Peter King on JMV

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Does this mean you reluctantly agree with Mel Kiper's Hair that Barkley will be gone when INDY is on the clock LJ or that MKH's assertion is completely unfounded in your estimation? 

 

Your yuck symbol could easily apply to both situations. Just looking for some clarity I guess. 

 

Or is this just a polite version of a boo voicing your displeasure at such a horrific realty missing out on a top prospect we desperately need? Let me know.

 

I fear Barkley will be gone by the time we pick.  The Browns can get him and a qb at #4. The Giants may pick him if the Browns don't because if they pick a qb Eli won't like it and the whole Manning family will be upset with the Giants organization lol.

 

If he's there I think Ballard & Irsay will select him. I'm hoping for a chance they will.

[jshipp23]

2 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I fear Barkley will be gone by the time we pick.  The Browns can get him and a qb at #4. The Giants may pick him if the Browns don't because if they pick a qb Eli won't like it and the whole Manning family will be upset with the Giants organization lol.

 

If he's there I think Ballard & Irsay will select him. I'm hoping for a chance they will.

If he is there we will take him...

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 hours ago, Aaron86 said:

I could get behind this 100%.

Yeah well as NewColtsFan said it looks like Norwell will be franchised tagged. I still like the idea of Drafting a guy like Guice in Round 2 if Barkley goes 1 or 2. Just roll with Chubb or even Nelson at #3. I know taking a Guard at #3 is a gamble but in reality the whole Draft is a gamble. I am tired of Luck getting injured so taking Nelson at #3 wouldn't bother me one bit. Lets say we do take Chubb at #3 though, maybe a guy like Billy Price would be there early in the 3rd Round for an O.Lineman? Guice wont be there in Round 3 IMO. He may go in Round 1 actually.

[Aaron86]

8 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Yes....   a lot of short yardage stuff....    his avg per catch was down in 2017 from what it was in 2016.

 

I don't know if that was due to the switch from Luck to Brissett or something else....

 

 

I think it was a little bit of both. But I do think Doyle could really be the next Dallas Clarke.

[Aaron86]

3 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah well as NewColtsFan said it looks like Norwell will be franchised tagged. I still like the idea of Drafting a guy like Guice in Round 2 if Barkley goes 1 or 2. Just roll with Chubb or even Nelson at #3. I know taking a Guard at #3 is a gamble but in reality the whole Draft is a gamble. I am tired of Luck getting injured so taking Nelson at #3 wouldn't bother me one bit. Lets say we do take Chubb at #3 though, maybe a guy like Billy Price would be there early in the 3rd Round for an O.Lineman? Guice wont be there in Round 3 IMO. He may go in Round 1 actually.

 I would take Barkley and then focus on o-line, Guice in the 2nd. I think if you wanted to you could even take a guy like price in the third. Alot of people forget you can find talent via UDFA. I would go all in on offence in the draft and defence in FA. I think we have some good pieces on the defence we just need a little help. But the offence is lacking.

[NewColtsFan]

47 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

I think it was a little bit of both. But I do think Doyle could really be the next Dallas Clarke.

 

There's a reason why Clark was drafted in the first round and Doyle was not drafted at all.

 

One was a superior athlete,  the other does it on heart and effort,  smarts and toughness.    

 

Doyle is more of a low ceiling, but high floor type of player.   Nothing wrong with that.   Plenty of players have had long successful careers being that type of player.   But Doyle is somewhat limited.

 

By the way,  it may not be obvious from what I've written,  but I really like Doyle.   He's one of my favorite players.

[jshipp23]

1 hour ago, Aaron86 said:

 I would take Barkley and then focus on o-line, Guice in the 2nd. I think if you wanted to you could even take a guy like price in the third. Alot of people forget you can find talent via UDFA. I would go all in on offence in the draft and defence in FA. I think we have some good pieces on the defence we just need a little help. But the offence is lacking.

Some people are saying Price is projecting in 1st now..I was thinking 2nd or 3rd..I get it though he is my 2nd favorite Guard prospect..

[Deadpool]

8 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

But the Browns haven't had Dorsey as their GM all those years either.

I honestly think they need to give Kizer a chance. every year they bring in a new QB and don't give their other QB's a chance. it's like they are giving them 1 year to prove them selves even as rookies. 

[NewColtsFan]

8 hours ago, stitches said:

My point is more about how much you need to take into account Swoope's presence into constructing your roster, not about whether we really need to draft a TE high.

 

TE high is absolutely a luxury pick. My point is more about the presence of Swoope hindering you from making moves you think are right, rather than me considering TE as some sort of priority. We definitely need to address other positions much more seriously, BUT Swoope is not high on my mind when considering whether to get a TE(whether in the draft or in FA). Lets say Goedert falls to the third... should having Swoope stop me from drafting him? Hell no. I'm taking Goedert and not thinking twice about it if I feel like he's a good value. Just Swoope has not shown enough for us to count him as anything more than depth at the position. 

 

I always appreciate the value argument.   Posters make it every year.   "What if this player falls a round or two?   I'd take him!"

 

I get it.

 

But, here's the deal for me...   I've been here since Luck arrived, and in that time I've asked for three things...   and I got the first one a few weeks ago when we hired Frank Reich, a coach who will get the ball out of Luck's hand faster.   It's taken six years.

 

The other two on my wish list are a good offensive line and a very good defense.   And I'm still waiting on those.   If not now -- when?

 

 

 

 

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I always appreciate the value argument.   Posters make it every year.   "What if this player falls a round or two?   I'd take him!"

 

I get it.

 

But, here's the deal for me...   I've been here since Luck arrived, and in that time I've asked for three things...   and I got the first one a few weeks ago when we hired Frank Reich, a coach who will get the ball out of Luck's hand faster.   It's taken six years.

 

The other two on my wish list are a good offensive line and a very good defense.   And I'm still waiting on those.   If not now -- when?

 

 

 

 

I agree with you about addressing O-line and D. I just don't agree that you have to spent every single resource on those weaknesses. I absolutely think there should be a priority in fixing the O-line and improving the defense. I also don't think it's likely that we can fix all problems of this roster right now and I think we shouldn't neglect other parts of the roster especially if we find good value at those positions(whether in the draft or in FA) so I don't think that a third round pick is some huge investment that we cannot afford to make for a top tier TE like Goedert.  

[NewColtsFan]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

I agree with you about addressing O-line and D. I just don't agree that you have to spent every single resource on those weaknesses. I absolutely think there should be a priority in fixing the O-line and improving the defense. I also don't think it's likely that we can fix all problems of this roster right now and I think we shouldn't neglect other parts of the roster especially if we find good value at those positions(whether in the draft or in FA) so I don't think that a third round pick is some huge investment that we cannot afford to make for a top tier TE like Goedert.  

 

Sticking with the Goedert example...   since we'd be taking him to be TE2 and not TE1, we'd be using a third round pick on a player who -- by design -- might only play 40 to 50 percent of the snaps.

 

I'd rather use a 3 on a defensive player or O-lineman who might play 75 to 100 percent of the snaps.   Get more bang for your draft pick buck.

 

Now...   a few years from now, when the franchise is in dramatically better shape, then we're in a better place to take a luxury pick.   I don't want us to get distracted by a shiny new toy.   I want to keep our eye on the prize..   A 53-man roster that can win games in a wide variety of ways.

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sticking with the Goedert example...   since we'd be taking him to be TE2 and not TE1, we'd be using a third round pick on a player who -- by design -- might only play 40 to 50 percent of the snaps.

 

I'd rather use a 3 on a defensive player or O-lineman who might play 75 to 100 percent of the snaps.   Get more bang for your draft pick buck.

 

Now...   a few years from now, when the franchise is in dramatically better shape, then we're in a better place to take a luxury pick.   I don't want us to get distracted by a shiny new toy.   I want to keep our eye on the prize..   A 53-man roster that can win games in a wide variety of ways.

I don't consider Goedert long-term TE2. I consider him TE1. He might start as TE2, but I'm looking long-term with such acquisitions. 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I don't consider Goedert long-term TE2. I consider him TE1. He might start as TE2, but I'm looking long-term with such acquisitions. 

 

I don't see Goedert lasting to the third round. Many people view him as the best TE in this draft.

[TrueBlue12]

19 hours ago, Smonroe said:

 

Jones (USC) is a good back but he fits the same role as Mack.  He may even be a little smaller.  

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

BUT as everyone will tell you, we need a pass rusher.  I like to ask them who do they think is the best player in the draft?   Don’t we go bpa?

I liked what I saw of Michel against Bama more than his running mate Chubb. Michel ran with much better vision.

[stitches]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I don't see Goedert lasting to the third round. Many people view him as the best TE in this draft.

Yah, that was an overly optimistic hypothetical. 

[Smonroe]

12 minutes ago, TrueBlue12 said:

I liked what I saw of Michel against Bama more than his running mate Chubb. Michel ran with much better vision.

 

I think he's a little faster than Chubb too.  I'm not sure Chubb ever regained his pre-injury skills.

 

Except for Barkley, I think Guice is the best all around back coming out. 

[Aaron86]

3 hours ago, jshipp23 said:

Some people are saying Price is projecting in 1st now..I was thinking 2nd or 3rd..I get it though he is my 2nd favorite Guard prospect..

He would be a great pick if he is still there in the 3rd.

[Aaron86]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

There's a reason why Clark was drafted in the first round and Doyle was not drafted at all.

 

One was a superior athlete,  the other does it on heart and effort,  smarts and toughness.    

 

Doyle is more of a low ceiling, but high floor type of player.   Nothing wrong with that.   Plenty of players have had long successful careers being that type of player.   But Doyle is somewhat limited.

 

By the way,  it may not be obvious from what I've written,  but I really like Doyle.   He's one of my favorite players.

Ya I agree but there have been alot of players drafted in the 1st who couldn't even make it through their first contract. Not saying they didnt have the talent or deserve to be there. Jeff Saturday always comes to mind. 

[southwest1]

11 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

But the Browns haven't had Dorsey as their GM all those years either.

Very true my friend. A qualified GM makes all the difference in the world. And Johnny Manziel was right when he texted "Let's wreck this league together." He certainly wrecked his chances in this league for sure. 

 

I'm always bewildered as to why Joe Thomas wants to stay in Cleveland. Okay sure, the cost of living is low there & walking thru both the NFL & Rock N Roll HOF would be cool a few times yeah. But darn man, your elite talents are being wasted on the Browns dude. Kirk Cousins is never gonna sign with you guys. He's not a fool. 

[southwest1]

11 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I fear Barkley will be gone by the time we pick.  The Browns can get him and a qb at #4. The Giants may pick him if the Browns don't because if they pick a qb Eli won't like it and the whole Manning family will be upset with the Giants organization lol.

 

If he's there I think Ballard & Irsay will select him. I'm hoping for a chance they will.

Thanks LJ. I know you're a big supporter of his & would love to see him in the horseshoe fold. Uh huh. I'm with ya; if he's still on the board. We got em. 

 

NY Giants have offensive line problems, which makes Barkley seem stupid to me for them. Hades, you could put Leonard Fournette, Le'Veon Bell, & Todd Gurley in Big Blue's backfield & Eli would still get sacked multiple times regardless. Barkley ain't gonna solve their protection woes up front period. 

[NewColtsFan]

43 minutes ago, Aaron86 said:

Ya I agree but there have been alot of players drafted in the 1st who couldn't even make it through their first contract. Not saying they didnt have the talent or deserve to be there. Jeff Saturday always comes to mind. 

 

Understood and agreed.

 

Lots of first rounders flame out.     And a number of free agents have nice long careers.    Gotta give made props to guys like that.     It's always great when your favorite team finds a diamond in the rough and the player becomes someone.

 

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

On 2/22/2018 at 2:04 AM, stitches said:

IMO not enough of a sample to rely on Swoope. You can have him on the roster as part of the TE core, but IMO you cannot go into the season penciling him in as our surefire vertical threat TE. Erik Swoope would certainly not stop me from drafting a high end TE if one is available at a place that makes sense. 

So true some around here act as if Swoope is the TE to answer all prayers! He had an ok year 1 of 4 years in the NFL for a guy who didn't play  College football and can't block?

[Coltsfanforlife12]

On 2/21/2018 at 7:16 PM, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Cant depend on moncreif as a #2 even if ballard brings him back which i doubt. Im ok with him as a #3 though.

 

I don't like rb chubb from Georgia. But Guice and a couple others would be ok. But I have my heart set on Barkley lol. 

He wasn’t saying take RB Nick Chubb at three.  He was talking about the DE Bradley Chubb.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

On 2/21/2018 at 7:49 PM, superrep1967 said:

Yeah, I heard on JMV that the Colts are not resigning Moncrief. 

I don’t think JMV said they aren’t resigning him.  JMV personally doesn’t want him back. 

[jshipp23]

3 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

So true some around here act as if Swoope is the TE to answer all prayers! He had an ok year 1 of 4 years in the NFL for a guy who didn't play  College football and can't block?

I honestly wouldn't mind Goedert in second if we trade back in 1st and pick up a couple seconds...He is that good..He can play with Doyle and be used as a big WR as well, like Graham was used in New Orleans..

[LJpalmbeacher2]

I haven't seen Goedert play so I don't have a opinion on him ....yet.

 

But speaking in general, I don't think a playmaking, vertical TE is a luxury. Especially for a team that will only go as far as it's its Offense will take it. The Patriots are talent deficient, you think they consoder Gronk a luxury? 

 

Imo, it's important to have players on O that opposing DC's gameplan for. And that opens up plays for other players.

[jimmy g]

If the offense is improved- the defense is automatically improved, because they won't be on the field as much.

[2006Coltsbestever]

It wouldn't shock me if we went Chubb in Round 1 and Billy Price in Round 2 = trenches.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

1 hour ago, jshipp23 said:

I honestly wouldn't mind Goedert in second of we trade back in 1st and pick up a couple seconds...He is that good..He can play with Doyle and be used as a big WR as well, like Graham was used in New Orleans..

Agree 

[Coffeedrinker]

On 2/21/2018 at 6:49 PM, Smonroe said:

 

Either Guice or Michel would be a decent second rounder.  None of them compare to Barkley who has the size, speed, returns and can catch.  He’s the total package.

 

 

I never thought I'd see the day.  Praise for a Nittany Lion from a Buckeye?  What's next; dogs getting along with cats, swine soaring through the skies, snowballs in that place down below?

 

The world is just topsy turvey.

[Coffeedrinker]

On 2/21/2018 at 5:46 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am not going to go on a how great Barkley will be Post. Everyone knows my take there but if Luck is healthy, we Draft Barkley, get a Good O.Lineman in Free Agency, and Draft a Great prospect at O.Line then yes we would be scary on Offense. TY Hilton is a Top 10 WR in the league and Jack Doyle is a Good TE. We would be tough to stop once Luck got his groove back. I think our Defense will be better too even if we take Barkley because we still have 6 other picks and can Draft Defense with at least 4 or 5 of those.

 

-Regarding the Offense, I also think Mack will be better as well.

 

On 2/21/2018 at 5:58 PM, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

I agree with everything you said but will add that we need to sign a big target #1b or #2 WR to help TY out.

So, if the Colts replace 36% of their starting offense with star players and get their Allpro QB back the Colts will have a tough offense.

 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

4 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

 

So, if the Colts replace 36% of their starting offense with star players and get their Allpro QB back the Colts will have a tough offense.

 

 

 

Thats only 4 playes...2 OL, RB, and WR.

 

[Coffeedrinker]

3 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Thats only 4 playes...2 OL, RB, and WR.

 

There are only 11 starters on offense.  So four players is 36% 36.36{repeating} to be exact.  And if you throw Luck in that equation then it's 45.45%.  So if the Colts replaced nearly 50% of their offensive starters from last year with star players then the Colts will have a tough offense to stop.

 

I think just about every team in the league could make that claim.

 

[jshipp23]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

There are only 11 starters on offense.  So four players is 36% 36.36{repeating} to be exact.

 

Good info

[LJpalmbeacher2]

1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

There are only 11 starters on offense.  So four players is 36% 36.36{repeating} to be exact.

 

 

I know. 11 goes into 100 9 times...9 times 4 equals 36. Which is 36% lol.

 

So do you think adding 4 playesr on offense is too many?

[LJpalmbeacher2]

9 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

There are only 11 starters on offense.  So four players is 36% 36.36{repeating} to be exact.  And if you throw Luck in that equation then it's 45.45%.  So if the Colts replaced nearly 50% of their offensive starters from last year with star players then the Colts will have a tough offense to stop.

 

I think just about every team in the league could make that claim.

 

 

I dont get your drift?  Luck is already on the roster. We drafted him first overall 6 seasons ago...remember?

 

Guards aren't usually considered "star players".

So a WR & RB is 2 "star players".

 

So with $80 million in cap space to spend in Free Agency and picking 3rd in every round you don't think adding 2 decent guards and a RB and WR is doable ???

 

Obviously you don't think much of Ballard's ability to add talent. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Oh btw, in basketball if you add only 1 player it's 20%.

In baseball NL 1 player is 11%.....  In AL with DH it's 10%.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

37 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

Good info

 

It is good info.... Mathematics is Fun!

[HarryTheCat]

10 hours ago, Horse Shoe Heaven said:

So true some around here act as if Swoope is the TE to answer all prayers! He had an ok year 1 of 4 years in the NFL for a guy who didn't play  College football and can't block?

I'd be amazed if Swoope makes the roster. Career totals: 15 receptions, 297 yards, 1 TD. You don't clog up a valuable roster spot with that kind of production. 

[Coffeedrinker]

1 hour ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

I dont get your drift?  Luck is already on the roster. We drafted him first overall 6 seasons ago...remember?

 

Guards aren't usually considered "star players".

So a WR & RB is 2 "star players".

 

So with $80 million in cap space to spend in Free Agency and picking 3rd in every round you don't think adding 2 decent guards and a RB and WR is doable ???

 

Obviously you don't think much of Ballard's ability to add talent. 

Oh my word.  Luck was not a starter last year, so he is a different starter in 2018.

 

Yes a superstar guard is considered a superstar player.  perhaps if I said All Pro or probowl caliber that would make more sense to you.

 

My comment has nothing to do with Ballard and his abilities.  He had to do with stating that obvious... that if the Colts add 4 superstar (sorry All pro or pro bowl level) players and get an All pro QB back they will have a good offense.  My "drift" is that if ANY team in the NFL replaced nearly 50% of their offense starters with superstar (sorry All pro or pro bowl level) players they would have a good offense.. one that is tough to stop.