richard pallo
-
Posts
13,938 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by richard pallo
-
-
1 minute ago, Yoshinator said:
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.
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.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, Yoshinator said:
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.
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:
That would be a typical Falcon move... Lol !
Verse is a nice player but to me you absolutely take the player from Alabama who's a one man wrecking crew.
The SEC is a much tougher conference as well. No disrespect to FSU which is playing in a much softer conference.
However, if the Falcons bit on Verse, Turner could fall to 15.
Move up. With no regrets.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes 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.
Once players think you have the right coach and a franchise quarterback everything changes. Night turns into daylight.
-
3
-
-
31 minutes ago, PRnum1 said:
For the trade back fans....
Randy Mueller of the Athletic says - maybe only ~150 draftable players this year
”After several classes overflowing with talented prospects (mainly due to the extra year of eligibility granted because of the pandemic), with as many as 350 names filling NFL teams’ draft boards, teams could struggle to get 150 names on their boards this year. This is dangerous for two reasons: The top players will disappear quickly, and teams will have to guard against the risk of overdrafting players in the later rounds. It might be a good opportunity for some teams to trade picks, maybe to move up into the first four rounds, or for a veteran player who brings more certainty. For that reason, there will be a lot of trade talk over the next couple of weeks.”
https://theathletic.com/5412463/2024/04/15/nfl-draft-randy-mueller-top-10/
This is the year to trade up. Move up higher in the first four rounds seems like a good strategy.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, ProblChld32 said:
I’ll be honest I’m shocked by this and the contract seems to be team friendly compared to some of those other DT contracts signed in FA. I was almost certain that DeFo would’ve opted into going to a Super Bowl contender after the season is up.
Apparently he thinks we are Super Bowl contenders.
-
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:
Latu at 15 would be interesting if they decided to stand and not trade up. He looks awesome on tape and his medical could cause him to slide and you could be getting the best pass rusher at #15 but assume some risk. Would it be better to say move up and get a pass rush and give up picks or stay at #15 and get a guy like Latu, if he falls that far, and assume some risk?
I’m not willing to assume the risk on Latu. I would rather move up for Turner or Nabors. Increase your chances of getting a difference maker.
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, DattMavis said:
I both agree and disagree with you.
The Chiefs absolutely won the Super Bowl because of their defense.
Having said that, I think we should go offense. 😂
I wouldn't be upset if we went corner or edge, but I'm tired of drafting guys with potential. We need to see what we have on defense, and honestly, I'm starting to doubt Ballard's ability to draft corner and edge early, so I'm just scared.
TBH Ballard hasn't really drafted edge or corner early. I don't consider Paye at 21 early for an ER. The potential elite go before pick 21. Usually top 10. This is the year to move up for Turner. He is within reach. That said I wouldn't entirely rule out Ballard trading pick 15 for a starting Edge or WR.
-
36 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:
Did you look at the defensive stats from last year? They ranked near the bottom in most categories that are important in rating a defense. What is more concerning is that these stats were accumulated while playing bottom of the barrel qbs. I would argue that Richardson has talent around him and if he is as good as they say, he should elevate that talent to another level. We have a franchise qb on the offense and now we need a franchise DE and a couple more defensive playmakers such as a corner and safety.
I think that's why Ballard tried to sign Hunter. He knows he could use an upgrade there.
-
1
-
-
1 minute 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.
I think if Gus has the right experienced players in his defense it is very effective. Starting inexperienced and multiple rookies in the secondary is going to result in breakdowns and problems. Hopefully we see a significant jump from these players this year.
-
41 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:
QB's that think fast and throw very accurately are the base for a SB contender.
The best help for the QB is a strong run game and having time to throw.
With Taylor missing the first for games, no Elite WR, and Smith missing I believe 6 games, and a rag muffin QB, we were 10th in scoring.
And near the bottom on D.
Knock on Woods, year two of Steichen and our scoring should improve.
Pittman is now in his prime, Downs is so smart and quick he is nearly unguardable. We have 4 TE's that run and catch well. Having a 4th WR that is fast, runs good routes, with very good hands will be a big help. And we can find that as late as round 3.
My first pick would be RT Latham. Fries is consistently dominated by power and gets pushed back too easily, so adding a better RG is high on my preference. Maybe that is Smith, or Latham for a year.
🥜 lol
-
1 hour ago, Yoshinator said:
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.
If we put the 5th year option in place with Paye then he is signed through 2025. If we don’t then he is a FA. His option price is $14m. Pretty cheap for an ER who has improved each year. My guess is they think our new DL coach could hopefully get him to make an even bigger jump. So I’m thinking they will pick up his option.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, MikeCurtis said:
Aiyuk is awesome, but I am wondering if we would have so much of our cash tied to one position (WR)
That is a good point but they have been saying that about our OL for some time and that has resulted in it being a top 5 OL. Not on the same scale but we now have two highly paid DT in their 30’s. If we acquired Hunter we most likely would have had a highly paid DL position group as well. I am not in the camp of worrying about how much we pay a player or position group. That’s for the front office to manage. They have a roster to build to try and a win a championship. That’s a lot of players and talent to deal with. I am in the camp of bringing in the best players we can to get the job done. As long as they manage the cap effectively, which they do, then I don’t care where they spend it. Just bring in the talent and go for that championship.
-
2 minutes ago, w87r said:
I've actually saw a couple articles talking about Aiyuk potentially being moved post draft for 2025 pick(s).
Best of both worlds?
Keep #15, trade 2025 pick?
Would be quick way for massive upgrades.
Saying that, I don't think it will happen, but you never know.
We definitely have a history with SF.
Maybe 2025 pick and Pierce so they get immediate help at WR since they don't get a 2024 pick?
Good thought. I was also thinking about including Kwity. Maybe they could use an ER. There are options I guess.
-
It feels like it’s Dejavu time for the 49er’s and Colts right now. The 49er’s issue with Aiyuk and Samuels reminds me of their situation four years ago with Buckner and Armstead. They traded Buckner to the Colts for pick 13 to solve it. I wonder if Ballard would be tempted to call and see if a trade for Aiyuk could work out for both teams again. He’s set to play on the 5th year option so his extension could wait for a year. I know he wants the extension but he might just have to play on the option this year no matter where he ends up if he is traded. If the Colts are really considering moving up for Nabors trading for Aiyuk would undoubtedly cost less. I know the rookie contract is cheaper but Aiyuk is a proven NFL playmaker. Interesting option none the less.
-
3 minutes ago, stitches said:
Yeah, that is somewhat notable, but it's probably largely coincidental and product of who was up for new contract this year and the state of the roster and payroll. I guess we will see in future year if there really is any change in approach... either way huge majority of those deals are for non-key players.
Pittman, Grover, Moore and Blackmon are starters and I think are key core players. He will try to bring back every player who performs to his expectations I believe. You don’t perform he’s going to find someone better. That’s the deciding factor imo.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, w87r said:
Side bar:
Then I will probably wait for a while to respond to some other things.
Yes the Colts are in decent shape at the moment.
$14-$14.6m in space.
But have $2.8m(ish) for draft picks.
$2.5m(ish) for practice squad.
That leaves with $8-$9m(ish).
That extra money just gives us more versatif we wanted to make another move. Not saying we are, but if not it will just roll over, pushing the money back isn't that big a deal. Even less so, when looking at what the cap is supposed to do the next couple years.
I think this actually increases the likelihood another meaningful acquisition is on the horizon. Ballard is working.
-
1
-
-
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he does Kelly as well. His contract also expires this year.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, shasta519 said:
PC was oft-injured and wasn't any good, so that's not really a good example.
Glow WAS signed to an extension at one point. He didn't get a third contract because the OL was already getting big money.
Oke left in FA because Shaq (another Colts player re-signed to a big deal) was in his way, both positionally and financially. If Shaq wasn't here, Ballard brings him back.
Autry left to TEN but Ballard tried to bring him back.
It's like a handful of players (only a couple that were core players) vs. the many core players he has re-signed, especially those that he drafted. Whether he did it in March or the summer is just really just timing, not indicative of a reversal of anything.
Plus, the Colts FAs this year all entered the league in 2017/2018 (Ballard's first two years as GM), so they are just the first group of his core players to happen to be entering/nearing 3rd contracts. There is no other situation to really compare this to.
It's fine, we can just have to agree to disagree on this. But this is "we like our guys" 2.0.
You’re wrong but that’s okay. The numbers this year speak for themselves.
-
1 minute ago, w87r said:
I don't know what the plan is, but I know it doesn't hurt to push $5m down the road from this year. $2.5m per year.
And if it isn't used it will just roll over, so there is no downfall. Just gives more versatility this season.
Yeah I expect his cap hit to go down this year. People forget the cap is gong up every year. So pushing some down the road is not a big deal.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, stitches said:
I think if you look at it a bit deeper it doesn't say that much and it's not that big of a departure. A ton of the signings in previous years come after the draft(i.e. he can still do it this year) and a lot of them are very cheap - very low average salary. So... what does that mean? IMO it means Ballard is waiting to see what he can do with the draft and then he will likely go out and fill the holes with cheap vets that in a lot of cases we don't even remember the next year. Example... Genard Avery, Chris Lammons, Kenyan Drake, Jake Martin, Amari Rodgers, Isaac Taylor-Stuart, Jalen Tabor, Breshad Perriman, AQM(back from Bears)... those were all signed last summer after the draft.
I think you could be missing the point. Before this year the average number of our own FA retained was 2 over the last four years. This year it was 10. That’s the point he was making.
-
7 hours ago, shasta519 said:
Ballard re-signing players is a huge role reversal? 1/3 of the starting roster are guys who have been here since 2019 or earlier. He’s always signed his own. Oke might be the only one he didn’t and that was just because they had re-signed Shaq to a big deal.You don't get it that's okay. Of course he signs his own players. A few every year but nothing to the extent he did this year. That was unprecedented. BTW he didn't sign Campbell or Glowinski just to name two quickly off the top of my head.
-
26 minutes ago, indykmj said:
Tough to justify doing that until the early draft unfolds and they know the guy that they
want is still on the board at the targeted slot.
Trade for (as an example) #9 pre-draft, watch the top-3 WRs go prior to that slot and
you're left holding your you know what.
You wouldn’t do it early for one guy. You’re not necessarily doing it for WR either although that could be the pick. You’re doing it to secure a potentially elite playmaker that could help push the team to the top. Since there is no consensus need on the team you pick the highest rated playmaker on your board. That could be offense or defense. With at least three quarterbacks going early moving up to 8 or 9 is going to get the Colts one of those players.
-
If the Colts are convinced they want to move up in the draft for a potential difference maker they should do it asap imo. Just like when they traded back and took Nelson or knew they wanted Buckner and pulled the trigger on that trade before the draft. That said I think the highest they would probably go is 8 or 9. They must realize other teams will want to trade up. Not just for quarterbacks either. WR, ER, T, would be the main targets as well. I would secure the pick now. Picking inside the top 10 is going to secure an 🧨 playmaker. Waiting can only jeopardize that goal and increase the price imo. If the decision is when not if then do it before the pressure and stress ramp up. I think they should do it this coming week.
-
1
-
Colts 2024 Current Up to Date Roster + Cap Outlook. OP updated + on page 12(MERGE)
in Colts Football
Posted
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.