First round mock with possible trades explored

[BlueShoe]

In this mock, the Colts take Barkley. However, the article outlines possible trade scenarios for the top teams.

 

https://footballdungeon.com/mocks/duane-livelys-2018-nfl-mock-draft-1-0/

 

 

[BProland85]

I'd much rather trade back with say Denver or the Jets, get additional high 2nds, and 3rds, and get Bradley Chubb in this scenario.

[BlueShoe]

10 hours ago, BProland85 said:

I'd much rather trade back with say Denver or the Jets, get additional high 2nds, and 3rds, and get Bradley Chubb in this scenario.

 

I think it will all depend on how much Ballard likes Saquon Barkley. 

 

On paper it's a great idea to pick up Chubb and the extra picks. However, if Chubb is a dud and the extra picks don't pan out either, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on Barkley.

 

Same thing if he chooses Barkley, and hindsight says taking the deal would have been better. 

 

It's a very tough decision for Chris Ballard to make. It's a career defining decision. 

[crazycolt1]

58 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I think it will all depend on how much Ballard likes Saquon Barkley. 

 

On paper it's a great idea to pick up Chubb and the extra picks. However, if Chubb is a dud and the extra picks don't pan out either, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on Barkley. It's a very tough decision for Chris Ballard to make. It's a career defining decision. 

Career defining decision?  I highly doubt that. No GM is keeping or losing his job over one player hitting or missing.

Look, I understand your man love for Barkley but the Colts world does not end if they don't get him.

[BlueShoe]

20 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Career defining decision?  I highly doubt that. No GM is keeping or losing his job over one player hitting or missing.

Look, I understand your man love for Barkley but the Colts world does not end if they don't get him.

 

Your attempts to keep making this about me is noticeable. I am sure many others see it too. 

 

Chris Ballard’s decision with the 3rd pick in this draft will absolutely be career defining. 

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, BlueShoe said:

 

Your attempts to keep making this about me is noticeable. I am sure many others see it too. 

 

Chris Ballard’s decision with the 3rd pick in this draft will absolutely be career defining. 

[BlueShoe]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

[CheezyColt]

4 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I think it will all depend on how much Ballard likes Saquon Barkley. 

 

On paper it's a great idea to pick up Chubb and the extra picks. However, if Chubb is a dud and the extra picks don't pan out either, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on Barkley. It's a very tough decision for Chris Ballard to make. It's a career defining decision. 

If Barkley is a dud and the lack of extra picks leaves gaping holes on the team, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on a trade down scenario and still not having any pass rush.

 

To the bolded, that's just called bad drafting. Of course if the first round pick and all other picks obtained from a trade down don't pan out the Colts would look stupid. But so would 31 other teams in the same scenario.

[Hoose]

Much will depend on which teams grab a FA quarterback. If Denver goes for a veteran, as they should,  then Chubb is in jeopardy of not being there if the Colts trade with the Jets. Denver and the Jets vying for the next best QB in the draft? Pure gold. You trade in that scenario, hopefully with Denver. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

We had a Poll in here = Who should we Draft Chubb or Barkley at 3? Chubb won 89-74 in votes, so it was somewhat close. Let me ask the people this that voted for Chubb, who do you think has the bigger chance of being a bust? We should make a Poll on that, I guarantee Chubb would win that one too.

[Yoshinator]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

We had a Poll in here = Who should we Draft Chubb or Barkley at 3? Chubb won 89-74 in votes, so it was somewhat close. Let me ask the people this that voted for Chubb, who do you think has the bigger chance of being a bust? We should make a Poll on that, I guarantee Chubb would win that one too.

Probably Chubb, but I also believe that there is an rb somewhere in this draft that is just as good as Barkley (think Hunt to Fournette). I don't see an edge rusher that is as good as Chubb possibly unless Arden Key falls to our 2nd round pick (and we can't rely on that). Very good RB class, lack of pass rushers in FA, and a better track record of RBs late say we should take Chubb. We need an elite pass rusher. I'd also rather have Chubb and a 1,000 yd rusher in the middle rounds in McDaniels system than a elite RB in McDaniels scheme where multiple RBs thrive, and a depth pass rusher. We had 25 sacks as a team last year. Our top guy was 5.5. We need a pass rusher that can get double digit sacks.

[BlueShoe]

2 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

If Barkley is a dud and the lack of extra picks leaves gaping holes on the team, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on a trade down scenario and still not having any pass rush.

 

To the bolded, that's just called bad drafting. Of course if the first round pick and all other picks obtained from a trade down don't pan out the Colts would look stupid. But so would 31 other teams in the same scenario.

 

I agree. Thought it was built into my point. Maybe you’re just agreeing with me though.  

 

That’s why I believe this is a career defining decision. It’s a tough choice. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

12 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Probably Chubb, but I also believe that there is an rb somewhere in this draft that is just as good as Barkley (think Hunt to Fournette). I don't see an edge rusher that is as good as Chubb possibly unless Arden Key falls to our 2nd round pick (and we can't rely on that). Very good RB class, lack of pass rushers in FA, and a better track record of RBs late say we should take Chubb. We need an elite pass rusher. I'd also rather have Chubb and a 1,000 yd rusher in the middle rounds in McDaniels system than a elite RB in McDaniels scheme where multiple RBs thrive, and a depth pass rusher. We had 25 sacks as a team last year. Our top guy was 5.5. We need a pass rusher that can get double digit sacks.

This is true I have to admit but man if we pass on Barkley and he ends up being like Marshall Faulk for the Browns, that will be very sad for us.

[Defjamz26]

6 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Career defining decision?  I highly doubt that. No GM is keeping or losing his job over one player hitting or missing.

Look, I understand your man love for Barkley but the Colts world does not end if they don't get him.

He’s right though. It is career defining. This should be the last time in awhile the Colts pick this high. All-pro and pro-Bowl caliber players come from the top 5 in the draft. It will be extremely important for him to hit. At #3 he should get the next Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison,etc...Not in terms of the position, but the elite level at which they played.

[krunk]

I don't think we are going to trade out of the spot anyway.   They made it known up front in last years draft they wanted to trade back and they didn't even do it until like the 4th round if my memory serves me right.   I think they'd have to offer an absolute haul to get Ballard to trade out of that spot.   It's either going to be Barkley or Chubb and you know what my opinion is.    Chubb

[crazycolt1]

30 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

He’s right though. It is career defining. This should be the last time in awhile the Colts pick this high. All-pro and pro-Bowl caliber players come from the top 5 in the draft. It will be extremely important for him to hit. At #3 he should get the next Edgerrin James, Marvin Harrison,etc...Not in terms of the position, but the elite level at which they played.

Any player taken in the draft is a gamble. There have been plenty of first round bust just as there have been 5th or 6th round all pro players. No matter who Ballard does decide to pick it's not going to decide his career.

The wins and losses is what is going to decide his career.

I know this pick is important but it is just one pick. Matter of fact players picked in the later rounds are just as important than pick #3.

[Indy Fan]

35 minutes ago, krunk said:

I don't think we are going to trade out of the spot anyway.   They made it known up front in last years draft they wanted to trade back and they didn't even do it until like the 4th round if my memory serves me right.   I think they'd have to offer an absolute haul to get Ballard to trade out of that spot.   It's either going to be Barkley or Chubb and you know what my opinion is.    Chubb

I don’t think anyone thought Hooker was going to be available in the first or Wilson in the second. They were both fantastic values at the time so I’m sure he weighed that with a trade down. I think I remember seeing a picture showing Hooker was like 4th on our board at the time.

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, Indy Fan said:

I don’t think anyone thought Hooker was going to be available in the first or Wilson in the second. They were both fantastic values at the time so I’m sure he weighed that with a trade down. I think I remember seeing a picture showing Hooker was like 4th on our board at the time.

Same situation again.    We know for a fact just about that there is going to be a fantastic player on the board when that pick comes.    I don't see us trading out of that spot unless we can get an absolute haul.  Or Barkley and Chubb are gone.     That's the only way I see us trading out of the spot.

[Yoshinator]

8 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Any player taken in the draft is a gamble. There have been plenty of first round bust just as there have been 5th or 6th round all pro players. No matter who Ballard does decide to pick it's not going to decide his career.

The wins and losses is what is going to decide his career.

I know this pick is important but it is just one pick. Matter of fact players picked in the later rounds are just as important than pick #3.

I've agreed with most of your posts regarding the draft, but the bolded is not true. Because of the quality and success rate of an average top 5 pick, you absolutely HAVE TO hit on that pick in a situation such as ours. That pick is infinitely more important than our others because we have our choice of the pick of the litter in this draft. If we hit on our 1st round pick (3rd overall), and miss on a 4th, that is MUCH better than missing on our 1st rounder and hitting on a 4th. Very rarely is the mid round guy you hit on going to be as good as the 1st round guy you could of hit on and missed. There are so many players already picked that the value is gone, as where the elite guys are all there at 3 overall. Hitting on the 3rd overall pick is a must and is much more important than hitting on the later round picks individually.

[Yoshinator]

13 minutes ago, krunk said:

Same situation again.    We know for a fact just about that there is going to be a fantastic player on the board when that pick comes.    I don't see us trading out of that spot unless we can get an absolute haul.  Or Barkley and Chubb are gone.     That's the only way I see us trading out of the spot.

If Barkley and Chubb were both gone, that would actually be kind of scary in a good and bad way. The trade offers could be huge, however, if there were no offers, then we would be up a creek and have to reach for someone like Minkah Fitzpatrick. That would be a truly interesting scenario (I prefer either Barkley or Chubb to be available myself).

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I've agreed with most of your posts regarding the draft, but the bolded is not true. Because of the quality and success rate of an average top 5 pick, you absolutely HAVE TO hit on that pick in a situation such as ours. That pick is infinitely more important than our others because we have our choice of the pick of the litter in this draft. If we hit on our 1st round pick (3rd overall), and miss on a 4th, that is MUCH better than missing on our 1st rounder and hitting on a 4th. Very rarely is the mid round guy you hit on going to be as good as the 1st round guy you could of hit on and missed. There are so many players already picked that the value is gone, as where the elite guys are all there at 3 overall. Hitting on the 3rd overall pick is a must and is much more important than hitting on the later round picks individually.

All pro players can come out of any round. We have even had an all pro who was working at a hardware store before the Colts called him and was cut off of the team who drafted him late. Jeff Saturday happens to be his name.

I am not saying that this pick is not important but it wont be the tell all in Ballard's career.

I have to disagree with saying the talent is gone. The talent is there, It just has to be found.

[21isSuperman]

8 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

 

I think it will all depend on how much Ballard likes Saquon Barkley. 

 

On paper it's a great idea to pick up Chubb and the extra picks. However, if Chubb is a dud and the extra picks don't pan out either, then the Colts would look pretty stupid passing on Barkley. It's a very tough decision for Chris Ballard to make. It's a career defining decision. 

At the same time, if Barkley is a dud and doesn't pan out while Chubb becomes a very productive player, then the Colts would look stupid for passing on him.

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

All pro players can come out of any round. We have even had an all pro who was working at a hardware store before the Colts called him and was cut off of the team who drafted him late. Jeff Saturday happens to be his name.

I am not saying that this pick is not important but it wont be the tell all in Ballard's career.

I have to disagree with saying the talent is gone. The talent is there, It just has to be found.

Well, you know good and well that the chances of finding an all pro player is much higher in the top 5 than the later rounds. For every Saturday, there are 10 players in the 1st round that are just as good. That's just how it is. GMs get fired for missing on multiple 1st round picks because of the missed opportunity of a stud. Ballard could miss on over half of his later round picks and still be a solid GM if he hits on his 1st rounders. The quality is always there in a draft early, unless the draft is historically bad. No one will fault Ballard if he misses late, but we all will if he misses on our 3rd overall pick.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Well, you know good and well that the chances of finding an all pro player is much higher in the top 5 than the later rounds. For every Saturday, there are 10 players in the 1st round that are just as good. That's just how it is. GMs get fired for missing on multiple 1st round picks because of the missed opportunity of a stud. Ballard could miss on over half of his later round picks and still be a solid GM if he hits on his 1st rounders. The quality is always there in a draft early, unless the draft is historically bad. No one will fault Ballard if he misses late, but we all will if he misses on our 3rd overall pick.

The thing is it don't matter where a GM picks, it's who they pick. They can whiff on a first rounder but hit on the later rounds and be just fine.

The Patriots never have high draft picks and find the players they need to win. Matter of fact they didn't have a #1 pick last season if my memory hasn't failed me.

It boils down to wins and losses. No more, no less.

[krunk]

8 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

If Barkley and Chubb were both gone, that would actually be kind of scary in a good and bad way. The trade offers could be huge, however, if there were no offers, then we would be up a creek and have to reach for someone like Minkah Fitzpatrick. That would be a truly interesting scenario (I prefer either Barkley or Chubb to be available myself).

Tremaine Edmunds seems to be rising pretty fast.   Might be another option.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

The thing is it don't matter where a GM picks, it's who they pick. They can whiff on a first rounder but hit on the later rounds and be just fine.

The Patriots never have high draft picks and find the players they need to win. Matter of fact they didn't have a #1 pick last season if my memory hasn't failed me.

It boils down to wins and losses. No more, no less.

It's still early, but Ballard hasn't proven he can hit on later picks yet. Grigson certainly couldn't do it, and the success rate is lower to hit as the draft goes on. The Pats have Brady and Belichick, which makes up for most of their deficiencies. We are just getting McDaniels, and Luck is hopefully just starting to play again. If Ballard, McDaniels, and Luck are all fine, that doesn't include the rest of the team. There are always hits, but even the best GMs are human and can have bad drafts. The truth is, if you miss on your first round pick, the majority of the time you'll have a mediocre to bad draft. It just happens that way. That's part of the reason I want Chubb over Barkley, because of the later success rate of RB's in the later rounds, and we still get an elite pass rusher in the 1st round. It sounds easy to just hit on picks and to pick correctly, but GM's still have trouble with it today and get fired every year for not doing it well.

[Yoshinator]

5 minutes ago, krunk said:

Tremaine Edmunds seems to be rising pretty fast.   Might be another option.

I had him for our 2nd round pick, but he probably won't be there now. I'm going to take a better look at him as I look at more pass-rushers besides Chubb. Mostly been investing time in Chubb and the RBs right now.

[Indy Fan]

36 minutes ago, krunk said:

Same situation again.    We know for a fact just about that there is going to be a fantastic player on the board when that pick comes.    I don't see us trading out of that spot unless we can get an absolute haul.  Or Barkley and Chubb are gone.     That's the only way I see us trading out of the spot.

It’s not the same situation. It’s about value, grabbing the 4th overall ranked player at 16 shows incredible value at 16. I’m not advocating we should trade down but the situation isn’t the same as one instance you get a premier player at 16 which is worth a ton less than 3rd overall. It’s the reason why so many are against taking Nelson in the top 3-5 because “value.” No one knows CB’s board but if he has 5 prospects ranked similar and they are available he “probably” will trade down to get extra draft capitol to build through the draft as he preached so many times.

[BlueShoe]

30 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

At the same time, if Barkley is a dud and doesn't pan out while Chubb becomes a very productive player, then the Colts would look stupid for passing on him.

 

I kind of thought that was built into my point, but you're the second person to mention it. 

[krunk]

26 minutes ago, Indy Fan said:

It’s not the same situation. It’s about value, grabbing the 4th overall ranked player at 16 shows incredible value at 16. I’m not advocating we should trade down but the situation isn’t the same as one instance you get a premier player at 16 which is worth a ton less than 3rd overall. It’s the reason why so many are against taking Nelson in the top 3-5 because “value.” No one knows CB’s board but if he has 5 prospects ranked similar and they are available he “probably” will trade down to get extra draft capitol to build through the draft as he preached so many times.

Why would you do that when you could have grabbed him at 3?    You don't even know if that would happen.   I wouldnt do it unless I got considerable value.   What I meant was we didn't trade back from our spot because like you said the Value was there and I am saying it will most likely be there this year also.

[BlueShoe]

1 hour ago, Indy Fan said:

I don’t think anyone thought Hooker was going to be available in the first or Wilson in the second. They were both fantastic values at the time so I’m sure he weighed that with a trade down. I think I remember seeing a picture showing Hooker was like 4th on our board at the time.

 

This is the picture you are referring to. 

 

http://footballdungeon.com/news/day-1-grades/

 

 

[BlueShoe]

1 hour ago, krunk said:

I don't think we are going to trade out of the spot anyway.   They made it known up front in last years draft they wanted to trade back and they didn't even do it until like the 4th round if my memory serves me right.   I think they'd have to offer an absolute haul to get Ballard to trade out of that spot.   It's either going to be Barkley or Chubb and you know what my opinion is.    Chubb

 

I have said it for a while now and still believe quarterbacks are going 1, 2, and 3. 

 

I think Elway is trading up with the Giants to grab Josh Allen, and the Jets are trading up with us to get Josh Rosen. 

 

I the end, I think the first 3 picks will look like this:

 

1. Browns - Sam Darnold

2. Broncos - Josh Allen

3. Jets - Josh Rosen. 

 

We will likely pick up the Jets 2nd and 3rd to move back to 6.

[richard pallo]

It's interesting how the author of the article refers to Barclay to the Colts as "their guy".  Does he know something?  We all know how much Irsay wants another Edgerrin James.  If Barclay is there I think Ballard is going to need a big haul of picks and maybe a player to sweeten the deal to make the trade.  If he doesn't get it I can see him taking Barclay.  Almost impossible to pass on the BPA in a position of need.  Luck's happy he finally has a RB that teams have to account for,  Ballard is happy he got the BPA and Irsay is happy for obvious reasons.  Everyone's happy. 

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Jared Cisneros said:

I had him for our 2nd round pick, but he probably won't be there now. I'm going to take a better look at him as I look at more pass-rushers besides Chubb. Mostly been investing time in Chubb and the RBs right now.

I think he's a very good prospect for us at ILB.  Can pass rush too and I love the size and range.   IF we did do a trade back I don't think you could go wrong with him or Nelson.

[Dark Superman]

Trade back a few spots and take Nelson.

Time to stop ignoring the offensive line issues we had for the past six years.

[BlueShoe]

8 hours ago, KING. said:

Trade back a few spots and take Nelson.

Time to stop ignoring the offensive line issues we had for the past six years.

 

Trading back and grabbing Nelson is a very likely scenario. 

 

However, we have tried to build the offensive line. It just did not work. We have to keep trying. 

[Indy Fan]

6 hours ago, krunk said:

Why would you do that when you could have grabbed him at 3?    You don't even know if that would happen.   I wouldnt do it unless I got considerable value.   What I meant was we didn't trade back from our spot because like you said the Value was there and I am saying it will most likely be there this year also.

Like I said only reason we wouldn’t trade back is if our prospect grading there was a huge drop off in talent. No one on these boards know how our war room is ranking them currently or what they will be come draft time since it’s fluid. I think we are saying the same thing except that last year has no influence on what we do this year.

[Four2itus]

8 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

. The talent is there, It just has to be found.

....and developed. A second rounder can receive proper development and put into the right scheme and succeed, and a first rounder the opposite. I am surprised at the number of fans who choose to see everything as linear. 

 

Like I said in an earlier post, if Ballard succeeds in building a formidable team, it will be made up of players from likely all rounds. Getting the first pick right in this draft does not mean success, and getting it wrong does not mean failure. I just want a solid starter who plays for a long time with the Horseshoe upside his head. 

[crazycolt1]

7 hours ago, KING. said:

Trade back a few spots and take Nelson.

Time to stop ignoring the offensive line issues we had for the past six years.

The offensive line issues wasn't ignored. Most the players brought in were bust or injury took them out. It wasn't from lack of effort.