Roquan Smith set to visit Colts tomorrow

[DaColts85]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

It doesn't matter if value extra picks more than players... 

 

They have mentioned 3 players for that pick and have shown they value extra picks. I agree that Ballard's board is al that matters, but that doesn-t mean he values his 6th pick at the 6th position... especially if he thinks he possibly can snag him later with extra picks. 

 

If a trade happens then yes it is because the value of everything outweighs the players sitting in front of you.  I at no point disagreed with that.  A smart GM is going to look at players and take the one that has the highest grade and value at the spot he is at.  If they look at someone and take them earlier than expected, than so be it...it happens every year.

 

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I will say, that I am high on Smith also... and the inside linebacker position in general. I loved his play all year. We also have never had a top notch Inside Backer to lead the defense... so I won't be upset if Ballard has him that high and takes him. 

 

I don't see it and only because of the precedent they have set and the players they have been hot on. I also understand there are a lot of smoke and mirrors. But there is a quite a few damn good linebackers if Smith somehow would go before where we trade (if that is what happens)

 

I would not and will not be upset with what Ballard does regardless.  Based on the initial conversation we were talking about Smith and going from 6 to 12.  You are adding a lot here that I do not disagree with but at the same time never mentioned as well.

 

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

This mindset also paints Ballard as the type of GM that narrowly focuses on single player instead of the big picture, which is acquiring picks and getting players of value at valueable positions throughout the draft. If he has Smith as a top 5 player, and he is on top of his board, he'll obviously take him. If he is high on Smith but thinks 6 is a reach, then he will look to move back, and move on if Smith is taken. 

 

My point of view was again based on the original comment you made.  I am not mentioning one specific player other than the guy you referred to.  Now with the other stuff you mentioned I do not necessarily disagree.

[ColtStrong2013]

28 minutes ago, Dirty Mudflaps said:

 

I agree with you and rocky.  The other thing I think was made obvious when they traded back to 6 is that they weren't all-in on any of the "experts" top 3 non-QBs, in Nelson, Chubb, and Barkley.  What that trade did is remove any control they had to assure themselves of getting one of those three.  At 3 at least one of them would have been there, with the QBs at the top.  Now, there is a chance none of them will be there.  I think that speaks volumes about where the Colts big board is and was, and it isn't where most experts or fans keep talking about.  If they wanted Chubb, or Neslon, or Barkley, they had to stay at 3.  It's no longer in their control being at 6.   Who sits atop that board has probably always been a player we'd consider a top 10 pick, not a top 5, based on all the draft experts lists. 

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it also doesn't take in account that Ballard obviously saw the value in acquiring the picks he did in the trade worth more than the guarantee of one of those players. He values acquiring valueable picks in the draft and building. That doesn't mean he doesn't value those players extremely high, it just means it was a nobrainer to move back and likely still get one of them at 6

[TdungyW/12]

18 hours ago, TKnight24 said:

 

If Chubb or Nelson are gone by 6 I think we trade back with buffalo possibly and take this guy + a couple more second rounders! 

[ColtStrong2013]

9 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

 

If a trade happens then yes it is because the value of everything outweighs the players sitting in front of you.  I at no point disagreed with that.  A smart GM is going to look at players and take the one that has the highest grade and value at the spot he is at.  If they look at someone and take them earlier than expected, than so be it...it happens every year.

 

 

I would not and will not be upset with what Ballard does regardless.  Based on the initial conversation we were talking about Smith and going from 6 to 12.  You are adding a lot here that I do not disagree with but at the same time never mentioned as well.

 

 

My point of view was again based on the original comment you made.  I am not mentioning one specific player other than the guy you referred to.  Now with the other stuff you mentioned I do not necessarily disagree.

All of those talking points were to reiterate my point that it isn't ridiculous to move back and select a player versus standing still and assuring you get him. It's exactly the same thought of moving back 3 positions to 6 and feeling good about getting one of your top 3 on the board because of the situation at hand. Which is what Ballard did, hence "setting the precedent." 

 

This is the comment from you that I singled out and wrote a novel on. My apologies for rambling. 

 The thought that, “oh noooo, picked at six is toooo early!”, but it’s perfectly fine to take him six players later at twelve, is just so ridiculous 

 

[DaColts85]

5 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

All of those talking points were to reiterate my point that it isn't ridiculous to move back and select a player versus standing still and assuring you get him. It's exactly the same thought of moving back 3 positions to 6 and feeling good about getting one of your top 3 on the board because of the situation at hand. Which is what Ballard did, hence "setting the precedent." 

 

This is the comment from you that I singled out and wrote a novel on. My apologies for rambling. 

 The thought that, “oh noooo, picked at six is toooo early!”, but it’s perfectly fine to take him six players later at twelve, is just so ridiculous 

 

To the bolded, I never said anything of the sorts so you are confusing your arguments I guess.

 

The other portion I will say that if you are at 6 and have a player in mind ok.  GM's do this every single year.  If your player is gone but another one is there and he will be gone if you make a trade back with a team then you might look at other players that might still be there and weigh the value.  This is where some GM's say no and take a player, while another might say screw it trade back and grab whoever is there that is at the top of the list.  I am not saying either is wrong.  You are construing a completely different argument over nothing.  

[Fisticuffs111]

I know this has already been said but you can't just expect Roquan to be there if we trade back. The Bears are looking at him and it wouldn't be surprising to see the Raiders or Dolphins take him.

Trading back isn't about having one specific target in mind anyways. It's about having multiple options you like at whatever pick you tade back to, Smith/Edmunds/Landry/etc.

[krunk]

Most people forget all this value talk if the player plays well.   Kelly was drafted way ahead of his Second round projection.  Most people don't make much of it today because he plays well.  Every now and then you'll hear something but not much. If they take Roquan at 6 it might not match who I wanted there, but I'd probably be slightly dissapointed for like 5 minutes.

[TKnight24]

6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I know this has already been said but you can't just expect Roquan to be there if we trade back. The Bears are looking at him and it wouldn't be surprising to see the Raiders or Dolphins take him.

Trading back isn't about having one specific target in mind anyways. It's be about having multiple options you like at whatever pick you tade back to, Smith/Edmunds/Landry/etc.

Denzel Ward

Derwin James 

Harold Landry

 

All have been tied to Indy in reports, all could be there at 12 if a trade back happens. And that’ll be more 2nd round picks for Mr. Ballard who’s on record saying he likes the Guard talent in the 2nd & later rounds and who also wants at least 3 LB’s in this draft

 

Me personally I’m hoping for Malik Jefferson & Evans from Bama. I like Anthony Walker from last draft and I think if healthy he could be really good in this system. Give me those 3 as our opening day LB starters and I’m happy with with that

 

[ColtStrong2013]

16 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

To the bolded, I never said anything of the sorts so you are confusing your arguments I guess.

 

The other portion I will say that if you are at 6 and have a player in mind ok.  GM's do this every single year.  If your player is gone but another one is there and he will be gone if you make a trade back with a team then you might look at other players that might still be there and weigh the value.  This is where some GM's say no and take a player, while another might say screw it trade back and grab whoever is there that is at the top of the list.  I am not saying either is wrong.  You are construing a completely different argument over nothing.  

You are correct. My apologies. You responded to my comment to the individual that made that comment, and I was under the thinking you were the original commenter the entire time, so toss everything out that I rambled... 

[ColtStrong2013]

3 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:

Denzel Ward

Derwin James 

Harold Landry

 

All have been tied to Indy in reports, all could be there at 12 if a trade back happens. And that’ll be more 2nd round picks for Mr. Ballard who’s on record saying he likes the Guard talent in the 2nd & later rounds and who also wants at least 3 LB’s in this draft

 

Me personally I’m hoping for Malik Jefferson & Evans from Bama. I like Anthony Walker from last draft and I think if healthy he could be really good in this system. Give me those 3 as our opening day LB starters and I’m happy with with that

 

Amen TKnight. I think too many people are jumping on those that are in favor of the possibility of trading back with the Bills. Most people aren't thinking in terms of singular players. They are trying to have the mentality that Ballard is looking at groups of players with high value and their likely drafting position. If you don't go into the draft with an understanding of where a player could and should be drafted, how have you done all the work/thinking needed to have an accurate board to base your scouting from?

I think in terms of positional value, which I will always argue goes into how a team puts their BPA board together, the linebacker position has a lot of value in the first couple rounds. Why would we invest so high at #6 in a linebacker that we could get a major upgrade at in the second round (especially with the prospect of moving down from 6 and adding another first or second round pick in the process.) 

[ColtStrong2013]

Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:

Amen TKnight. I think too many people are jumping on those that are in favor of the possibility of trading back with the Bills. Most people aren't thinking in terms of singular players. They are trying to have the mentality that Ballard is looking at groups of players with high value and their likely drafting position. If you don't go into the draft with an understanding of where a player could and should be drafted, how have you done all the work/thinking needed to have an accurate board to base your scouting from?

I think in terms of positional value, which I will always argue goes into how a team puts their BPA board together, the linebacker position has a lot of value in the first couple rounds. Why would we invest so high at #6 in a linebacker that we could get a major upgrade at in the second round (especially with the prospect of moving down from 6 and adding another first or second round pick in the process.) 

This is also why I think Nelson is a bit high at #6, and not sure Ballard would value him at that position. Chubb is by far and away the top of our board, in my opinion. Positional value, BPA, draft positioning, all of it has to be accounted for every single player, at every single draft position. Teams that reach for position (Mostly QB), are teams that get poor value from their drafts. 

[Fisticuffs111]

6 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Amen TKnight. I think too many people are jumping on those that are in favor of the possibility of trading back with the Bills. Most people aren't thinking in terms of singular players. 

Yeah, I might not have been clear in the post that was quoted by @TKnight24, but that's basically what I was getting at. That trading back isn't about assuming one specific target will be there, but multiple (and I'm pretty pro-tradeback for the most part, at least if Buffalo gives us a good deal).

[TKnight24]

2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

This is also why I think Nelson is a bit high at #6, and not sure Ballard would value him at that position. Chubb is by far and away the top of our board, in my opinion. Positional value, BPA, draft positioning, all of it has to be accounted for every single player, at every single draft position. Teams that reach for position (Mostly QB), are teams that get poor value from their drafts. 

I think Chubb is high on Ballard's board & Barkley is high on Irsay's board

 

Ballard mentions how you're not gonna get premium pass rushers in FA so you gotta draft one (Chubb)

 

Irsay mentions wanting to give Andrew a Edge James type RB (Barkley)

 

Only one of these guys can get what they want, me personally I'm hoping for Barkley and that we take the Seahawks approach when they won their SB with just a great rotation of guys who could get to the QB. It's easier to phase out ONE pass rusher than it is to phase out an entire group. 

 

I always think of Khalil Mack in OAK. Yes he's a great talent, but he gets phased out and their defense still stinks. He gets his stats, but it doesn't mean anything if the rest of the defense isn't doing anything. Get me a group of guys who can get after the QB instead of just one

[TKnight24]

2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Yeah, I might not have been clear in the post that was quoted by @TKnight24, but that's basically what I was getting at. That trading back isn't about assuming one specific target will be there, but multiple. 

Don't worry, I got your back

 

[Fisticuffs111]

22 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:

Denzel Ward

Derwin James 

Harold Landry

 

All have been tied to Indy in reports, all could be there at 12 if a trade back happens. And that’ll be more 2nd round picks for Mr. Ballard who’s on record saying he likes the Guard talent in the 2nd & later rounds and who also wants at least 3 LB’s in this draft

 

Me personally I’m hoping for Malik Jefferson & Evans from Bama. I like Anthony Walker from last draft and I think if healthy he could be really good in this system. Give me those 3 as our opening day LB starters and I’m happy with with that

 

Yeah I'm really hoping Evans makes it to the 2nd, seems like he's getting some 1st round hype, which is much deserved IMO. Jefferson I go back and forth on but his ceiling his undeniable, wouldn't mind him at all if Ballard pulls the trigger in the 2nd.

 

I'm just as excited about our first two 2nd rounders as I am about the #6 pick, if not more.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 minute ago, TKnight24 said:

I think Chubb is high on Ballard's board & Barkley is high on Irsay's board

 

Ballard mentions how you're not gonna get premium pass rushers in FA so you gotta draft one (Chubb)

 

Irsay mentions wanting to give Andrew a Edge James type RB (Barkley)

 

Only one of these guys can get what they want, me personally I'm hoping for Barkley and that we take the Seahawks approach when they won their SB with just a great rotation of guys who could get to the QB. It's easier to phase out ONE pass rusher than it is to phase out an entire group. 

 

I always think of Khalil Mack in OAK. Yes he's a great talent, but he gets phased out and their defense still stinks. He gets his stats, but it doesn't mean anything if the rest of the defense isn't doing anything. Get me a group of guys who can get after the QB instead of just one

Pass rushing has to be by committee or you are risking being an injury away from a bad defense fielded. But a guy like Chubb only rolls around once every so often. And the talent disparity between him and the next guy is pretty large. 

 

I think Barkley is a once in a generation player also, but there are a lot of starting caliber running backs this year.

[TKnight24]

2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Pass rushing has to be by committee or you are risking being an injury away from a bad defense fielded. But a guy like Chubb only rolls around once every so often. And the talent disparity between him and the next guy is pretty large. 

 

I think Barkley is a once in a generation player also, but there are a lot of starting caliber running backs this year.

If we don't land Barkley I'm cool with Ronald Jones, Royce Freeman, Chris Warren, Sony Michel, or Nick Chubb

 

The kid in me wants us to draft B. Chubb & N. Chubb, I could have alot of fun with that

 

[TKnight24]

6 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Yeah I'm really hoping Evans makes it to the 2nd, seems like he's getting some 1st round hype, which is much deserved IMO. Jefferson I go back and forth on but his ceiling his undeniable, wouldn't mind him at all if Ballard pulls the trigger in the 2nd.

 

I'm just as excited about our first two 2nd rounders as I am about the #6 pick, if not more.

Yeah, I haven't been this excited for a draft since the 2012 rebuild draft with the #1 overall pick between RG3 & Andrew 

 

I see RG3 is back in the league now, just got signed by Baltimore 

[RollerColt]

5 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:

Yeah, I haven't been this excited for a draft since the 2012 rebuild draft with the #1 overall pick between RG3 & Andrew 

 

I see RG3 is back in the league now, just got signed by Baltimore 

 Wouldn't it be something if the two of them have a renaissance this year?  

[rockywoj]

2 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Except it isn't at all.... Why would you feel good about reaching for a guy at 6 when you can load up on picks moving back several spots to pick him at 12? How is that a ridiculous thought process? Many don't think he is valued high enough to pick in the top 5 or 6, it doesn't make it "ridiculous"....

I think you are wrong to think they can so easily simply load up on picks in a move back.  I suspect consummating move back trades is a LOT more difficult than most of you seem to think.

[TKnight24]

Just now, RollerColt said:

 Wouldn't it be something if the two of them have a renaissance this year?  

RG3 just has to beat out Flacco who hasn't been good since the magical SB run but on the other hand their offense hasn't really had any offensive power. Ozzy can draft some defense, I won't question his skills there but offensively not so much

 

I'm happy Alex Collins is shining at RB though. I was high on him coming out of Arkansas. Wanted the Colts to draft him

[RollerColt]

15 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:

RG3 just has to beat out Flacco who hasn't been good since the magical SB run but on the other hand their offense hasn't really had any offensive power. Ozzy can draft some defense, I won't question his skills there but offensively not so much

 

I'm happy Alex Collins is shining at RB though. I was high on him coming out of Arkansas. Wanted the Colts to draft him

They've suffered on offense since Jim Caldwell left town as well it seems. 

[ColtStrong2013]

59 minutes ago, krunk said:

Most people forget all this value talk if the player plays well.   Kelly was drafted way ahead of his Second round projection.  Most people don't make much of it today because he plays well.  Every now and then you'll hear something but not much. If they take Roquan at 6 it might not match who I wanted there, but I'd probably be slightly dissapointed for like 5 minutes.

I dont remember Kelly being a second round projection at all... He was projected to Indy the entire time

[krunk]

29 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:

If we don't land Barkley I'm cool with Ronald Jones, Royce Freeman, Chris Warren, Sony Michel, or Nick Chubb

 

The kid in me wants us to draft B. Chubb & N. Chubb, I could have alot of fun with that

 

Lately I've picked up a liking for the big guy from Arizona State  Kalen Ballage.  I think he moves well for a big guy and he's got some wheels on him.  Good in the passing game also.   I like some of your choices also though.

[ColtStrong2013]

22 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

I think you are wrong to think they can so easily simply load up on picks in a move back.  I suspect consummating move back trades is a LOT more difficult than most of you seem to think.

They literally just proved your comment wrong a few weeks ago... Ballard made it look that easy, so no I dont think it will be difficult. 

 

I don't think we trade back unless 3 players are gone, which means 2 top QBs are still available... which yes, teams will trade picks for

[krunk]

1 minute ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I dont remember Kelly being a second round projection at all... He was projected to Indy the entire time

He was being projected for the early 2nd round.

By the time the draft day got closer they started projecting him to Indy

and a good couple of us on this forum didn't want him at the pick we

had because he was a center and we felt it was too early for a center.

[krunk]

9 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I dont remember Kelly being a second round projection at all... He was projected to Indy the entire time

Here was the write up after the pick:

 

It's not often that NFL teams go for a true center in the first round of the draft, but that's exactly what the Colts did on Thursday.

With the 18th overall pick, Indianpolis selected former Alabama center Ryan Kelly. A three-year starter at Alabama, Kelly took home the Rimington Trophy in 2015, an award that goes to the college football's top center.

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2016-nfl-draft-colts-get-an-a+-for-drafting-ryan-kelly-with-18th-pick/

 

 

The line of thinking at the time was you don't take a center in the first round.

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

He was being projected for the early 2nd round.

By the time the draft day got closer they started projecting him to Indy

and a good couple of us on this forum didn't want him at the pick we

had because he was a center and we felt it was too early for a center.

18 was a touch high for him. I think Grigson felt he had to pick him him to prove he was serious about protecting Luck after the first several years. 

 

I just dont remember him being a second round grade. Some even thought it was a nobrainer for us.

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

18 was a touch high for him. I think Grigson felt he had to pick him him to prove he was serious about protecting Luck after the first several years. 

 

I just dont remember him being a second round grade. Some even thought it was a nobrainer for us.

No brainer only because the line was in total shambles.

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

No brainer only because the line was in total shambles.

Agreed. Which is not a good position to be in going into the draft for any position group.  

[krunk]

1 minute ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Agreed. Which is not a good position to be in going into the draft for any position group.  

Grigson was under pressure to make some kind of good move regarding the OL even if he had to reach for a need.

[ColtStrong2013]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

Grigson was under pressure to make some kind of good move regarding the OL even if he had to reach for a need.

Should not have been the case. They both should have been fired that off season and moved on. 

 

I sincerely hope we look back and thank the timing of Grigsons firing. I like Ballard's approach and I truly hope he is successful, especially with drafting, developing, and retaining his own players. That kind of locker room under Frank Reich could be priceless. 

[rockywoj]

38 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

They literally just proved your comment wrong a few weeks ago... Ballard made it look that easy, so no I dont think it will be difficult. 

 

I don't think we trade back unless 3 players are gone, which means 2 top QBs are still available... which yes, teams will trade picks for

Holy, the Colts do it once in how many years, and all of a sudden it is now easy?  The fact that Ballard pulled that trade off was fantastic, but I don't think it is something so easily replicated.  For years people here have been calling for trade backs and then all upset when such does not materialize.  Right now I think the Giants, Cleveland, and Denver are in a far better position to work a trade back with Buffalo.  I predict that nothing more will happen for the Colts until draft day and then things will be entirely dependent upon if Buffalo (or anybody else) can work a trade for #'s 2, 4, & 5, before anything with the Colts will be entertained.

 

If something can be worked out, then terrific!  But I am pretty darn sure it is not nearly as easy as you make it sound.

[krunk]

5 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Should not have been the case. They both should have been fired that off season and moved on. 

 

I sincerely hope we look back and thank the timing of Grigsons firing. I like Ballard's approach and I truly hope he is successful, especially with drafting, developing, and retaining his own players. That kind of locker room under Frank Reich could be priceless. 

Grigs kept trying to fix the OL through FA and it kept blowing up on him.  I think maybe things swing a little differently if Donald Thomas didn't get hit with a big injury bug and then the knee issue with Gosder Cherilus.  On top of that none of his drafted OL worked out other than Mewhort and then in his final year Ryan Kelly. Maybe you can add Denzel Good to the mix but he's far from a reliable option.  Even the ones he drafted along with Kelly are struggling.  Maybe Clark and Haeg will finally get it together enough to where we are certain, but for right now????

[rockywoj]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

Grigs kept trying to fix the OL through FA and it kept blowing up on him.  I think maybe things swing a little differently if Donald Thomas didn't get hit with a big injury bug and then the knee issue with Gosder Cherilus.  On top of that none of his drafted OL worked out other than Mewhort and then in his final year Ryan Kelly. Maybe you can add Denzel Good to the mix but he's far from a reliable option.  Even the ones he drafted along with Kelly are struggling.  Maybe Clark and Haeg will finally get it together enough to where we are certain, but for right now????

Right now, we can only hope!

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Holy, the Colts do it once in how many years, and all of a sudden it is now easy?  The fact that Ballard pulled that trade off was fantastic, but I don't think it is something so easily replicated.  For years people here have been calling for trade backs and then all upset when such does not materialize.  Right now I think the Giants, Cleveland, and Denver are in a far better position to work a trade back with Buffalo.  I predict that nothing more will happen for the Colts until draft day and then things will be entirely dependent upon if Buffalo (or anybody else) can work a trade for #'s 2, 4, & 5, before anything with the Colts will be entertained.

 

If something can be worked out, then terrific!  But I am pretty darn sure it is not nearly as easy as yo make it sound.

First off, we had this guy named Ryan Grigson here for several years... and he sucked at everything relating to drafting. We also weren't a top 10 drafting team with the QB position locked down, ever... so things are different this year than they have been in the past 2 decades.

 

I completely agree that nothing more will happen until draft day for us. I have repeatedly said that on this forum. Ballard will sit back and see what happens. If those teams that are now ahead of us do trade back to QB reaching teams then that is GREAT. Exactly what Ballard hoped by moving to 6. It opens up drafting Barkley or Chubb. If not, then there will be a few teams entertaining moving up for their QB. If it were easy, everyone would be successful at it. Many fear the unknown. Ballard trusts his hard work and scouting, and knows if the elite guys are no longer on the board or if a great opportunity comes his way, he is comfortable moving back. His vision has been laid out over and over. Focus on the draft, do your homework, acquire picks, draft well, develop your picks, stack drafts on top of another and retain your key players. 

 

Acquiring picks is going to be his forte, and he's excelling already in year 2. No one knows what is going to happen, not even Ballard. But moving back is certainly on the table and will look better and better closer to draft day.

[ColtStrong2013]

8 minutes ago, krunk said:

Grigs kept trying to fix the OL through FA and it kept blowing up on him.  I think maybe things swing a little differently if Donald Thomas didn't get hit with a big injury bug and then the knee issue with Gosder Cherilus.  On top of that none of his drafted OL worked out other than Mewhort and then in his final year Ryan Kelly. Maybe you can add Denzel Good to the mix but he's far from a reliable option.  Even the ones he drafted along with Kelly are struggling.  Maybe Clark and Haeg will finally get it together enough to where we are certain, but for right now????

Right now it is unsettled. There is definitely going to be a pick or two in the first three rounds to bolster this offensive line. Book it. Deep interior offensive line in this draft. 

 

Perhaps Ballard thinks that a fresh coaching staff and offensive scheme will go a long way with the current guys also. Getting rid of the ball faster will certainly help. 

[ColtStrong2013]

26 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Holy, the Colts do it once in how many years, and all of a sudden it is now easy?  The fact that Ballard pulled that trade off was fantastic, but I don't think it is something so easily replicated.  For years people here have been calling for trade backs and then all upset when such does not materialize.  Right now I think the Giants, Cleveland, and Denver are in a far better position to work a trade back with Buffalo.  I predict that nothing more will happen for the Colts until draft day and then things will be entirely dependent upon if Buffalo (or anybody else) can work a trade for #'s 2, 4, & 5, before anything with the Colts will be entertained.

 

If something can be worked out, then terrific!  But I am pretty darn sure it is not nearly as easy as you make it sound.

I also would like to point out that it isn't uncommon for teams looking to move up to negotiate possibilities ahead of time so they aren't scrambling every pick. Make no mistake, CB has already taken phone calls from teams looking at quarterbacks. He knows what teams are valuing and knows exactly what he will be willing to trade for.

 

This isn't Madden and you can just wait to see what trade offers pull up on the screen when your pick comes. You negotiate for weeks leading up to the draft so you have a starting point to work from. 

[rockywoj]

14 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I also would like to point out that it isn't uncommon for teams looking to move up to negotiate possibilities ahead of time so they aren't scrambling every pick. Make no mistake, CB has already taken phone calls from teams looking at quarterbacks. He knows what teams are valuing and knows exactly what he will be willing to trade for.

 

This isn't Madden and you can just wait to see what trade offers pull up on the screen when your pick comes. You negotiate for weeks leading up to the draft so you have a starting point to work from. 

I've never played Madden.  Used to play a card and dice game call TSG NFL Football, if my memory serves, and then an X's & O's computer game called NFL Challenge by XOR Corporation.

 

And yes, all the trade discussion scenarios are already going on, to be sure.

[waka waka]

1 hour ago, TKnight24 said:

If we don't land Barkley I'm cool with Ronald Jones, Royce Freeman, Chris Warren, Sony Michel, or Nick Chubb

 

The kid in me wants us to draft B. Chubb & N. Chubb, I could have alot of fun with that

 

I think some forget before N.Chubb got hurt he was suppose to be the next great RB prospect. While at the combine he looked just as fluid as Sony. I think has he gets further past his injury he can come back to his old self. He's can be more than just a one-cut runner. I think he's going to be a steal for whoever drafts him.