Yoshinator
-
Posts
14,612 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Yoshinator
-
-
1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Regarding Clark, she wouldn't make an NBA roster but it would be interesting to see her in a 3point contest against the best men with a man's ball and regulation NBA 3s. She would do pretty well in that IMO. Her range is 25 feet easily. She would have to practice with the regulation NBA ball for a while, but shooters are shooters, she would do ok in something like that.
I believe she's done that twice Vs Stephen Curry. She beat him 2 years ago and then he beat her last year.
EDIT: She beat him last year and he beat her this year.
-
On 4/17/2024 at 11:55 AM, Myles said:
Clark will get paid $339,000 for 4 years. That is for playing a game and having lots of time off. Of course she will make more with endorsements. The WNBA averaged 6500 people per game. That is similar to lots of minor leagues.
Not only does the WNBA not draw, but Caitlin Clark would get destroyed by any male NBA player. She would probably get destroyed if she played in the G league. Women cannot compete with men in physical sports. That's just a fact. If the WNBA drew close to the NBA, there would be merit to this. They don't though. So it's a moot point.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, w87r said:
https://overthecap.com/compensatory-picks
Minshew got cancelled for Davis
Moss got cancelled for Flacco
Of course these are just projections, but they have been doing it for many years and seem to be fairly accurate.
Here's their formula
https://overthecap.com/compensatory-formula
Flacco makes sense cancelling out Moss as he was half a million more than him. Minshew went for $5.5 million more a year than Davis. How the hell does that take away our 5th round pick? Not mad at you, but I'm tired of not getting any compensatory picks.
Absolute garbage way of determining who gets picks. Can't sign anyone and you don't gain any picks. Absolutely sickening. A 5th rounder doesn't seem like a big deal, but it is when Ballard has a track record of hitting on late picks a decent amount of the time.
-
9 minutes ago, w87r said:
Are you talking about compensatory picks?
Yeah it's, I think the 1st or 2nd Monday after the draft. Something like that
It really doesn't effect us this year though, as we aren't due to get a comp pick next year.
Minshew and Moss got cancelled out by Flacco and Davis.
Why would Minshew get cancelled out by Flacco and Davis? Minshew got more than both of them. He should only be cancelled out if we signed a FA equal to or more than Minshew.
-
3 minutes ago, ChuggaBeer said:
So with the extra cap space, assuming they are planning to make a move. Would you all think it is better to sign a vet WR and draft a CB. Or sign a vet CB with a WR in the draft?
Sign a vet CB and draft a WR. The WR cupboard is bare now in FA. Not only that, rookie CBs tend to take longer to develop as rookies, and this WR class is loaded. The CB class is nice too, but we need a veteran CB for Gus Bradley. We have Pittman at WR as a veteran.
-
1
-
-
Just now, w87r said:
Seems after looking at Spotrac and OtC this morning.
Spotrac has moved Dabo, to commissioners list with free spot. I was wondering if he had 1 more year with a free roster spot exemption, seems he may.
Only reason that is a big deal is it actually gives another spot now, so instead of having (14) spots remaining, we have (15).
Spotrac is yet to update Buckner's extension numbers.
Yeah, I forgot about Marcel Dabo. That's good news.
-
1
-
-
I have another off-the-wall prediction. Colts trade the Broncos their 15th pick for Patrick Surtain. They could use that pick to move up in the draft and get a QB. Them having 12 and 15 would get them ahead of the Vikings who have 11 and 23.
We then extend Surtain to a long-term deal.
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:
The first impulse is to say Simmons or Diggs. I think Ballard could very well make a bigger move. I have mentioned three trades in earlier posts. Baker, Aiyuk, or Crosby. The Raiders would really want to move up for a quarterback to want our pick 15. But our pick could easily help get them to 3or 4. Some think Crosby is a foundation piece and they would never trade him. But if you really want a certain quarterback you have to sacrifice something to get him. Ballard wanted Hunter no reason he wouldn’t try for Crosby. I like a Baker trade a lot as well because it’s a longer term fix in a position of need. Trading for Aiyuk reminds me of the Bills move for Diggs. I wouldn’t rule that out either. I think the Crosby trade is the only one that would require our 1st pick. The others would not imo. For me something is definitely cooking. Exciting times coming up I would say.
Crosby seems like he would be a Ballard guy. It probably would cost our 1st rounder for him. However, we might be able to pull off Dayo and a 3rd for Crosby or something like that so the Raiders get an EDGE back that they can extend for cheaper than Crosby and we only lose a 3rd to get an upgrade at EDGE.
There's a lot of possibilities there.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, BProland85 said:
I mostly agree but I could see Dallas Turner having an immediate impact with possibly 8 sacks as a rookie. Really hope Odunze falls to us or one of the big 3 WR1s falls to 10 overall, well within striking range to get them without having to give up too much.
I actually see Dallas Turner as an all-or-nothing guy. High ceiling, low floor type of guy. His ceiling to me is Myles Garrett, his floor is Ben Banogu. He's an elite athlete with the potential to be great, but he could crash and burn very easily too. There's no middle to him IMO. If he hits, then he'll get double-digit sacks his rookie year. If he misses, he could only get 2-3 sacks and struggle to learn how to play the game well.
-
Just now, richard pallo said:
I said this in an earlier post. A trade for Baker makes sense to me. He’s younger than Simmons or Diggs. I think the first knee jerk reaction is we are signing on of the two but I wouldn’t rule out Baker.
Nice nice. I didn't see it. Wasn't piggybacking off your post lol. I agree though. Baker plays FS. Simmons is better at SS. That would give us our S duo.
It's one of the more obvious possibilities, I would be happy if it happened. We'll see as the S class isn't great.
-
1
-
-
I'm going to make a prediction. We trade for Budda Baker and give him an extension. We may even release Cox to save another $6 million.
We trade a 3rd rounder for Budda Baker and a 6th rounder. That's my prediction.
-
4
-
-
47 minutes ago, w87r said:
Wowsers:
https://overthecap.com/player/deforest-buckner/4720
Contract Notes
DeForest Buckner signed a two year, $46 million contract with the Colts on April 15, 2024. Bucker received $53.25 million in guarantees on the total contract value of which $43.25 million is fully guaranteed. The new money guarantee is $33 million with $23 million guaranteed at signing. Buckner received an $18 million signing bonus and his 2024 and 2025 salaries are fully guaranteed. There are two void years for salary cap purposes. The extension reduced Buckner's 2024 salary cap number by $14.4 million.
2024 original cap hit: $22.75m
new extension cap hits:
2024 - $8.35m
2025 - $26.6m
2026 - $26.6m
2027 - $7.2m(void year)(dead cap)
2028 - $3.6m(void year)(dead cap)
This is way outside the box for Ballard. Something probably in the works.
New cap space per OtC(Spotrac not updated yet)
$28,412,296
Spotrac estimate - $28,194,348
Maybe we will go after Akhello Witherspoon on a one-year deal? Maybe both him and Quandre Diggs? This is really interesting in any case.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, csmopar said:
Fair enough and I can see how you have arrived at that thought process. And I’m not saying you’re wrong either. I’m just saying I’m gonna withhold my judgement on it all until next off season. For me, this is the make it or break it year for Ballard. Assuming AR is as good as hyped and can stay healthy, going into next FA is when I expect to see some more aggression, not expecting the Texans level of course, but more aggression I think would be warranted. Until then, I think the guarded approach is okay until we know what we have or don’t have with AR.
i keep saying this, but people need to understand where Ballard came from. The Chiefs, this is the very same MO they used prior to the Mahomes era. Once they got Mahomes, they became far more aggressive but not stupidly aggressive either. And they became more attractive as a team for FA. In fact, the chiefs were drafting roughly where we have have been, last year not with standing, when they finally traded up for Mahomes.
we are literally the chiefs before Mahomes. A solid roster that is on the cusp of playoffs but yet not consistently getting there. We have a solid core roster but not a star roster. Mahomes elevated that roster and I think they are expecting AR to elevate it some as well. But we still need weapons. We don’t have many
The difference with Mahomes and AR to me is the timeline of the GMs on both teams. Brett Veach was only on the Chiefs for a year at this point before he started building around Mahomes. Ballard is the GM of the Colts for 8 years now and he isn't doing it. With Veach, you can argue it's because he was waiting for Mahomes to get better and he was relatively new as a GM. With Ballard, it's just how he is.
The rosters are similar from that time, yes. I agree. I just think we are fooling ourselves by saying he's going to spend over and over and it never happens. We just come up with a new reason. I'm guilty of it too. I'm actually fine with the offseason besides Sneed. That was inexcusable not getting him IMO, but everything else is ok. We just have to do well in the draft. I think we will take a WR on day 2 or in a trade down (Xavier Worthy maybe). The draft is Ballards bread and butter, so I always know he'll do his best there to help the team.
-
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:
You could make that argument that he has been aggressive and overpaid when it came to acquiring Wentz and Ryan. Draft picks and money. Two quarterbacks no less. The most important position on the team. So I don’t think you can say he’s not aggressive. He took big swings on those two and missed. But he also traded a 1st rd pick for Buckner paid him and hit a home run with that swing. I think you could say he has taken aggressive swings. I do think having a franchise quarterback leading your team makes it easier to justify taking one. I think he thinks he has that guy now. So I’m expecting a few more aggressive moves going forward. I think they will be calculated and well thought out. And he and Shane will be in lock step when they happen.
He was aggressive on this front with Wentz and Ryan. Those were trades and not FAs though. Ballard generally will get his guy in a trade if he wants him (Sneed not withstanding). Free Agency is where I have the issue (where Ballard is competing with other teams with money). The funny thing is that I'm actually perfectly fine with what Ballard did in FA besides not getting Sneed. That was the only major error IMO. Everything else can be fixed in the draft immediately.
I'm just not of the mindset that AR needs to prove himself first before splurging in FA. I think that's a mistake personally. Though this year, a lot of the best FAs were also guys that we re-signed anyway.
-
1
-
-
@VikingsFanInChennai Can you please make sure to count my pick on the spreadsheet? I don't want someone else to duplicate it when the last round begins in a few mins.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, csmopar said:
I don’t think he’s fairly being judged here. There’s been reports every single year that we were the high bidder and yet lost out. I truly think most of that comes down to the fact we really don’t have much to offer in terms of things not counting as salary. No franchise QB proven yet, no bikini clad babes or beaches, income tax etc.
If you want to argue that we didn't have a realistic shot on Danielle Hunter, I agree. However, we could have easily gotten Sneed if we wanted (we just didn't want to pay the guaranteed money because of the injury concerns). When it's just members of the forum saying "we could have gotten X guy for Y amount", then there's not that much credibility to it. However, when it's an 8 year sample size in FA, and Ballard admits that's how he goes about things, it's a pattern. There's a lot of guys he goes after that he misses on, but there's even more that he could get for a realistic price that he has no interest in.
In the end, he's not aggressive as a GM, and it's not necessarily a good thing. He never wants to overpay, but sometimes you have too. If he's building the team through the draft, you think he would allow himself to overpay a time or two in FA because he'd have the cheap rookie contracts he's hitting on to supplement the team and the cap.
Just my two cents.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:
I do think that there is pressure on Ballard to add a play maker on defense. He really needs to get that guy on defense. Do i see him giving up a 1st rounder? I probably think that is really rich for and it would take a lot to move up into the top 8. I do see a trade to move up a couple of spots if that guy is sliding. I think Mitchell and Latu intrigue me the most should they slide. I think Mitchell may go top 10 and if not shortly after. He is probably the only true man corner at the top of the draft and Latu could slide because of medical.
I have Turner, Latu, and Verse in the same top tier. IMO, Turner is probably the best athlete and highest potential of the three, but worst player. Latu is the best player of the three, but has injury concerns, Verse is in the middle, but a one-dimensional pass rusher. I don't personally feel there is much of a difference between the three overall where a GM can definitely tell who will hit and who won't. I'd probably go with Latu personally as I agree he might fall to 15, and the injury concerns seem to be behind him now.
Mitchell IMO will possibly go to the Raiders. They are by far the biggest threat IMO. Broncos and Vikings are candidates to take a QB, and I don't see the Saints going CB. I think there's a good chance Terrion Arnold falls to 15, and that will be tempting to Ballard to grab him.
Overall, I say we grab Mitchell, Arnold, or an EDGE. People want a WR in the first, but they will be disappointed IMO. We will take one on day 2 like Ballard is known for IMO.
-
2 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:
You know how ridiculously expensive that would be to say move to #4 for a wr? You would be looking at this years #15 and next years 1st rounder and we still are not done and all for a wr. MHJ coming to this teams is not going to happen.
I know. I'm just making a point that Ballard would never do something like giving up a future 1st for a non QB, and if he did, it'd take interference from Irsay for a guy that's probably seen as Colts royalty from Irsay. Just an extreme example.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, shasta519 said:
I don't see any scenario where they are giving up next year's R1 pick. It would be an opportunistic trade up that they can likely spread over this draft and next draft.
The MOST we have seen Ballard additionally give up in trade-ups is a mid-late R5 pick. Tyquan, JT, Cross.
For him to give up even a Day 2 pick would be out of character. So it would have to be quite the opportunity.
I literally think the only player in this class Ballard would give up a future 1st for would be Marvin Harrison Jr, and that's if Irsay told him to do so.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, masterlock said:
A big reason the Colts were 28th in points allowed, IMO, was Gus Bradley's non-contesting zone scheme. Time and time again, we saw opponents complete critical 3rd and 4th downs, with the nearest Colts defender 10 yards away. It's disappointing to me that they brought him back. IMO, what the Colts' D needs is aggression, not soft, non-contesting zone that keeps opposing offenses on the field.
Yep. it was the worst move of the offseason keeping Gus IMO. Even worse than not trading for Sneed when we had interest. If we don't get pressure more often, those sack numbers will not be sustainable either.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, cjwhiskers said:
Ranked 28th? By what metrics, genuinely curious because that seems incredibly low. They were top 10-15 in most statistical categories...
We have two young but promising corners, loading up on defense when you don't even know what you have in a quarterback just doesn't make sense to me. You do everything in your power to make that quarterback successful because that in itself gives you the BEST chance for success. You go as your quarterback does. Not you go as your corner does, or your safety or your edge rusher.
I'm not saying defense isn't important but it's less important than putting pieces around AR and giving him the biggest chance to be successful. Look at the Jets...could've easily been the leagues top defense with the amount of play makers they have on their roster...Team didn't go anywhere because they couldn't score.
28th in scoring defense. I also added more to my post that you didn't see. Check that out as well.
We'll add more to the offense in the draft, but the defense is the obvious weak point. AR may make the team better. We'll see on that. The defense is terrible though.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:
The Chiefs defense was absolutely elite last year and made up for a mediocre Mahomes (by his standards). Also, there are rankings to determine if defenses are good, bad, mediocre, and all that. You don't just get to say the large majority of defenses can be considered mediocre, stats and rankings prove otherwise. We don't go by the eye test anymore. The Colts had the 28th best defense last year. Those are the players we re-signed. I understand there were injuries and Stewart was out for 6 games (which hurt the run defense), but the secondary was terrible, and we should have traded for Sneed.
You do need an elite defense in the playoffs. The Chiefs beat the Bills, Dolphins, and Ravens in the playoffs with their defense last year to get to the SB. The Colts won their only SB with Peyton Manning because of their defense. The Broncos had Peyton Manning in the SB Vs the Seahawks when he scored 55 TDs that year, and they got destroyed by the Seahawks defense in the SB.
Defenses win Championships.
-
19 minutes ago, cjwhiskers said:
The large majority of defenses in the NFL can be considered “mediocre”. The Colts defense did plenty to keep the games winnable and that’s all you can ask of a defense in today’s NFL.
Let me ask you, was it the Browns top defense that won the Super Bowl? Was it the Ravens? Was it the 49ers?
You don’t need an elite defense. You need an elite offense that scores consistently and in clutch moments.
Colts resigning all of their own defensive players back is really all you need to know about how this organization views their own defense.
The Chiefs defense was absolutely elite last year and made up for a mediocre Mahomes (by his standards). Also, there are rankings to determine if defenses are good, bad, mediocre, and all that. You don't just get to say the large majority of defenses can be considered mediocre, stats and rankings prove otherwise. We don't go by the eye test anymore. The Colts had the 28th best defense last year. Those are the players we re-signed. I understand there were injuries and Stewart was out for 6 games (which hurt the run defense), but the secondary was terrible, and we should have traded for Sneed.
You do need an elite defense in the playoffs. The Chiefs beat the Bills, Dolphins, and Ravens in the playoffs with their defense last year to get to the SB. The Colts won their only SB with Peyton Manning because of their defense. The Broncos had Peyton Manning in the SB Vs the Seahawks when he scored 55 TDs that year, and they got destroyed by the Seahawks defense in the SB.
Defenses win Championships.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Stephen said:
Edge may be a reach in the 1st
I actually think the 1st round is the only round where EDGE wouldn't be a reach. I see the class as much weaker throughout the draft as it goes on. Kneeland would be a great get in the 2nd if he fell, but that'd be a huge risk if we wanted an EDGE. We'll see where Ballard has his big board ranked. I think Quinyon Mitchell would be the dream pick, but the draft is deep at CB as well.
Just remember, Paye and Dayo are FAs at the end of the season, so we could definitely take a successor to one of them.
-
1
-
Caitlin Clark selected #1 by Fever. **Updated title**
in College Football and all other sports
Posted
In any case, it's cool Clark went to Indiana. That'll make it fun for people who watch the WNBA on this forum.