Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

stitches

Senior Member
  • Posts

    14,783
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    97

Posts posted by stitches

  1. 7 minutes ago, OLD FAN MAN said:

    ballard has not been good at drafting explosive pass rushers, pass catchers or cornerbacks

    I agree with this, but IMO the worst thing he can do is not even try anymore because he's been bad at it in the past. IMO he should keep trying. As long as he's here, I'd prefer him to try to address those high value positions, rather than give up on them. 

    • Like 1
  2. 5 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    I was focusing on the offense because JW's position was we didn't do enough to support Richardson. 

     

    I don't like what we've done on defense. People are saying if we let players walk, it would create holes on defense, and I honestly don't mind that. I don't think we have the right players on defense, I don't think we have the right scheme on defense, I wouldn't mind a near total tear down of the defensive roster. I'd prefer that to spending $100m on players that probably cap our ceiling. I've said that a few times now. It's where we agree the most, I think.

    Agree with a lot of this, but I don't think it's happening. Ballard is not changing his scheme and likely not changing his DC... and not changing the majority of his players... like we saw, he actually likes what he's building, he resigned almost every big piece of that defense he could have resigned... including the DT that was bullied the whole season. And just like you I don't agree with any of it, but we are working with what we have, not with what we wished we had. So... with that said... knowing that Ballard likes this scheme and this (type of) coach, what should we be doing to make this defense with this coach better? I know this won't be popular for many people but... IMO this defense is super reliant on dominant pass-rush, so... just keep investing in it, keep drafting DEs early... and late... and hope one or two hit. The problem is that Ballard likes even his pass-rushers to be good in run defense so in a lot of cases this eliminates good players from consideration. 

     

    5 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    But regarding the offense, I don't know what you can do to 'for sure' solve our offensive problems. You keep bringing up JJ, I'd rather talk about reality LOL. The Vikings aren't trading him, and we're not trading for him.

    Yeah... no draft pick is really for sure... even the MHJ or Nabers... but IMO they have significantly higher chance to hit than the day 2 picks. 

    5 minutes ago, Superman said:

    And philosophically, I think the draft is where you get your dynamic WRs. There are tons of them every year, and you just need to keep swinging until you hit. I don't mind a trade back, I don't mind a DL at #15, I think every WR draft class for the foreseeable future will be rich with talent, and I have no problem with attacking that position on Day 2. But I think the Colts have signaled that DT isn't happening at #15.

    True... the trend has been set for a while now - the draft will have good WR classes almost every year and again, I agree with you... ultimately you just have to keep trying even if the previous one didn't work. What you cannot and shouldn't do is give up on the position. Just keep drafting them. 

    • Like 1
  3. 1 minute ago, Superman said:

     

    I see more potential in the TE room than you do. But let's say the draft went Bowers at #15, and at some point on Day 2 we get Walker, Leggette, whatever... now the offense has what we're looking for, right? (I think there are other TE possibilities on Day 2, by the way.) And that kind of talent wasn't really available in free agency, not without moving heaven and earth to get it, and we knew that wasn't on the table.

    The problem is... with the way Ballard has handled FA ... so far... we need much more than a WR and TE... we need pass-rush, we need corners, we need safeties... hell, we might need a LB too... so... no idea if Ballard would really put WR and TE atop of this list. In fact, if I had to guess, he wouldn't ... IMO he's more likely to pick DE at 15 than Bowers, even if Bowers is there. And even more likely to just trade back. BTW... I don't think drafting Bowers and WR in the second for sure solve our problems. Just like Alec PIerce didn't solve it. It's possible we get our guy, but far from certain... 

    1 minute ago, Superman said:

     

    My point is that I expected the potential upgrades on offense to come in the draft, not free agency. I wanted a veteran WR and some veteran OL depth in FA, but those kind of players will be available for several weeks. It's also Ballard's plan to add those kind of players after the draft.

    That's fair. With the slight exception for possible trade for WR or TE. But those are very hypothetical and not entirely up to Ballard.

    • Like 2
  4. 1 minute ago, DougDew said:

    With everybody saying that Bowers will not fall to us, I would not at all be surprised if Ballard trades up to get him.  

     

    Do we need more young corners with that second round pick...or more young edges (that don't seem to work out when drafted there anyway).  With Downs, and Pitt on board, Ballard's words suggest he's not ready to give up on AP.   How do you get more "explosive" in Ballard's words. if you don't replace AP?  He's not replacing Downs, and obviously not Pitt.

     

    With Grover and Davis signed, is Ballard going to pick a DT with that second round pick he would use to trade up for Bowers?

     

    Not making a prediction.  But you heard it here first if Ballard does the out of character thing and gets more explosive by trading up for Bowers.

    If he's going to be trading up I prefer he goes for one of the top WRs. I have no idea what his thoughts on the TE group is... he just spent a bunch of picks on TEs in consecutive drafts. I can absolutely see him being with that group the same way he is with his other pet projects - protective of his own picks and decision and determined to make them work until the very end. 

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  5. 38 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    What's your take on the offense from last year?

     

    I personally don't think it's that far off. I want another WR who can make explosive plays, and I don't think that player was available in free agency, so I always expected that to be a draft target. I want OL depth. And I like our young TEs, but wouldn't mind a potential upgrade at the top; I'm a fan of Woods, if he's healthy.

     

    Other than that, I think the offense going up a gear is mostly dependent on the QB.

     

    What would you have wanted them to do on offense in free agency?

    I think the offense will go as far as AR takes it... BUT... if we want consistent excellence... rather than being just OK to good, we need better weapons for him. We need better/more dynamic WR, we need better TE... + yeah... better depth at OL. 

     

    It's hard to say what would have brought us a better(or even good enough) WR or TE in FA. IMO we need to either trade up in the draft for one of the top 3 receivers or we need to try trading for Justin Jefferson or Aiyuk or someone of that sort. We kind of ... don't really need depth at those position. We already have depth. What we are lacking is top tier talent. 

     

    On the TE front... Brock Bowers I guess is our best bet at getting elite player right now? Maybe Kyle Pitts if he's available for trade somehow? I have my doubts about Bowers but I cannot deny that he looks like a very good player who knows how to play the game and plays with force and determination. 

    • Like 2
  6. 3 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

    Lol. Funny, you always demand facts from others and you get called on for some evidence and you, who have covered eight GMs and four NFL teams and four moon landings and the true Bigfoot discovery, can’t Google a link? Just take your loss and pull the rip cord. No Colt front office member ever said it. Lol 

    I don't think Indianapolis as a city or the franchise have any significant hindrance to attract top free agents. I think Ballard's approach to free agency and his stated(repeatedly) philosophy of "not paying B players A money", setting a limit on offers beforehand and not going over it, his reluctance to get into bidding wars, etc is much more responsible for the Colts' inability to get top FAs. 

     

    With all that said I don't necessarily disagree with that philosophy. My biggest gripe with Ballard has been with the areas he focuses his attention to much more than him not getting the top of the market FAs.

    • Like 1
  7. 4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:



    Appreciate that….

     

    But in the defense that Ballard wants to play, the 3-tech was the most important position, and the Will was the 2nd most.   Hence Buckner and Leonard. 
     

    And Ballard said he hired Bradley because his defense was the most like the defense that Flus ran.   So there’s that. 
     

    I thought the defense the Colts ran the most was Cover 3.   Is that not true?   I’m sure someone here knows. 
     

    The most important is the one we spend big on at the respective moment. When we take a FS in the first, it's the FS like Earl Thomas was in the Seahawks Legion of Boom. When we drafted Leonard high and later gave him the big bucks it was the Will linebacker that's most important. When we spent a good first and big money on Buckner, it was the 3-Tech that's most important.

     

    For whatever it's worth, IMO there are multiple positions that can make substantial difference for a defense, almost no matter what system is used. But for ours specifically, IMO the defining characteristic is rushing 4, not blitzing and trying to deny the deep ball. Trying to deny the deep ball can be done through scheming -dropping deep, giving cushion to receivers, etc. Or it can be done with a dominant ballhawking free safety(but those are just so freaking rare...). What you cannot scheme up is pressure, especially when you don't blitz so, in my opinion, if you absolutely need something in this defense, no questions asked, it's pass-rushers. Both at DE and DT(3Tech). If you are not going to blitz, you need to be able to create pressure with 4. So that 4(and by extension the whole rotation of 7-8 players) needs to be able to disrupt the passer. And herein lies the biggest problem for Ballard's Colts - for the entirety of his tenure with the Colts, we have been unable to create consistent pressure and disrupt the passer.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 3
  8. 3 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    I didn't want to distract from the main point, but the other element was getting the HC right. The Rams had Goff as a rookie, he looked awful, they won four games. Then they hire McVay, suddenly Goff looks like an MVP candidate, and they win 11 games. 

     

    And then, they got aggressive: traded a 5th for Talib; traded a 1st and 6th for Brandin Cooks and a 4th; signed Suh for one year, $14m. They went to the SB in 2018 and lost.

     

    And the following offseason, they got rid of those players. Traded Talib and a 5th to the Dolphins for a 7th; traded Cooks and a 4th to the Texans for a 2nd; and Suh went to the Bucs (after the draft, screwing the Rams out of what could have been a 4th round comp pick). There had been other players along the way -- Dante Fowler, Clay Matthews, etc. This is something that people don't pay attention to with those Rams -- they strategically dipped in and out of some of those bigger contracts, recouping some of their draft capital and freeing up cap space.

    Oh yeah, the coaching hire is extremely important. 

    3 minutes ago, Superman said:

    I'd also push back on the idea that they were a legit contending team prior to 2021. They missed the playoffs in 2019, finished 2nd in the division in 2020 and lost in the divisional round, and then went back to the SB in 2021. They were basically a fringe playoff team those two years before they got Stafford, despite their aggression in other areas. They had laid a foundation as a solid team, but they weren't a legit contender every year.

     

    Pushing into that top tier is much harder than becoming a fringe playoff team. And winning the SB is another story. But I don't think that the way a team spends money -- whether free agency, trades, or retaining your own players -- has a meaningful correlation to overall success. What matters is the quality/production of the players on which you spend, which to a certain extent connects to the positions those players play. 

    For some reason I had remembered their stretch leading into their SB as a bit more impressive than it was. On the bolded - I guess the more current and better example would be the 49ers? They spent a ton of resources on pass-rushers, weapons(retaining Kittle after hitting on him in the draft, WRs - 1st and 2nd round picks, pass-catching RB in McCaffrey ), best LT in the league... and they did try to address the QB too... and might have gotten there in a roundabout way... 

  9. Jeremiah released his 3d mock draft and in this one he has trades... 

     

    https://www.nfl.com/news/daniel-jeremiah-2024-nfl-mock-draft-3-0

    Quote

     

    15 Indianapolis Colts - Quinyon Mitchell

    Toledo · CB · Senior

    I’ll always look to connect the Colts to toolsy prospects. Mitchell ran a 4.33-second 40-yard dash at the NFL Scouting Combine and he was phenomenal at the Senior Bowl.

     

     

    Some notables:

    - 4 QBs go in the first 4 picks. Minnesota trade up to 4 for McCarthy. @NFLfan how would you feel about that?

    - Jets trade up to 5 for MHJ. If that pick is available maybe the Colts hould be trying to get it. 

    - Joe Alt OT1 at 7 to TEN

    - Dallas Turner DE1 at 8 to ATL

    - Odunze drops to 9.

    - Brock Bowers to DEN at 12.

    - Pennix goes 13 to the Raiders

    - Colts get their pick of CB and pick Quinyon Mitchell

    - Byron Murphy drops to 27

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2
  10. 10 minutes ago, Superman said:

     

    To the bolded, I don't think that's true. They aggressively acquired two or three players, but most of their core was drafted or had been with the team for multiple seasons by 2021 -- Kupp, Donald, Whitworth (2017), Rapp, Higbee, Havenstein. In November 2021, they traded a 2nd and 3rd for Von Miller, paid him $722k for the remainder of the season, let him walk in free agency, and got back a 5th round comp pick. They signed OBJ for $1.25m (prorated) after he was waived by the Browns. 

     

    And it didn't matter until they had the QB. For example, they got Ramsey in 2019, but they won the SB two seasons later, after the Stafford trade.

     

    I agree that it would be good to supplement the draft in other ways -- trades and free agency. But I think the correlation between winning and spending is overstated, especially after the Rams and Bucs won after being aggressive. And in both cases, they only had major success once they made significant upgrades at QB.

    I only have one slight contention here. The SB is the ultimate goal, but arguably becoming a contender in the first place is the more realistic and more achievable end goal. There are a ton of things that need to go your way and becoming a SB champion requires a lot of luck. What doesn't require tons of luck is becoming a legit contending team and the Rams were that even before they got Stafford. They had been hovering around that level for a while before they became champions and even made it to SB LIII with Goff. Of course, not disputing the importance of the QB, but lets not act like getting the QB was what made that team. It was series of moves and acquiring the QB was one of them. 

     

    For example, if the Colts were as good as the Rams were in that 3-4 year stretch, I'd be perfectly good with our GM. Now I would still want him to pursue the final piece in a franchise QB if we didn't have it, but that type of a record of legitimate chance to go all the way a few years in a row would buy that GM a lot of leeway from me. 

    • Like 2
  11. 9 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

    So four times in 8 years.

     

    We've just spent $200m to stay the same. I mean instead re-signing Stewart and extending Franklin sign Arik Armstead and Frankie Luvu than add a safety like Kamren Curl and a CB like Sean Murphy-Bunting. That would've cost us, what, $20m year more? Tell me the defense wouldn't instantly be better...

    Absolutely... Ballard just is very high on... himself. He likes the guys he has liked before and there is noone that likes his guys like he likes them(thus he's the one resigning them)...

     

    My soccer team is in deep financial trouble and can't afford much of any new signings of substance so when asked by reporters about his roster our coach said "If you can't have what you like, you better like what you have". I feel like that with the Colts. Except there is no financial reason for the Colts to limit themselves like that. It's purely philosophical approach by the GM. 

    • Like 6
  12. 3 hours ago, Solid84 said:

    And those are about the best signings the Colts have done under Ballard in 8 years. 
     

    Has Ballard even spent over $10+m once in a FA? Gilmore maybe? That’s once. In going on 8 years. 
     

    Noone does what Ballard does and he hasn’t had success doing it, so noone’s trying to replicate it. 

    I think he paid Johnathan Hankins about 10M per year(30/3) in his first free agency when he was remaking the whole defense. 

    In 2019 he signed Justin Houston for 24/2... and Devin Funchess for 13M... 

    In 2020 - Rivers...

    In 2021 - none

    In 2022 - Gilmore

    In 2023 - none

    • Thanks 1
  13. 2 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

    This gets peddled like it means spending in FA doesn’t work. The Rams won a Super Bowl by spending. The Colts don’t spend and haven’t won bupkis since Ballard got here. 
     

    I’m not saying the Colts should just spend mindlessly and I don’t think that’s what anyone wants. But, Ballard’s gotta cover his draft misses by spending in FA otherwise we’ll never win with him at the helm.  

    Spending doesn't mean you will win. You still need to spend smart and you still need to draft well and overall make good decisions. 

     

    Not spending limits you in your roster construction. I don't know why it's so hard for people to understand. The best teams in the league use ALL available avenues for improving their team. They do not limit themselves artificially with what's possible to achieve. They also concentrate resources into windows of contention. This means at any given time, if you are not spending you are competing against teams that are pouring resources into trying to win it RIGHT NOW. You will just always be at disadvantage because while 1 specific team will need to reload and take their lumps for spending too much in short period of time once in a while, the league as a whole will always have at least a few teams that are in that high spending mode chasing a window for contention. 

     

    Now... is it possible you strike gold and beat those teams while relying almost exclusively on the draft? It's possible. If you string together a few insane draft classes. But it's not very likely... 

    • Like 1
  14. 3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


    Hey, Tom!    Good to see you posting again!    I know you like to show up this time of year to offer your insight.   
     

    As I like to tell you every year, I’m sure you’re posting as often as you can,  but I think many here would love to see you post more often!   This website is always better when you’re posting more!   :scoregood:

    Agreed. Tom always brings thoughtful perspective to the forum and I enjoy reading his posts. :thmup:

    • Thanks 2
  15. 6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

     

    "really great positive contributors -in the immediate"

     I really do hope your health is good.

     

     Well, we will have Taylor for the whole season.

    We, might... or we might not... or we might lose someone else to injury. It's just what happens in the league. If it's not one player it will be another. It's a violent sport and players will miss games. 

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

    I watched our season opener with Jaxs over the weekend. AR was 17-22 at one point and running a speeded up offense from the getgo. His head is going to be really straight in year 2.

    You know how I feel about AR. I still think he needs improvements but the sky is the limit with him... I don't think there was anybody higher on him than me here. But first thing - he just needs to stay healthy. 

     

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

     Downs was breaking their ankles and picking their zones apart. He had 67 catches last season. He is a stud.

    Downs had a very promising rookie season. Hope he makes a jump in year 2 too... 

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

     Ogeltree and Mallory were solid rookies, can't you believe in their 2nd year jump? Woods can still be really good. AR getting the ball downfield to Pierce.

    Honestly. I'm not high on this TE group. The rumors about Woods are not great. Ogletree and Mallory IMO are JAGs at best. Which is OK for where they were drafted but they are not game changers. We need better... I guess if you believe in Brock Bowers we should be hoping he's there for us to take in the draft. 

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

     Cross was making plays down the stretch.

    Cross will need to make the jump because it looks like we might be losing Blackmon. He had some flashes at the end of the year, but he still needs to show consistency over a prolonged period of time.

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

    We need a 2nd year bump from Juju. A little bump from Raimann. Definitely no more seive behind Grover.

    I think Raimann is already very good. I'm not too enthused with the way Ballard has handled the DT position... 

     

    6 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

     2nd year of Steichen. I fully think we will be better.

    Steichen was already doing wonders with what he was given last year. IMO the hope is that AR stays healthy and is able to unlock the full potential of what Steichen envisions in his offense. 

  16. 3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:


    these parts of @stitches post resonate most w me. I admit I am usually a Ballard supporter. Love his eye for talent. And generally agree w the approach to not overpay for the top tier free agents because the ones that hit the open market usually do for a reason and they reset the market when they aren’t the elite of the elite and don’t deserve to be the ones resetting the market. 
     

    that said , now is the time to push hard when you have your rookie contract qb. And I’d bet behind the scenes the colts did and they fell short. 
     

    Hunter is a great example. If he truly took less to go play at home then what can you do? 

    I don't believe any of this post-hoc spin. He took less to play home. And even if we did believe it - OK... he did take less. What about the 100 other FAs we could have gotten? 

     

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

    the funny things is this:

     

    if you said the colts signed a top-3 free agent wr and a top cb and a top DT and that they spent around $200M in free agency, we would all be throwing our hands up in praise and hallelujah. 

     

    thsts what they just did. But it Doesn’t feel that way because all of those guys were our home grown guys. So we didn’t really get better as a team. We spent that to just remain at the level we were at. 

     

    This is exactly it... it feels like Ballard is not proactive... he's grabbing to the status quo and holding onto it for dear life. Like the status quo has actually given us anything to brag about? The Texans let go of one of their best defensive linemen... to replace him with a better one. The Chiefs let go of one of their best receivers... to replace him a better one... Those are teams that are not happy with what they had(and they were better than us) and tried to actually improve. Could that backfire? Sure. But at least they are trying to compete. What are we trying for? 

     

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

     

    I don’t see any guys out there worth throwing major money at currently. I wanted Sneed. But that drama got to be exhausting and I don’t think he’s a $22M deserving guy either, especially not when trade compensation goes along w that cost. 
     

    I wasn't the biggest fan of the idea of giving record setting contract to Sneed while also giving up significant draft compensation too. IMO you should only do that for elite players and as good as Sneed is IMO he's not quite at that level. But with that said -yes, there aren't many high level FAs remaining on the market. Because while other teams were busy chasing the high level FAs, Ballard was busy giving 14M contract to a backup nose tackle and resigning his PED implicated 31 year old starting nose tackle 40M contract. 

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

    I will say this:

     

    last year I was hell bent on needing OL upgrades. We did nothing. I thought we were doomed running it back w the same cast and just a new coach. I was wrong and sparano killed it. I think the exact same thing could happen this year for our DL. 

    I wouldn't hold my breath quite honestly. With the OL there was precedent of them being great previously. With this DL there really hasn't been. We've been at the bottom of the league in creating pressures and affecting the QB for years. And the personnel will be the same more or less. A lot of people putting a lot of hope into the new DL coach. I liked that hire too, but you have to give the guy something to work with and apart from Buckner the rest of the group has never been more than... solid, and in a lot of cases much less than solid. 

     

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

    if we make a couple solid secondary signings then we can allocate draft resources to critical areas and see a jump. 
     

    after all, we spent recent fairly high draft capital in pierce, downs, woods, Brents, cross. Those guys haven’t made their leaps yet and if they do they’re a major improvement more so than free agency likely would bring. I have honest faith in this team if Richardson gets and stays healthy. But I’d love to add another elite pass catcher at 15 (please Thomas or Bowers if he’s there) or invest in Arnold or Mitchell and take advantage of the crazy wr depth and grab a good one in round two. 
     

    Yep... it always comes back to this... hoping our draft picks will pan out. The problem with that of course is that over the long term most teams in the league have about the same success rate in the draft. And while other teams use all avenues to improve their team(draft, trades, FA), it seems like Ballard has resigned himself to the draft. He will draft and live or die by it. He's just too stuck in his ways and too stubborn to make any significant changes to his approach. 

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

    I don’t see this as doom or gloom. And I do truly hope we live to see some exciting free agency news one of these years. This year it just happened to be all the internal re-signings were actually the right big money moves. 
     

    That's the problem with Ballard. It's never exactly doom and gloom. I am never worried with him that this team will be horrible and hopeless. I worry that it will be mediocre... forever! Which it has been. He gives you just enough hope for your to think "maybe this year... maybe this guy will get better... maybe this draft pick will pan out", but in reality we are just treading water. 

     

    3 hours ago, TomDiggs said:

    but man, Sneed would have been fun lol

    Yeah, Sneed could have been good for this defense... oh well... 

    • Like 4
  17. 2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:


    Well there is the draft. 
     

    Yeah, the draft is really our biggest chance to have improvement, but it's actually rare for rookies to be positive contributors. 

    2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

    And there is the potential that Richardson is who they thought, which if it turns out to be true, will make them better. 
     

    Yep, that's the second biggest hope(or probably the biggest)... 

     

    2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

    And free agency is not over. 
     

    It's not over but... I just don't see any significant changes happening. It's just not in Ballard's nature. We should know by now. 

    2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

    On the flip side, are we sure that the teams that signed all those free agents are better than they were last year?  
     

    Some might not be, some will... for example, I am almost certain the Texans will be stronger than last year. 

    2 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

    Not trying to battle with you here - but the roster building is not done yet.  

    Like I said above... I'm just kind of tired of watching the same thing happen every year under Ballard. Ballard is "never finished with roster building" but what does that mean exactly? He will sign C or D free agents that have not been singed in wave 1 or wave 2 of FA... he will get some FA off the streets to compete for spot in October or whatever... But do those moves actually have any serious impact? Do they raise the ceiling of this team. I feel like Ballard has resigned himself to the draft and I can't help but follow suit and just have all my hopes for this team tied to the draft. And this is happening with a QB on rookie deal too... I have no idea why I believed him when he was hinting he might change his approach now that he can afford more things now that his QB is really cheap... 

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1
  18. It just feels like I'm having the exact same thoughts and feelings about what's happening with the Colts and Ballard's approach every single year. There hasn't been a single season since... 2020 when I felt like... "oh we got better this off-season... nice" :dunno: 

     

    Pretty much the only hope is that Ballard has another 2018 type of draft and that's where the strengthening of the team comes from... but it's just so rare for rookies to be really great positive contributors... it's hard to be optimistic about it... at least in the immediate. 

    • Like 7
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...