stitches
-
Posts
15,011 -
Joined
-
Days Won
101
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by stitches
-
-
16 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
We are talking about this year. You can’t keep that many without cutting someone or another position is going to have no depth. Wasting a puck at 15 on a DT does not improve thr team this year.
We've seen Ballard cut players with not insignificant money or resources invested in them. He can easily just cut Taven Bryan after camp if we get a highly rated DT in the draft... Or hell even if a 3d-4th rounder outperforms Bryan... Or Adebawore... Or... Eric Johnson... Or multiple of them.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, NFLfan said:
@VikingsFanInChennai @stitches had expressed interest in a second team, as the Bears have very few picks.
Because of the time zone difference I'd rather not pick up a second team, sorry...
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Superman said:
The bolded is an important qualifying factor. And of course, QB is a completely different discussion...
If you've genuinely evaluated the prospects, and you have two guys available that are pretty much equal on your board, and you default to the player who you expect can contribute the soonest, that's reasonable. I still think there's a potential adjustment for positional value, but that can vary depending on the prospects in question.
To me, getting the fullest value from the rookie contract is well down the list of considerations. There are too many factors that cannot be predicted -- performance, injury, etc.
Plus... if the rookie is top tier talent (of the type you would regret not giving more snaps in year 1), he would very likely find himself a way into those snaps anyways. And this is especially true when our rotation at DE, for example, is nothing to write home about.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Superman said:
I don't understand this way of thinking.
When you draft a player in the first round, they sign a four year contract, with an option for a fifth year. If the player is as good as you hope, then the intention is likely to sign them to a second contract for another 4-5 years. So if you hope that this player is a foundational piece of your roster for the next decade, then why would you be so absorbed in the player's playing time in Year 1?
Specific to the Colts at DE, we do not have a game changing pass rusher right now. I like Kwity and Dayo, but so far, they aren't foundational pieces. They're both going into contract years, depending on whether the team picks up Kwity's option. And we have Ebukam, who is also good, but not a game changer. There's no reason any of these players can't be challenged for playing time, especially in pass rush situations. Dayo and Lewis play DE, but also rotate at 3T, so that can be worked out. And there are injuries, which will open up playing time.
DE historically has a learning curve, even for good players. Kayvon Thibodeaux was the 5th pick in 2022, he played 14 games as a rookie, 444 pass rush snaps, and had 4 sacks. He played 17 games in 2023, 498 pass rush snaps, 13 sacks.
Ultimately, passing on a high level edge rush prospect because you're not sure he can start in Year 1 seems incredibly shortsighted.
Yep. Ideally you draft a player that high for the next 10+ year and not for their rookie year. BUT lately I've been thinking about something else - part of the appeal of the rookie contract is the limited money you are giving the player compared to the production they are giving you. It's not super high on my list of things to consider but losing on the value of one year of those 4-5 rookie deal years is not negligible. In most cases it probably won't influence my decision, but if 2 players have similar value in my estimation, I would probably choose the one for whom I project faster/easier path to contributing for my team.
-
17 hours ago, Solid84 said:
-
1 hour ago, richard pallo said:
So green is good, yellow is average and red is bad?
On the first one is the success-rate - green=good, yellow=average, red=below average
On the second one is the usage rate of each route. It shows what routes he ran the most with similar color designation - green=above average, yellow=average, red = below average.
32 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:Sooooo...MHJ either loves or hates screens....got it lol
The second graph shows they didn't run a lot of screens for him, the first one shows on the few they ran he did well.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Congrats to them!
-
1
-
-
I just saw Pittman's "Reception Perception" charts... so here it goes:
-
4
-
1
-
-
Here are some Matt Harmon "Reception Perception" charts for the top receivers:
And here's the best of them... look at this one for Rome:
According to Harmon Odunze is the first receiver he's ever charted that has completely green route tree everywhere. He runs every route and he get gets open on every single route.
BTW MHJ's chart is not as impressive, but he mentions he was doubled the most out of any receiver in this draft class and his chart is still really really good.
-
5
-
1
-
-
Just now, VikingsFanInChennai said:
Top player = #1 draft overall pick, like some think Nabers could be drafted #1 overall. Does anyone think so?
Top wideout = some think Nabers is #1 WR of this class.
If Brugler says Nabers is "a" top player in the draft as in meaning one of the many top players, I think everybody who has seen big boards and mock drafts knows that already.
Top player in the draft doesn't automatically mean he will go no. 1 in the draft. Positional value changes things. QBs live in a completely different world. Like... remember when people were saying Quenton Nelson was the best player in his draft? But he was drafted no. 6.
Also... they are not saying that this is the prevailing opinion... just that some people in the league think that... for whatever it's worth.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:
Wait... Schefter says some think Nabers is top wideout..
Brugler re-tweets and said some think Nabers is this whole draft class' Top Player?
The Draft season always gives headaches because of guys like this.
Yep. Why is this confusing?
-
Just heard an insane stat about draft success of EDGE players by round on today's PFF podcast.
(since 2015)
% EDGE players who become starters:
- 1st round - 61%
- 2nd round - 25%
- 3d round - 21%
% WRs who become starters:
- 1st round - 63%
- 2nd round - 56%
- 3d round - 35%
This is a good argument for picking EDGE in R1 and delaying WR for R2... I know this has been an argument @Superman has made before(the WR part at least)... his intuition seems to have been right.
This also explains the big number of failed 2nd round EDGE picks Ballard has made. I.e. it's not just Ballard - the whole league cannot find a ton of 2nd round EDGE starters.
-
7
-
1
-
-
For the record after considering trading up from 9, the Bears are now open to trading down from 9 too...
-
8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
With Buckner, Stewart, Davis and all the other DE’s that can kick inside when needed, why would you want the Colts to draft a player who is likely NOT to play much his rookie year? I don’t see where the playing time for Murphy comes from?
Im not saying he isn’t a good player. But when does he play?
When we trade Buckner?
-
5 minutes ago, w87r said:
Definitely possible, they've been rumored to be a trade up possibility.
Seems hard to pass on 1 of those WRs after letting Allen and Williams go this off-season.
Side Bar:
That's interesting, but the Colts have been drafting a lot of high level athletes in general. I wonder if the results wouldn't be similar with different test.
-
1
-
-
Is it possible the Chargers go for an OT at 5? Or even better - is it possible they are willing to move back? Interesting...
-
4
-
-
13 minutes ago, chad72 said:
I am certain that MHJ would rather play with Herbert versus Murray or anyone that the Patriots trot out, and would be very happy if the Cardinals and Patriots passed on him.
IMO MHJ would love to play with AR the most!
-
7 minutes ago, Superman said:
It's like no one wants to come out and say it, but it's not a radical proposition to think that Nabers is better than MHJ.
I still like MHJ better but I don't think it's radical to think Nabers is better. I think they are close... and Nabers is more fun player to watch...
-
-
Nabers ran at LSU's pro day - 4.35...
Malik Nabers
6'0/199 lbs
4.35 40 yard dash
42" vertical
10'9" broad
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Superman said:
I've been saying this for a month. I didn't know whether we'd keep Stewart, but it doesn't really change the strength of the draft class. It's highly possible that Murphy (or Newton) is rated higher than any player at one of the positions everyone wants in the first round, and it wouldn't surprise me if the Colts drafted him.
Everyone is foaming at the mouth over corner right now, and I don't think the Colts value corner like that. Also, the corners at the top of the draft aren't great fits for the Colts preferred size profile. And I don't think the Colts value WR like that, plus it's the deepest position in this draft, IMO. You've pointed out a lot of this as well.
So yeah, get ready for the meltdown, 29 days and counting.
Murphy is intriguing.... although... he's another one that doesn't quite hit what Ballard prefers 100% - his length is not great. Look at our DTs on the roster:
- Buckner - 34 3/8"
- Stewart - 33 1/4"
- Raekwon Davis 33 7/8"
- Eric Johnson 34 1/4"
- Taven Bryan 32 3/4"
Murphy in general is very squaty and not long at all - 6' 0 1/2" with 32 3/8" arms. He would be the shortest DT on the roster and I just don't think Ballard would spend this high of a pick on someone who's that much of an outlier to what he usually likes. Newton has similar measurables so... again... not perfect fits. I don't think we go DT, but again, not because of needs or anything of the sort, but rather because I am not sure they fit what Ballard wants from the position.
-
1
-
-
Reggie Wayne is at LSU pro day...
-
4
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Colt Overseas said:
I'm a big fan of Mitchell stitches, he has the H/W/S and is a very good route runner. The route running almost has me higher on him than BTJ, because he is nearly as athletic than him. But I just wonder about the effort. Seen alot of tape of him not making really any effort at all on some plays. Just concerning for me because I really like him as a player.
Agree with you about this... there are plays where he's not the target that he seems to take off and doesn't put full effort in. It's not ideal... but in the grand scheme of things IMO it shouldn't be anywhere the top of our consideration about him. There are videos of Pittman doing something similar(taking plays off) when the play is not around him and I don't really think it's a huge deal when he does so much else at a really good level when the ball is actually going his way...
-
2
-
-
Matt Miller, ESPN's mock from today:
I would be just here watching the meltdown if this happened ...
Trading up with Chicago for Odunze
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
Usually against it. I would give up a 3d to move up for Odunze.