ColtStrong2013
-
Posts
4,139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by ColtStrong2013
-
-
Just now, aaron11 said:
hankins wasnt a free agent
He didn't fit the new defense and wanted out too...
How else would we improve the roster without the draft then my friend? I was implying FA outside of those 4 players, because even with them, according to you, we wouldn't be better than last year "right now."
-
The draft might not make us better next season. Although Andrew Luck with a new (and much improved) coaching staff will... But it will make us better over the next 3-10 years.
-
Just now, aaron11 said:
its like you dont get that we are worse off right now today, which is what we keep saying
i dont trust the draft to make us that much better.
LoL. It's a good thing you aren't in charge of the organization. I guess you think FA solves problems more than creates. Thank the good Lord that we are focusing on the draft and developing our own talent. This is a rebuild regardless of what way you cut it, but you'd rather overpay for old, slow and unreliable players.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:
It is like you just can't get it that the roster additions/improvements are still coming and waa waa waa you have not gotten your way. Gawd!!
You need to look forward to the 2019 free agency and draft when we fill even more holes on our pathetic roster.
Cry then if we are not looking much better without slow___ Hankins, 10 game wonderkind Melvin, 35 year old Gore, and totally unreliable Mongrief.We could have kept all 4 of those players.... There's good reasons why not one of them are playing in Indy this year. Plenty of them.
-
12 minutes ago, aaron11 said:
im not sold at all on ridgeway or autry at all. neither of them get that much pressure either
anderson has like 2 career sacks, he doesnt get after the QB any better than hankins.
He had 2 sacks last year in 8 games that he started/9 played... he absolutely gets more pressure when he's playing well than Hankins ever did. Jabaal Sheard had 6 sacks and wasn't playing his natural position. I'm interested in seeing how that goes. Basham wasn't in his natural position last season and played pretty well for a rookie passrusher that did not play much.
You can not be sold on the d-line... I'm not either. But you can't say it's far worse because of Hankins, because it isn't... especially if Chubb is anchoring it come end of this month.
-
15 minutes ago, aaron11 said:
we are objectively worse at all four of those positions
hankins and melvin were good players last year, where we now have empty roster spots. thats not an improvement
our running back group is worse off without frank until we do something to make it better.
Heading into the draft, possibly, although I question if we truly are.
Hankins wasn't a fit in this new defensive scheme. Ridgeway, Anderson, Autry, Woods all are. They can disrupt and get up field with pressure. Hankins was a runstopper. If we would land Chubb, it's not even a topic for debate that the d-line is much better.
Melvin is a loss, for sure. But one that's likely to be replaced by Wilson starting and whatever we bring in the draft. Some say we might even get Ward first round. Even with a top back in the second round, it's hardly a loss if so.
Running back will be addressed and will be a better position group under Frank Reichs offense than we have seen in a long time.
-
1 hour ago, #12. said:
Reich as a head coach is a complete unknown. The guy has yet to coach a practice.
Better players? To this point in free agency, this team is weaker. We lost four starters we have to replace. Gore, Hankins, Moncrief and Melvin were some of the better players on the team.
Free agency? We didn't touch free agency for a reason. We will add 4 starters in the first 2 rounds of the draft pal.
I'm pretty sure we will replace Gore with a true 3 down back this draft... Gore was showing his age more and more. Moncrief was a joke last year on the field and a detriment to the locker room with a lazy attitude. We don't know that losing Melvin is a loss yet. How would we seeing as Wilson was never allowed to play? and Hankins while great against the run, didn't do anything for our lack of pass rush. And he didn't fit this defense. Poor examples to use to say this roster isn't better. We are putting defensive talent from last year in their true positions in this new scheme. That is a huge factor that you aren't even considering...
We will have a more talented football roster after this draft... that is a guarantee. And if you are still stuck on Pagano being a better coach than Reich, you are bonkers. Reich knows how to gameplan and make adjustments. He knows how to change the game up and utilize matchups. He knows that having poor tendencies like Pagano did for 6 years, offensively and defensively, is a losing trait. He will take calculated risks to keep the defense off the field more, and the ball in Andrew Luck's hands. He'll dial up better playcalling than we have seen since 2010 season (Peyton's last playing year) and get the ball out of Lucks hands faster, making the offensive line (which should be improved through the draft) look better than ever.
-
Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:
Exactly... The biggest reason they were at the bottom in most categories has a lot to do with how bad the offense performed and put them in tough spots. Pagano didn't even try to keep his defense off the field throughout his career.
Link for the article is attached the the quote.
It really is amazing how bad Pagano was... his tendencies were incredible.
How people can say this team won't be drastically better this season blows my mind. Better coach. Better players, who are young and hungry. Better environment. And if Luck is healthy, our franchise qb back under center.
-
6 hours ago, a06cc said:
Lack of a scoring offense didn’t help our defense as well. Being a one half coached team didn’t help...
Exactly... The biggest reason they were at the bottom in most categories has a lot to do with how bad the offense performed and put them in tough spots. Pagano didn't even try to keep his defense off the field throughout his career.
-
3
-
-
22 minutes ago, TKnight24 said:
I know Sheard had a good amount. Well according to PFF anyway.
This scheme if it lives up the hype it’s getting should generate a lot more. Supposedly the scheme is simplified so the players think less and play more
I think with the versatility they have, we could have some great success. Henry Anderson, when healthy was putting good pressure from the end position in the 3-4. He can generate pass rush from anywhere in this defense. Ridgeway is another. You bring in Autry, who is technically a 4-3 defensive end, but has played plenty inside as a tackle as well. I think Ballard wants versatility. Why not have a few linebackers that can get down as an end to solely passrush? I think that's what makes defenses extremely dangerous and deep. New England has consistently had versatile players, especially at linebacker.
-
45 minutes ago, bleevit said:
I believe that finding himself back in the 4-3 with the tutelage of Robert Mathis he may find himself fighting for a starting role very soon. My stupid pick of the year: Basham will have a breakout year and pick up 8 sacks.
It isn't stupid. Even if we land Chubb and have solid production from he and Sheard, Basham could have 6-8 sacks as a rotational guy. I can definitely see Basham being an 8 sack a year guy in the future.
-
Just now, ColtStrong2013 said:
I think you are the only person I have seen thus far in this forum that agrees with this...
Positional value is huge in determining value in the draft. If it weren't, teams wouldn't be jockeying to get position for a qb. Running back and Offensive guard has to be weighted poorly compared to a defensive end, which is why some value Chubb so high. It's not necessarily the player, more than the position. I can't help but think Ballard doesn't have those guys valued much higher, if at all, than several others on top of his board.
With that said, I'm not sure I agree in getting something now versus draft day.
Crazy stuff happens on draft day, so I think it more wise to sit back and hope some teams make stupid decisions that might make #6 more valuable. He's been patient and methodical. There will be no quick moves with Ballard.
-
6 hours ago, DougDew said:
I think why I'm advocating that is because I no longer see much of a difference between the 7 players mentioned for who we could get at 6. I don't think Chubb is a once-in-a-lifetime DE, and while Barkley and Nelson are probably better players than the other 5, their positional value knocks them down a bit. So I see pick 6 and pick 11 being about the same for us. Any of them would also fill a need. So moving back 5 spots means nothing, so getting something now is pure profit.
If we liked a player at 6 who we didn't think would be there at 11, then I would need more for the pick.
I think you are the only person I have seen thus far in this forum that agrees with this...
Positional value is huge in determining value in the draft. If it weren't, teams wouldn't be jockeying to get position for a qb. Running back and Offensive guard has to be weighted poorly compared to a defensive end, which is why some value Chubb so high. It's not necessarily the player, more than the position. I can't help but think Ballard doesn't have those guys valued much higher, if at all, than several others on top of his board.
-
1 hour ago, rockywoj said:
Of course, to be fair, your point assumes that this “draft value chart” is God. I think of it as more of just an arbitrary “guideline”, one that time and time again is NOT adhered to.
Exactly.... because that trade with the Jets was perfectly aligned on the value chart...
-
2 minutes ago, bsteves said:
Not enough imo. Not even close.
Agreed.
We move back 3 spots and get three 2nd rounders from the Jets... moving out of the top 10 should warrant the same at the very minimum...
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, DougDew said:
Well, lets do the math right here. If we trade to 11 before the draft, and 4 QBs go top 4, who's left.
Barkley, Chubb, Nelson, Edmunds, James, Fitzpatrick, Smith and Ward. All of those names have been mentioned in the top 6, so we are assured of getting 1. If Ballard has no real favorite among that group, then maybe he gets Miami's RT and another 2nd round pick by trading with them in the next few days. If he waits, he risks losing the RT and pick and ends up with no better player than if he made the trade early.
And if that 2nd round MIA pick could be a G as you say, he can count on fixing the oline with the MIA trade before the draft even starts. He goes into it with 11, 36, 37, 49, and 67 not having to look at oline anymore.
I don't disagree. He's negotiating. Miami might not be budging on it, but he's negotiating for sure... knowing he doesn't have to trade.
He could still land a really good guard in the second round, and drastically improve the o-line with the right side of the line upgraded.
-
7 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Possibly. I don't think Ballard is in love with Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson and feels like has to get one of those three players or else the first round is a failure. Which has been the opinion of about 75% of the forum for the past 6 weeks.
It's certainly not my opinion. But I think there is a lot of value at 6.
I believe in value and positional value. I think Ballard might really think highly of Nelson but can't justify picking him at 6 when there is really good interior talent to be had in the 2nd round. Playmaking linebackers like Edmonds and Smith aren't followed by a deep inside linebacker class. That could be the value he sees.
-
2
-
-
24 minutes ago, DougDew said:
Ballard has leverage now. If draft day comes and deals are made with 4 QBs off the board by pick 5, he's missed. I think come draft day, teams will just try to move from 11 and 12 to 2 or 4 out of desperation. Today, I think they see moving up to 6 as having an advantage over other teams. JMO.
IF he is looking to trade. What if he is just entertaining offers and is content at staying? I don't think that's considered a miss. He already won at the trade game this draft.
-
4 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said:
Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo.
The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage.
Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare.
I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now.
I agree with this. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Ballard would go with Edmunds over Smith because of his continued comments on development of draft picks. If Ballard believes there is a much higher ceiling for Edmunds and that he can develop him over the next several years versus get better results in the short term with Smith, he's going Edmunds.
Either one of them is a gigantic upgrade at Inside Linebacker than we have had maybe ever. But with Edmund's versatility to play multiple spots in Eberflus' 4-3, I would be more shocked if Smith is the pick
-
1
-
-
The more teams looking to trade into the top 6, the better offers Indy gets for #6... OR, the more likely 4 QBs come off the board ahead of 6.
WIN freaking WIN for CB and the Indianapolis Colts.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, DougDew said:
No. if the 4th QB is gone by pick 4 on draft day, he has absolutely no leverage. Buff or Miami may want to move up to 6 ASAP to get into position to offer CLEV something for swapping 2 spots. After the Browns take their QB, they are not going to love one position player over the other and will take one of the five elite players at 6, IMO.
Ballard should make that trade today and let BUFF and MIA take the risk on how the draft falls. We will get a good player at 11 or 12.
If I was MIA, I wouldn't do it today. if I was Ballard, I'd do it in a second.
If you were MIA and you needed a qb, you would do whatever necessary to put yourself in position to get one. Trading to 6, might do it. But it might be the first step in moving further up also...
Indy isn't the one throwing an offer out, so I'm not sure how you think they have no leverage here. We don't HAVE to trade. Miami is the one that is looking to. Ballard's just entertaining the idea until it is worth it.
-
13 minutes ago, DougDew said:
No. if the 4th QB is gone by pick 4 on draft day, he has absolutely no leverage. Buff or Miami may want to move up to 6 ASAP to get into position to offer CLEV something for swapping 2 spots. After the Browns take their QB, they are not going to love one position player over the other and will take one of the five elite players at 6, IMO.
Ballard should make that trade today and let BUFF and MIA take the risk on how the draft falls. We will get a good player at 11 or 12.
If I was MIA, I wouldn't do it today. if I was Ballard, I'd do it in a second.
He absolutely does... because it is highly unlikely all 4 go before 6... and if they do, then he likely feels good about the top of his board.
Ballard put himself in a win/win position with the Jets trade. Truly.
-
I have said multiple times on this forum and stand firm in my belief that Ballard will wait until draft day. He's doing his homework and entertaining offers so if 2 quarterbacks fall to #6, he knows what he wants to get out of a trade... He has 100% of the leverage in any trade scenario.
Sit back and watch folks. This is going to be fun.
-
5
-
-
I have yet to see this posted on this forum... someone guide me if I am wrong.
Has anyone else seen anything about this?
-
1
-
1
-
Colts select Tarell Basham, Edge, Ohio
in Colts Football
Posted
8 sacks as a rotational piece in NE that started 1 game that year... Take your blinders off.