Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

DougDew

Senior Member
  • Posts

    18,106
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by DougDew

  1. For most of his college career, IIRC, Woods was a blocking TE. He became more of a pass catcher after he transferred to play his senior year, also IIRC. I would wager that Woods could block as well as Mo, who isn't as great a blocker as billed, IMO. Woods taking over for Mo, and adding Bowers as a truly elite Move TE, would give the Colts one of the best TE rooms in the NFL. A very dangerous two TE set, and two good options for AR, whereas now its a mediocre bunch missing that star threat player. Would save some cap too with a Mo release.
  2. Its hard to get a high quality DE outside of the first round. Has been my observation over the years, and corroborated by the stats posted above. Like QB, and LT, the traits simply have to be in the player. IMO, those are the three hardest positions to find (Raimann is an exception) Like QB, when you are in a position to take one, you take one. Unless there is no DE worth it at 15 of course. A down year perhaps.
  3. With the amount of capital offered to Hunter, does it mean that Ballard is looking for an EDGE early?
  4. I think the first sentence answers the question that's imbedded in the last sentence. The draft picks have to have a good return on investment. I think ROI is measured over a 3 to 5 years timeframe.
  5. That's the way I remember it too. His sack production at MICH was not great, and he was also used in the interior at times. Lack of bend was a known issue (not that its everything). He was considered the best of a weak class. I think his natural position is LDE, and he is very good there, IMO. Polian didn't think he'd make a great NFL pass rusher, IIRC.
  6. I'm not advocating taking a DE. With this thread talking mainly about the attributes of several players, I thought to approach the topic from what position has the least amount of ceiling to it. I think CB has some ceiling that we don't fully know. What is APs ceiling? What is Woods/Ogeltree's? What is Paye's ceiling...or Ebukam's? Eyesight or not, Paye is a not a bendy guy. Neither was Freeney, but he sacked the QB so well because of an awesome spin move he had. Mathis was bendy. So was Houston. So was Yannick, who came over with Gus. Since Paye does not have a spin move like Freeney, he probably was always destined for LDE, kinda like Bjoern Werner always was too despite the GM and HC drafting him like he could play RDE..
  7. I didn't say that. It was John Waylon. I butted in to help you understand the concept from the perspective of building through the draft. If you did, I don't think that you would have asked the question. But , the word "consistently" can have varied meanings? If we are going to separate out 1st and 2nd round picks from the rest of the resources, then I guess the entire bucket of resources a team would have to build a team would be. 1. Drafting 1st and 2nd round picks. 2. Trading 1st and 2nd round picks.3 3. Drafting or trading all other picks. 4. Signing FAs. I would strongly assume that the GMs that perform 1 and 2 effectively would have their teams in the playoffs. I doubt that the playoff teams would use method's 3 and 4 as the measure by which their teams get into the playoffs. If so, then it would seem that signing FAs would be the preferred way to build a team. Just off the top. SF used 1st and 2nd for Aiyuk and Deebo, and traded a 2nd for McCaffrey? Philly used a 2nd for Hurts and used pretty high 1sts for Brown and Smith? LAR traded its 1st round QB to DET who traded its 1st round QB to LAR. LAR used a 1st for the best DT in the NL at one point, Donald? MIA drafted Tua, and used a first on Hill and a 1st or second on Waddle? When was the last time the Colts used something higher than a third round pick for a QB? Wentz was a 2nd? How many 1sts have the Colts used for dynamic playmakers that handle the ball? IIRC, AR is the first time in 7 years?
  8. Yes, I know the history of Paye and Dayo. Paye was drafted to be the long term RDE, and that's where he started, but did not perform well enough there. Dayo is not a bendy guy. Neither were thought to be coming out of college. How do these 4 compare to some of the best EDGE pass rushers in the NFL? All either seem like LDE.s tweeners' or backups. Is Ebukam the long term solution? Does his contract reflect this...or a rotational stop gap? Would either Verse, Turner, or Latu be a better RDE rusher than what we have...a long term 3 down threat? Because EDGE is the most premier position, (the position with the highest value), IMO, than either WR or Corner........ if there is a player to support a top 15 pick.
  9. Okay then, think about talent over three to 5 years....the term of a 1st rounder. Will JuJu, Jones, and Flowers develop into something? Think about ceiling, and what picking a corner at 15 would do if those other corners develop. Paye can flip sides. Do we pass on EDGE at 15 because we like Ebukam or Dayo or Lewis? Is AP's ceiling a 2 or a 4? It seems that we have a bigger hole at corner right now. But I think if you look at potential ceiling of EDGE and WR, it seems like those two spots don't have as high of a ceiling?
  10. Well, to help narrow down who y'all think will be taken at 15.....let's think about which position is the weakest on the team? S....I doubt we take one at 15 CB....Ballard thinks there is talent there? Drafting more talent might just cause a bottle neck in a season or two while other positions might languish. EDGE... Should Paye be playing RDE, or LDE? Is Ebukam long term, or stop gap, rotational? WR...Should AP be a #2, or a #4 and first backup to both starting outside WRs? Special teams too? TE (Bowers only option at 15)....Like Corner, is there talent there, or are there too many of the same guys fighting for PT?
  11. The GMs that have teams in the playoffs? Its 12 a season now and used to be 10. Unless they build via free agency, which would mean that building via the draft would be the wrong way.
  12. Right now its less than we have. A congratulatory feeling of Blackmon being signed would then be running it back with what you have.
  13. I'll come off like the dreaded WL-Lover, which I'm not, but I have to defend him because the negative comments towards him seem to gloss over some things, as if there is a bias going in. At KY, I thought he played reckless hero ball, and figured he might be Wentz 2.0 in the NFL. Wouldn't mind having him, because that could be the result of youthful energy and immaturity...something that Wentz never grew out of. But he was definitely a risky prospect. Regardless of stats or rank, what impressed me last season was that he was the opposite of the hero ball guy. He stayed in the pocket, often too long, IMO, and scanned the field trying to make reads...and took a LOT of hits he should not have if he just ran the ball. Not only did he finish games, he took way more punishment than AR. He had nothing to work with outside of DHop and a one-pony Henry. The oline was trash. Next season he'll have Ridley, a new C, and probably a new LT after TEN pick 7. I think he has a bright future, and I don't care that he plays for TEN.
  14. True. But one of the first things he said is that he wants to draft and develop a group of core players that are here for years. Good enough you don't want to churn. As of year 7, who are those players and what positions do they play?
  15. I have been saying the same thing, but I've never been done with Ballard. I've never picked on Ballard directly as a lame, failure, GM in that sense. What I noticed was that the Colts (including the last pick with RG) went C, FS (monoskilled), LG, WILL, RG/RT, with picks like 18, 15, 6, 36, 37 while failing to address aging players like TY, AC and Mathis (who was never here). I didn't bash Ballard in as much as I said if you are going to use that much capital on those types of positions but not address the "more important" positions, its going to catch up to you. Its going to force you to hit on EDGE, #1WR, and LT with the first opportunity there is to get them. Still don't really have the EDGE or the #1, and there was a two year gap before the LT was filled. And then we needed to fill the QB spot because of Luck. That's a lot of perfection needed with important picks in succession. Picking those interior positions back to back to back, etc. backs yourself into a corner and makes it harder to punch out, so to speak. I have not been anti-Ballard, and some have misinterpreted what I'm saying (because they look at it through a Ballard thumbs up or thumbs down filter). What I have consistently said and will continue to say: We'll only be a perennial AFCCG contender when all of those positions are filled with AFCCG type of talent. Ballard may do it. His picks might develop. I'm not bashing or making prediction about them. But that's what its going to take to be that kind of perennial contender, and when we are, we'll see it in the quality of play from those premium spots. JMO. And no matter who's name is on the GM title. Are other positions important? sure. And different schemes and coaches might make some slightly more important than others, but they generally can be churned more easily. The core players you want to keep should be in spots that are harder to find...not the easier spots like G, RT, RB, and probably X WR, and now NT, etc. (3T is probably an important position, but it's not important enough to eliminate the need for and EDGE, unless the 3T is Chris Jones, Aaron Donald, or maybe Jeff Simmons.)
  16. Hey I forgot about Kicker and Long Snapper. Their positions play only between the hash-marks too. LOL.
  17. TEN also signed Chuke Awuzi (sp?), CB. They had cornerback issues last year on both sides, but appeared to have "fixed" the issue in about 13 days. I was meh on the potential Sneed to the Colts issue with the terms being rumored here, and thought Ballard made a good move to walk away. But those terms seem very reasonable and I can see how folks are disappointed. Maybe it was the 4 year term and Ballard or Irsay is stuck on only having 3 year deals this year? Bigger plan in the works?
  18. JMO. I think the absence of Hill changed KCs offense pretty dramatically. With Hill, they never seemed to worry about moving the ball methodically because they had big chunk plays. When Hill left KCs offense became more methodical and Pechenko got tough yards...and Mahomes would convert critical 3rd downs with his legs. If it wasn't for Pechenko over Hillier (sp?) and the better defense, KC would not have won as many games after Hill left. In fact, KC struggled some in the regular season...unlike when they had Hill...but Mahomes got very hot in the playoffs. Not to mention some of the other would be contenders folded like paper tigers against KCs defense. If we roll with the current group of WRs, AR will have to play like Michael Jordan of the NFL....kind of like Mahomes has to do now. And folks may like that brand of FB. Fine, to each their own. Its partly why I'm being a bit more drawn to teams like JAX and HOU because their great QBs limit themselves to playing QB very well, and aren't relied upon to be MJ...which is what I think many Colts fans expect and want. Its why I don't like KC (and BAL), and I hope the Colts don't have an offense that is THAT QB dependent. BUF has that too, but I donlt mind them so much because they donlt seem to win with it...I guess not a good enough running game or defense when it matters. MJ destroyed the entertainment value of the NBA for me, and I hope the NFL doesn't go in that direction with its QBs. The hype-train certainly will take it there if its not constantly deflated by more (reasonable?) fans. I'm not saying we need a guy like Hill, but if AP does not become a threat to break a big on most downs with AR as QB, then there needs to be a change. I don't think we'll have a KC level defense any time soon...and don't give me stats to argue that we are close. We do need a back end FS. But, that FS can't just sit back there like a soccer goal keeper forcing the rest of the defense to defend the intermediate and short game with only 10 guys. We've had that guy before.
  19. Comments that Frank valued the bigger slower contested catch guys to fit his three button hook at the same time route trees. That Frank told Ballard what kind of WR he wanted, and the assumption was that the lack of dynamic guys was Frank's fault. I'm commenting on what I read, not what I think. What I think is that Ballard has a profile for what he wants on the outside, and its about height and length, and saves the movement guy for the slot. I think SS sees the value in AJ Brown and Donte Smith over the guys we have. Pitt probably works fine, but I'm giving AP a short rope in SS eyes unless he can show that he moves better than he does. Maybe he does on all-22, and I'm fine with AP being the eventual TY/Donte guy. I criticize Ballard's drafting for what its shown to be through last season, and reserve the right to change my mind if the guys he drafted develop into dynamic players. It hasn't yet happened with EDGEs, and not yet with the outside Z guy yet. I think its because his philosophy focuses on the wrong traits for those positions...maybe stoutness over bend and movement....thinks of most players as interior-ish types of players more than he should, and has a blind spot as to the differences there should be. If we draft an edge that actually has bend, and draft an outside fast guy that can also move laterally, I'll think that SS influenced Ballard to see some things differently, and not think that Ballard has actually been prioritizing those traits for 7 years before, but just sucking at finding it. Raimann is a stud. Stud LTs go high. No team, none, that has a gaping hole at LT, waits to draft a WR like AP and a RAS project TE before the stud LT, if they really thought the LT was going to be a stud this soon. Ballard got lucky, not that Raimann would not be a good player by year 3 or 4. Feeds the idea that as long as you have an elite LG, you don't need a stud LT. His drafting shows it, and I don't agree with it. And still another indicator of interior > outside. The other guys who found that stud in later rounds got lucky too. It doesn't just happen to Ballard. Luck happens a lot in the NFL when it comes to drafting players in later rounds. Maybe to explain the concept better....Walter Football does "redrafts" of previous drafts. You can see where he is coming from when you see how much re-slotting he does. Guys from the 4th and 3rd round go in round 1. Guys who busted aren't drafted, etc. Golly, if the GMs only knew on draft day what each player would become.....
  20. Okay, replace Lockett with McLaurin. Probably still better outside candidates...better size than PC.....more traditional outside skills. Compared to the WRs mentioned, PC was still a slot, IMO, and that's what I think he was drafted to be most of the time. If Ballard wants his Z to be from the slot, I guess that just feeds into the idea that he really looks at the interior positions as being key. Every one of them. Maybe his blind spot is lack of peripheral vision to notice that football is also played on either side the hash marks. LOL.
  21. If Ballard's reasoning is that we have been missing the QB piece, and that it is the key to our problems over all else, then why did we trade pick 13 for Buckner and not save it for Love or use it as funds to move up? We need a QB, unless it keeps us from getting a DT? Who knows how it would have turned out. Love could have played better quicker if he didn't have to sit behind Rodgers. But if the "missing the QB piece" is synonymous with Ballard simply being a victim of some NFL environment that's out of his control, it sounds a bit whiny, don't you think?
  22. I don't want to have two convos about the same thing with two different people. And...I'm talking about philosophy, which is conceptual, and its my opinion of his philosophy over a period of 7 years. So its not about going down rabbit holes of drafts exactly who was drafted ahead of whom, specific player misses and opportunities missed, etc. over those 7 years Let me say the same things a different way. If a GM does not prioritize positions, and just goes by the idea that "Other than QB, I don't really care where my 7 other elite players are, just as long as I have 7 elite players" Combined with..."my guy is the best on the market, so I want to resign him" You might look over the football field on opening day and see that you've got your highest paid guys, freshest signees, or the most talent at the 21 positions at: LG, 3T, NT, backup NT, ILB, Slot, and the RB who runs between the OTs...(all INTERIOR position if you will) .and then realize "oh, poop, who do I have to play along each boundary". Well, I've got a great X. (And folks blamed this lack of explosion on Frank? Ballard just signed three of them) You need better dispersion than that. It has to be managed over several cycles so the talent just doesn't end up concentrated almost entirely between the hash marks. It has to be disbursed from boundary to boundary, and all three levels of the O and D. There has to be priorities. There just has to be. And getting lucky with a 3rd round LT playing like a 1st rounder, or drafting a RG that plays well at RT, can't be relied upon to rescue a flawed process. JMO.
  23. I keep it simple. I think in terms of Marvin and Reggie. TY and Reggie, etc.. The fact that PC was thought to develop into a successor to TY and "doing some things" just underscores my other feelings about the lack of urgency to fill important roles. You could also say that we drafted Deon Cain to eventually develop into that guy, or Ashton Dulin. PC was drafted as slot when TY was still the starter. Ballard simply invested in TY's future cheaply. Some suggest he should go WR at 15 this year. The guys talked about getting drafted there are the kinds of WRs I'm talking about. Not someone that necessarily develops from a slot and does nice things on the outside. And I'm not going through every draft, but I think you would even acknowledge that we could have taken Deebo, AJ Brown, maybe even Lockett and they all would have been better TY replacement candidates than PC even though that's not their primary role either. Reggie, Funchess, and Pitt are a different discussion. But Pitt deserves to be acknowledged for what he is. And with the Funchess signing and then Pitt on the heels of that, Ballard seems to express more urgency with the X receiver than the (outside) Z. Or maybe just understands it better, and he can find the right guy better. He understands the easier spot to fill, the lower hanging fruit.
×
×
  • Create New...