stitches
-
Posts
15,352 -
Joined
-
Days Won
111
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by stitches
-
-
8 minutes ago, w87r said:
I think the DL did just fine last year. Near top of the league in sacks, with a young secondary. Very good against the run, when Grover was playing.
When I say solidified, I am really referring to the fact that 2 days ago we had (3) DTs on the roster and a little thin outside.
Now we have kept Grover and added Davis to the group.
Bringing Lewis back helps inside and outside.
Yeah... we definitely have bodies now. The DL is taking shape. I'm just not sure it's good enough for the resources we are spending... and I'm not sure the resources we are spending are well directed.
-
9 hours ago, w87r said:
DE:(6) Samson Ebukam, Kwity Paye, Dayo Odeyingbo, Tyquan Lewis, Titus Leo, Isaiah Land
DT:(5) Deforest Buckner, Grover Stewart, Raekwon Davis, Adetomiwa Adebawore, Eric Johnson
DL is looking pretty solidified right now.
Wouldn't mind adding though.
And subtracting Johnson.
Here's my question - how do you evaluate the season this DL had last year? Where would you put them in the hierarchy of the league? When we call it solidified... what is it solidified into? Elite? Great? Good? Average? Mediocre? To me this DL is somewhere between average and mediocre. I.e. not good enough...
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
It’s clear you don’t get it.
If you had bothered to look back one more year you’d have found that in Davis’s rookie year he graded out in the 70’s. So you missed that.
That was like a 4 years ago. Since then he's been at best mediocre.
7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:And you've apparently forgotten the Colts hired the top DL coach available. Do you think maybe he had some input on this signing? Like maybe the coach said he can work with the player.
Maybe? How much weight would you put on that? From a coach who's never coached in the NFL? I think our pro scouting and player personnel department had much more to do with it than the new coach.
7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:Ballard does the normal and you don’t like it. Now Ballard does something out of the ordinary and you don’t like that either. I think I spit a trend.
That's the thing... this is nothing new. This is the exact same thing Ballard does every year - this is the Isaac Rochelle, Taven Bryan, Sam Tevi of this year. Pick up a failed/mediocre at best player for depth/reclamation project in the trenches. Except this year, he's paying 14M for that depth piece, who you hope will never see the field(i,e, Grover stays healthy). And I don't mind the addition of depth to the roster. We needed a better backup for Grover. I just don't like the allocation of resources.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, tweezy32 said:
Sure, why not... invest in all the areas that don't directly help your young QB. Linebackers, defensive tackles... give up day 2 picks for backup QB... anything to avoid improving our weapons for AR. That would be another very Ballard move.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Superman said:
Taven Bryan played over 300 snaps last year. Davis will have a role. It just doesn't move the needle for this team in the AFC.
There are obvious things that separate the Colts from the Chiefs, Bills, Dolphins, Ravens, etc. Interior run defenders are not among the top ten on that list.
Taven Bryan could play 3T and was rotating in at 3T. Davis can't. He's a run stuffer... just like Grover. They will both be fighting over those 60-65% of snaps that are available for run plays.
-
5 minutes ago, 1959Colts said:
The Colts will rotate all the DLmen like they always do.
I'm sure Ballard and his staff did their homework and have big plans for Davis
They will rotate but Davis is not a versatile DT... he's a nose tackle. As is Grover. How many NT non-pass snaps are there in a game? 60%? 65%? And if you are going to rotate Davis and Stewart on those? Then why the hell are you paying 20M+ for those 60% snaps of one position? This makes zero sense to me.
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, Superman said:
I would have signed Davis, and let Grover walk. Half the money, shorter contract, similar player/production.
I think Grover is much better. But I get your point...
The worst thing about this one is - in the perfect case scenario (if Grover is healthy), Davis probably gets about 0 snaps.
-
8 minutes ago, Superman said:
Of course he does. He's basically said it.
I think I'm about done with Ballard and his obsession with mediocre trench players. When you are this obsessed with the trenches one would think at least our OL and DL would be amazing. We are paying 40M+ for our DTs. What are we talking about? Is this 2024 or 1974?
-
3
-
-
He's practically this year's DT version of Isaac Rochelle or Sam Tevi. Except, this time Ballard decided to splurge and gave what should be a depth piece at DT(vet minimum) an actual 2 year 14M contract.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, w87r said:
He hasn't graded out very well on PFF.
58.8 last year
36.5 in 2021
43.4 in 2022
58.8 in 2023
... I guess... at least he's on upward trend...
I just don't get it. Like... I get wanting a backup for Grover. I don't get this contract... Are you telling me teams were lining up to give Davis over 3-4M a year?
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
We have a backup up for Grover. A expensive one
I don't get this one... Just typical Ballard stuff I guess
-
2
-
-
We need to support Richardson, not waste prime resources for his backup.
-
2
-
-
Ballard really likes his team and his players. Lets hope this is not one of those "do the same thing over and over again and expect different results" things...
-
6
-
-
For whatever it's worth:
-
4 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:
sounds like Kenny is coming back they are just working on the contract.
This sounds like his agent contacted 2 different reporters with the same info that he wanted out. He's hoping some other team will come over the top and outbid the Colts offer. He's pretty much saying to other teams - come get Kenny or we will sign soon...
-
1
-
-
There was NOTHING worrying in AR's play in his rookie year. In fact, he surpassed expectations from the get go. He won the starting job from a solid player like Minshew and he was coming along nicely with his play. He showed improvement in his short-area accuracy, showed good command of the offense(should I remind people that the expectation when he was drafted was that he will likely sit and learn his full rookie year?), he showed off both his athleticism and his arm at times. By his 3d game we was not just showing off some flashes of brilliance, he was stringing drives and even full halves of play at a very high level(the Rams second half).
If there is something to worry about it's definitely his ability to stay healthy. This is where my biggest worries stand right now. The rest ... yeah, it's a work in progress, but we already knew that... we already knew he's one of the youngest and least experienced QBs to ever play in the league. Nothing from what he showed on the field was really worrying. There were much more positives than negatives purely play-wise and development-wise from his rookie year.
Now... nothing is guaranteed and he will still need to work and make significant improvements in his game, but the trajectory pre-injury was actually very positive and inspiring optimism. Lets just hope he will stay and keep himself healthy so we can actually talk about his play rather than his rehabs...
-
4
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Patrick Miller said:
Irsay wouldn’t have it. If I had to pick a FA qb I’d prob bring in Tannehill.
I was going to say - you guys really want to kill Jim, don't you?
-
Is Drew Lock much/any better than Sam Ehlinger?
-
5 minutes ago, richard pallo said:
I guess that’s called filling a need.
Unfortunately we have the same need that's being left unaddressed. I don't have the numbers, but I would bet we were one of the worst teams in the league in the same stat.
-
3 minutes ago, Superman said:
He can actually cover. End of story.
Much MUCH BETTER!
-
1 minute ago, Superman said:
He's better than Ngakoue, but I just don't see him as a super dangerous pass rusher that wrecks the game. I think everyone knows his name because he's been trying to get a new contract for two years.
PFF has a stat that I really like, pass rush productivity (PRP). Basically measures the rate of pressures per pass rush, and it's weighted toward sacks (including half sack). Out of all edge rushers who rushed at least 50% of pass snaps, Burns was 39th with a PRP of 6.8. He had 9 sacks in 379 pass rushes. (Ebukam had 10 in 450 rushes, PRP 6.7; Dayo had 12 in 365 rushes, PRP 5.9; Paye had 8 in 410, PRP 4.6.)
Jonathan Greenard had 14 sacks in 405 pass rushes, and a PRP of 8.3; he just got four years, $72m. Bryce Huff had 10 sacks in 334 pass rushes, PRP of 12.2; he got three years, $51m.
Burns for $30m/year is STEEP. I'm good. That's Myles Garrett, Nick Bosa, TJ Watt money.
He could also ball out for the Giants, which would be good for them. But this feels like a cautionary tale example that we'll be talking about in a couple years when Joe Schoen gets fired.
Good breakdown. Thanks. I guess part of the appeal is his youth, too. He's still only 25 and you can argue his best years are still ahead of him and moving to a less disfunctional situation would help him realize his potential.
-
Just now, Superman said:
I don't think I see Burns as a game changer.
Now this would be a better reason to not give him 30M a year... I'm not 100% sure he's a game changer either... or is he a Ngakoue type?
-
My choice would be Tyler Huntley.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, w87r said:
I think it's the $30m AAV that needed to be attached to it, that was the issue.
This is the price of doing business. Some OK guards are getting 20M a year... we paid Pittman 23 a year... Franklin 10 a year... the salary cap is booming and the new salaries are exploding. If you want a game changer you will have to pay one way or another.
-
1
-
Colts offseason discussion / Ballard Grievances (merge)
in Colts Football
Posted
51 sacks is not representative of the strength of that DL. Sacks are very much luck dependent. A much more representative stat is the number(%) of pressures, hits, hurries and there we've been around the bottom of the league for years. This DL is not good at disrupting the passer.
I posted a graph recently that encapsulated well the struggles of this DL... I'm trying to find it, but can't right now. Will come back to you if/when I find it.
Edit: Here it is:
This defense doesn't blitz and it doesn't pressure the QB. It provides very limited disruption of the opposing QB. We pretty much allow them to drop back, scan the field and execute their offense. IMO this defense will never be great when the fundamentals of it's pass-disruption are this poor.