MightyLucks

Henry Anderson Traded To Jets

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Dilger85 said:

Really? Hankins was a good player but not an all pro ie replaceable production. Anderson couldn’t stay healthy.  Every team does it this way. 

So 2 months ago, if someone told you to dump Hankins and Anderson for a 7th rounder?  You would have been ok with that?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

But because some on here feel the need to protect Ballard NO MATTER what, all of a sudden they are great moves.  

 

Righttttttt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must've made a half dozen different posts where I predicted Henry Anderson would be traded.   Why was this hard to see?    He's a 3-4 DE.    He was always a bad fit in this defense.

 

As for what we got...   do you think Ballard was offered more and he said "no thanks" I'll just take a 7...   you're worth what some team will give you.

 

This is yet another embarrassing thread in a weekend filled with them.

 

Anyone remember the thread about old fans vs young fans?!?     

 

Young fans......    :HFire:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So 2 months ago, if someone told you to dump Hankins and Anderson for a 7th rounder?  You would have been ok with that?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

But because some on here feel the need to protect Ballard NO MATTER what, all of a sudden they are great moves.  

 

Righttttttt.

 

Protect Ballard?!?

 

Rightttttttt!!

 

The guy isn't losing his job in the near future.   He doesn't need protection or defending.   He needs a better fan base, but that's about it.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Protect Ballard?!?

 

Rightttttttt!!

 

The guy isn't losing his job in the near future.   He doesn't need protection or defending.   He needs a better fan base, but that's about it.

 

I love the Colts.

 

I am not a blind homer.

 

 

So far Ballard talks a cocky game.  I don't see anything to say he is a managing savant however.

 

In fact if I had to rate his performance so far?  D.  At best.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heck of a trade. Anderson was a good player and hopefully will be playing for a much better team. Ballard really is a genius. No one can figure out what he’s doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Protect Ballard?!?

 

Rightttttttt!!

 

The guy isn't losing his job in the near future.   He doesn't need protection or defending.   He needs a better fan base, but that's about it.

 

Good point. With a better fan base, this team could be a Super Bowl champ. Trust the genius but don’t bother trying to figure him out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cdgacoltsfan said:

I predict we trade Luck to the Bengals for their next year's 7th rounder...or maybe just cut him. He's injury prone and doesn't fit the new scheme.

Not a bad idea. Get something for him before he retires this Fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So 2 months ago, if someone told you to dump Hankins and Anderson for a 7th rounder?  You would have been ok with that?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

But because some on here feel the need to protect Ballard NO MATTER what, all of a sudden they are great moves.  

 

Righttttttt.

Whenever they made the decision to switch defenses, yes. They want faster dline with the 4-3. That is why these moves were made. It’s not supporting Ballard, it’s understanding that the defense will be focused on penetration not either one of those guys strong suit. Anderson is a two gap 5 technique for a 3-4. Hankins is a run stuffing DT. He is not quick enough for what they were wanting. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I love the Colts.

 

I am not a blind homer.

 

 

So far Ballard talks a cocky game.  I don't see anything to say he is a managing savant however.

 

In fact if I had to rate his performance so far?  D.  At best.

What part of changing the defense are you not getting?  They want faster players period.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I must've made a half dozen different posts where I predicted Henry Anderson would be traded.   Why was this hard to see?    He's a 3-4 DE.    He was always a bad fit in this defense.

 

As for what we got...   do you think Ballard was offered more and he said "no thanks" I'll just take a 7...   you're worth what some team will give you.

 

This is yet another embarrassing thread in a weekend filled with them.

 

Anyone remember the thread about old fans vs young fans?!?     

 

Young fans......    :HFire:

 

I’m a young(er) fan , and I totally understand the rationale behind the trade.

 

There might be another word you’re searching for , but I don’t think it’s 

“young”.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So 2 months ago, if someone told you to dump Hankins and Anderson for a 7th rounder?  You would have been ok with that?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

But because some on here feel the need to protect Ballard NO MATTER what, all of a sudden they are great moves.  

 

Righttttttt.

Plus two months ago they stated they were switching to a 4-3 so if you were blindsided by some of these moves then that is on you. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

Whenever they made the decision to switch defenses, yes. They want faster dline with the 4-3. That is why these moves were made. It’s not supporting Ballard, it’s understanding that the defense will be focused on penetration not either one of those guys strong suit. Anderson is a two gap 5 technique for a 3-4. Hankins is a run stuffing DT. He is not quick enough for what they were wanting. 

See I find that just ridiculous.

 

A fun stuffer is a run stuffer.  Whether in a 3-4 or a 4-3.  Compare teams that play those styles.  The interior lineman are all basically the same

 

 

The point is, even knowing that, Anderson lost weight and was going to do his best to fit into the new scheme.  They didn't even give him a chance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, azcolt said:

Good point. With a better fan base, this team could be a Super Bowl champ. Trust the genius but don’t bother trying to figure him out.

 

Give me a break...   "figure him out?"

 

People have been explaining Ballard for the last three days.   And those who hate what he's done haven't changed their tune one bit.   They're still complaining non-stop.

 

No one is saying "Oh, I get it now, thanks for explaining."    No..   Their response is to mock people who get it and think we're just blindly supporting our GM. 

 

It's like that every year here.... 

 

If the GM doesn't take the guy or the position they like or want then they go nuts...   some things don't change...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

Plus two months ago they stated they were switching to a 4-3 so if you were blindsided by some of these moves then that is on you. 

Trying to fit less talented players into a '"scheme" is a sure fire way to disaster.  

 

 

And 2-14 records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, threeflight said:

See I find that just ridiculous.

 

A fun stuffer is a run stuffer.  Whether in a 3-4 or a 4-3.  Compare teams that play those styles.  The interior lineman are all basically the same

 

 

The point is, even knowing that, Anderson lost weight and was going to do his best to fit into the new scheme.  They didn't even give him a chance.  

You can find it ridiculous if you want but it’s the truth. They have Woods as the run stuffer. Not really a need for Hankins. Anderson is a position change both from a technical and technique standpoint. The scouts and coaches felt that he couldn’t make the transition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I love the Colts.

 

I am not a blind homer.

 

 

So far Ballard talks a cocky game.  I don't see anything to say he is a managing savant however.

 

In fact if I had to rate his performance so far?  D.  At best.

 

You're entitled to your opinion...

 

I respectfully disagree...   and we'll leave it at that...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, threeflight said:

Trying to fit less talented players into a '"scheme" is a sure fire way to disaster.  

 

 

And 2-14 records.

What has Anderson done that makes him irreplaceable?  He has a hard time staying healthy. His replacement was Autry who had a more productive year last year and is a better player. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, threeflight said:

Trying to fit less talented players into a '"scheme" is a sure fire way to disaster.  

 

 

And 2-14 records.

 

2-14?     That's your prediction?

 

Remember this post and we will check back in about eight months....

 

Good luck with that....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Trueman said:

 

I’m a young(er) fan , and I totally understand the rationale behind the trade.

 

There might be another word you’re searching for , but I don’t think it’s 

“young”.

 

Thank you.  Point noted.   And you're probably right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TouchdownMonkey said:

At the time of trade every one was pumped about not one person was saying it was dumb till Trent didn't show up. Trent failed not Grigson, not saying Grigson was good lol.

That’s not even remotely true. There were scores of people against that trade from the minute it was announced.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't understand all the "wasn't a good fit for the new scheme" comments. He was an athletic lineman who had dropped weight to become even more athletic. The 4-3 scheme depends on athletic linemen to penetrate. I also think cutting Hankins was a bad move. I think he could have been very disruptive in the new scheme. 

 

Ballard's questionable moves:

  • Not resigning Rashan Melvin
  • Cutting Hankins
  • Trading Anderson for a god-forsaken 7th rounder
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, threeflight said:

See I find that just ridiculous.

 

A fun stuffer is a run stuffer.  Whether in a 3-4 or a 4-3.  Compare teams that play those styles.  The interior lineman are all basically the same

 

 

The point is, even knowing that, Anderson lost weight and was going to do his best to fit into the new scheme.  They didn't even give him a chance.  

Albeit one who could rarely stay on the field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bsteves said:

For the 235th pick?! You can't be serious..

We didn't get anything for Hankins so I guess anything is good for a player you're probably going to cut as the season goes along

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people assume that they somehow have a better handle on the marketplace than the only guys who have exclusive access to that marketplace? 

 

I'm not saying you can't criticize the move, that's fine...but to essentially say that our GM actively and purposefully took less value than what was available is a bizarre point to try to make. I mean, what GM did you talk to that said "I would have given a 6th"...? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, azcolt said:

Heck of a trade. Anderson was a good player and hopefully will be playing for a much better team. Ballard really is a genius. No one can figure out what he’s doing.

Yet we have those that believe they are better at his job than him. Those are the "funny people".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dilger85 said:

What part of changing the defense are you not getting?  They want faster players period.

It's funny (not) the Colts have gone from fast defense to big defense (Build a monster or whatever Grigson said) now back to fast defense. Hope for better results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IndySouthsider said:

That’s not even remotely true. There were scores of people against that trade from the minute it was announced.

 

Oh, I know... people have a terrific ability to utilize hyperbolic revisionist history to support an argument.

 

When I heard about the trade I thought :

 

One, why did we trade a 1st for a RB?

 

Two, why did we sacrifice a great asset for a skill position when our lines were poor?

 

Three, Trent’s vision was horrendous as a rookie in Cleveland too. Look at what Jim Brown said about him. Why would they want to move on from a 3rd overall selection if he was such a stud?

 

Grigson’s scouting abilities have been brutally criticized by people in the NFL , and he showed why countless times. Not to mention his flawed approach towards team building.

 

Don’t tell me “Trent failed Grigson”. That’s beyond dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, threeflight said:

So 2 months ago, if someone told you to dump Hankins and Anderson for a 7th rounder?  You would have been ok with that?  I seriously doubt it.  

 

But because some on here feel the need to protect Ballard NO MATTER what, all of a sudden they are great moves.  

 

Righttttttt.

Well I thought Hankins was a bad FA signing by Ballard. So color me not surprised at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JColts72 said:

And u are so high and mighty like only your view is all that matters. Well it does not. It's still US of A here and each can disagree. So leave it at that. Worse here then expressing political views in the real world.

 

Funny how you try to make it seem like I'm being unreasonable.  I simply asked you to back up your statements with some facts and you have yet to back up anything.  That would lead me to conclude that you are not capable of backing up your statements.  If asking you to back up what you post is unreasonable, then so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, King Colt said:

It's funny (not) the Colts have gone from fast defense to big defense (Build a monster or whatever Grigson said) now back to fast defense. Hope for better results.

Right, only time will tell but I see the reasoning behind the moves.  Personally I think the defense will look more like the Seahawks than the old Colts or Bucs. Either way you need speed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you only win four games and cannot stay healthy you are not safe except Andrew but it would take Irsays okay to be able to unload him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, threeflight said:

I love the Colts.

 

I am not a blind homer.

 

 

So far Ballard talks a cocky game.  I don't see anything to say he is a managing savant however.

 

In fact if I had to rate his performance so far?  D.  At best.

Hold your ratings for 2 or 3 years or at the very least wait til the end of the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If these guys work out Ballard will be a genius.  If they don't, even his most ardent supporters will turn on  him , and he will be run out of town.  Too early to tell.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh man I liked Anderson, hate to see him go.... oh well, que sera sera!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, azcolt said:

Heck of a trade. Anderson was a good player and hopefully will be playing for a much better team. Ballard really is a genius. No one  can (I can't) figure out what he’s doing.

It's OK to stand on your own opinion without including others. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the end, Anderson is not a 4-3 DE and he’s not explosive enough to play DT in a 4-3 scheme. He was superb in his rookie season as a 3-4 DE but has struggled to get back to health since then and has been less than stellar as a result. Thus his low trade value. You get what the market is willing to pay. He was worth a 7th round pick today. I hope he gets healthy and kicks some *. But he was a cut waiting to happen. So the Colts got what they could. Pretty simple really. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, mikey287 said:

Why do people assume that they somehow have a better handle on the marketplace than the only guys who have exclusive access to that marketplace? 

 

I'm not saying you can't criticize the move, that's fine...but to essentially say that our GM actively and purposefully took less value than what was available is a bizarre point to try to make. I mean, what GM did you talk to that said "I would have given a 6th"...? 

Because they are too emotional, and that makes them ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.