DougDew

Yep, his comp pick will be equal or greater than his trade value.

The way I think of it, if the class is deep, then I can find good ones in round two and three. The formula for positional value says that you don't give up a very good DE for a RB and an olineman.

Why would they give up a good player when they are looking for more good players. Especially a DE for a RB? They would then have to use our pick to replace Burns. I would just draft a Moss in the 4th and keep Burns if I was CAR.

Wasn't that before the draft...between the combine and the draft. I meant the heart thing was debunked shortly after he drafted and fell. I'm just saying that the heart thing is no reason not to pursue him now. Why Ballard passed on him back then doesn't exist anymore (if we even know it was the heart...it could have been simply bad player eval). There are other reasons to not have pursued him at this point, but I don't think the heart report is one of them now.

Sweat isn't really a quick bendy guy anyway, IIRC. More of an effort/strength DE. More results than Paye, but not a whole lot different.

The difference here though is that I don't think CHI has invested a first rounder in the guy they are starting now. I'm not a big fan of Ballard's way, but I'm not going to put every thing back on him. This makes sense for CHI if they don't have a guy they invested in. For IND, what would we do with Paye and Dayo once Sweat comes on board (with a huge starters extension too)? I guess make them purely rotational players. I don't think ANY GM would be ready to do that yet. I think that condition was debunked pretty early after he was drafted.

If TEN still had AJ Brown I think their O would be an issue. Their D is still pretty good.

Only QBs are really worthy of top 5 draft choices anyway, IMO. No need to intentionally lose to get a top 5 pick. Great positional players can be found pick 6 through 10 just fine. Second round starts the drafting for need more than elite players. I would like to know how many folks will be honestly rooting for CAR to convert first downs, score TDs, etc. during the game.

Lets test your resolve on this young man. Will you be rooting for the Colts to lose this week....on every play you watch for three hours.... and let Frank and Young have "pride" rights so the Colts can pick #4 instead of #7?

What do you think our chances of winning are if we play hard?

Do we still have JJ Domann? That was his role in college.

RAS and potential is another way of saying they are not ready to play at an NFL level. I think that's the real problem. The best players Ballard has drafted are still probably Nelson, Leonard, Smith, and Taylor. All 4 had great production in college for more than one year. Notre Dame, Auburn, Wisconsin. Leonard was from a small school but he had length and traits for the NFL.

All of this will probably happen if we just play hard and try to win. I don't think we have to make any special effort to lose. That's not being harsh, IMO. Teams that are thinking about tanking are not very good anyway. As a fan, I still approach the Colts with realistic expectations. but... Can't get my mind around watching the game and hoping for a fumble, a pick, or bad plays. Just can't do it.

Buckner, Grover, and Dayo would make a pretty good 3 man front. Dayo might get washed in the run game but I think its easier to beef him up than to slim him down into a 43 edge. I'm kinda with you on the 3-3-5 idea. Need some new LBs though.

The only game I wanted to lose was last year's HOU game, and they came through. Because by then the circumstances were clear that it made a difference in draft position to get one of the QBs. I don't get the idea of rooting to lose just to get a better chance at a positional player. Top 15 is good enough for that between scouting and/or trading up or down for value.

The DC isn't the one biting on fake moves.

Do we ever get coverage sacks? I see some defenses getting sacks by rushing three defenders because there isn't anybody open for long periods of time. That's almost always a zone defense because you don't have 8 guys covering 5 receivers man to man. Our guys just suck at covering the middle zones.

Downs has come to the nfl being very reliable as a rookie. He’ showing that there doesn’t have to be delayed gratification if the right traits are identified on tape. As a process, RAS and "ceiling" have delayed gratification built in.

I don’t think jt is elite at picking running routes. Vision at the los has not been one of his best skills, imo.

Context of price. Everybody would accept Pitt returning in that secondary wr role. But that wr job pays about 10 million a year. Imo. Pitt will want more and will be paid more by another team. That reality is the context behind the idea of letting him walk.

I assume the colts would have to pay market price whether it’s an extension or a free agent signing. I never thought of free agency as like eBay where two teams get into an emotional bidding war But I could be wrong.

If we just wait it seems like we can sign "the other one" this spring and save the high round draft pick. Makes no sense for a 3-5 team to use a draft pick for a player whose contract is expiring in 9 games.

I watched the TEN/ATL game. I can't tell you what PSR is, but I would say that his game was not very efficient. What I saw was a lot of Henry up the gut on 1st and 2nd down, and quite a few 3rd and longs. Henry had a good day but he also got stuffed a lot as up the gut runners will do. I doubt that TENs 3rd down conversion rate was very high. Not a lot of sustained drives either. The passing game was more explosive than efficient. On the boundary passes. the WR screens and behind the LOS passes, ATL stuffed those very well. Levis was 18/28 I think I read. Aside from those 4 TD passes, he had a typical meh rookie first day passing, IMO. Other things: No picks. Only one turnover worthy pass and it was as he was getting hit. Looked poised. Was was in command of the O. A couple of times, the announcers mentioned that Levis checked into running plays that got first downs. He looked like he belongs in the NFL. But its one game.

I don’t understand why the selling team does not see their good young player as part of their future. Seems like they would have to replace them with the same draft pick you question. I think the only in season trade that makes sense is for a losing team to trade a productive vet to a winning team to rent for 9 games Like us trading Buckner. We wont be acquiring. We should be selling

I get it. It seems logical It just seems odd that a team in our position would be buying players isnt Washington in the same situation we are. Would they not think that two edge players are in their long term future. Why would they sell in that situation and we would be buyers. it probably comes down to which players the other teams want to offer for trade. Too expensive for their production.