA as well.  So I could really get excited about a Barkley pick but my first choice would be to trade back. 

If he addresses the guard positions real good in FA I could see him taking Barkley also

 

[Myles]

Obviously trading back would be preferred if he wants to take Nelson.   I wouldn't be upset if he took Nelson at 3 or 4 if they couldn't trade down.  

 

Quenton Nelson, G, Notre Dame
Height: 6-5. Weight: 325.
Projected 40 Time: 5.15.
Projected Round (2018): Top-25.
12/9/17: Nelson has dominated for Notre Dame in 2017, showing the ability to overwhelm defensive linemen as a run blocker and pass protector. After surveying sources from around the league including multiple general managers, Nelson is a consensus elite prospect for the 2018 NFL Draft. However, he might go behind lesser prospects in the draft just because he is a guard and many teams don't value guards that high.

Nelson is the most talented and polished offensive lineman in the 2018 NFL Draft class, regardless of position. He also is one of the safest prospects in the draft class. Some team sources think that Nelson could be the best guard in the NFL during his pro career and could be better than former Patriots All-Pro Logan Mankins. Some have higher grades on Nelson than they did on Mankins, David DeCastro and Brandon Scherff.

7/17/17: Nelson was dominant in 2016 and could have been a first-round pick if he had entered the 2017 NFL Draft. Nelson is strong at the point of attack to open holes in the ground game and athletic in pass protection. He was excellent at protecting quarterback DeShone Kizer in 2016. Sources said that Nelson was receiving first-round grades, and one national scout told WalterFootball.com that they think Nelson is a future Pro Bowler similar to Logan Mankins when he came into the NFL.

Read more: http://walterfootball.com/draft2018OG.php#ixzz51cMLTG9l

[Defjamz26]

43 minutes ago, Myles said:

Obviously trading back would be preferred if he wants to take Nelson.   I wouldn't be upset if he took Nelson at 3 or 4 if they couldn't trade down.  

 

Quenton Nelson, G, Notre Dame
Height: 6-5. Weight: 325.
Projected 40 Time: 5.15.
Projected Round (2018): Top-25.
12/9/17: Nelson has dominated for Notre Dame in 2017, showing the ability to overwhelm defensive linemen as a run blocker and pass protector. After surveying sources from around the league including multiple general managers, Nelson is a consensus elite prospect for the 2018 NFL Draft. However, he might go behind lesser prospects in the draft just because he is a guard and many teams don't value guards that high.

Nelson is the most talented and polished offensive lineman in the 2018 NFL Draft class, regardless of position. He also is one of the safest prospects in the draft class. Some team sources think that Nelson could be the best guard in the NFL during his pro career and could be better than former Patriots All-Pro Logan Mankins. Some have higher grades on Nelson than they did on Mankins, David DeCastro and Brandon Scherff.

7/17/17: Nelson was dominant in 2016 and could have been a first-round pick if he had entered the 2017 NFL Draft. Nelson is strong at the point of attack to open holes in the ground game and athletic in pass protection. He was excellent at protecting quarterback DeShone Kizer in 2016. Sources said that Nelson was receiving first-round grades, and one national scout told WalterFootball.com that they think Nelson is a future Pro Bowler similar to Logan Mankins when he came into the NFL.

Read more: http://walterfootball.com/draft2018OG.php#ixzz51cMLTG9l

And just to piggyback off of this, check out this article of perfect team fits for a few of the prospects. And guess who they think is a perfect fit for the Colts (hint: it’s not Bradley Chubb).

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2749692-most-ideal-landing-spots-for-2018-nfl-drafts-top-prospects?share=other

[krunk]

21 hours ago, richard pallo said:

If we can't trade back and Ballard has to draft at #3 then Ballard should take Barkley like you referenced.  That's assuming we have him rated as the BPA. The good news is it is also a position of need.  I'm also expecting a few OL additions in FA as well.  So I could really get excited about a Barkley pick but my first choice would be to trade back. 

Barkley is definitely a talent.   I've only skimmed across a couple videos so far so I have more digging to do.  My only thing that I've seen so far is all his production seems to come from shotgun looks.   I don't really see much of anythng coming out of the I formation or any kind of single back looks.   I don't forsee any major issues, but that's what I've noticed so far.    Also haven't been able to form any opinions on him as a blocker yet either.  But again I have more homework to do.    I think he's an option for us depending on what we do in the FA period and where he's ranked on Ballards board.

[indyagent17]

I know its tempting but a guard at #3?  

[BProland85]

13 hours ago, krunk said:

If he addresses the guard positions real good in FA I could see him taking Barkley also

 

 

I just think RB is a deep position this year, plus having a dominant OL is much more important than a great RB. So I'd still be in favor of trading down to where Nelson should be drafted, and take him. You could dangle Barkley as trade bait for a team wanting a dynamic RB who is a better prospect than Elliott was. 

[Rackeen305]

My only concern is, Are the Colts drafting in 2017 for BPA. According to Draft History (i.e. FS HOOKER), The Colts always draft BPA. 

 

With that beening said, If RB Barkley is BPA, will the Colts draft RB Barley at #3. 

 

If not, would you as "Colts GM" have drafted RB Zeke Elliott with top 5 pick? (Mainly because Barkley is rated as Elliott production)

[Myles]

2 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

I know its tempting but a guard at #3?  

I'd be Ok with it with Nelson.   Just because from everything I have seen and read, he is as close to a sure this as Manning was.   He's a great run blocker and pass protector.  

[indyagent17]

8 minutes ago, Myles said:

I'd be Ok with it with Nelson.   Just because from everything I have seen and read, he is as close to a sure this as Manning was.   He's a great run blocker and pass protector.  

Ok but I sure hope we can get the second pick and get a sweet deal to trade back and get two #1 this year and more

[Myles]

12 minutes ago, indyagent17 said:

Ok but I sure hope we can get the second pick and get a sweet deal to trade back and get two #1 this year and more

Trading down a bit and drafting Nelson would be ideal.  

 

Those who want to draft Barkley, have you given up on Mack already?   I recall so many people, early this season, saying Mach should be our starter.   I think that Mack and Gore would be great behind a better line.  

[indyagent17]

Just now, Myles said:

Trading down a bit and drafting Nelson would be ideal.  

 

Those who want to draft Barkley, have you given up on Mack already?   I recall so many people, early this season, saying Mach should be our starter.   I think that Mack and Gore would be great behind a better line.  

I like Gore for one more year and Mack to be the #2 and our future starter. We have so many other needs than RB. Want a dominating edge rusher and a stalwart at ILB. Those two spots make our defense MUCH better. Simon, Sheard, Woods, Hankins and Anderson. That would be a solid front 7 plus you got love Farley at one CB spot and Hairston or Wilson at the other, finally Hooker and Geathers.   2 new players would make a massive difference