shasta519
-
Posts
8,615 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by shasta519
-
-
On 2/12/2020 at 4:20 PM, Fisticuffs111 said:
Good stuff.
The more I watch them, the more I waffle on what I think of two guys in particular: Love and Gordon. Not that I have them in the same tier, I like Love more. But both have moments where they play like a top prospect and both have moments where they look, well, bad.
Both have huge weaknesses that I think are gonna be tough to overcome. Gordon’s footwork, and for some reason his lack of velocity stands out to me at times. And for Love, his field vision/reading coverage.
Also, I’m very wary of Eason. I haven’t watched much of him but for some reason I just do not see I’m having success in the NFL. Guys that don’t handle pressure well, no thanks.
Agree with this...Gordon seems to be as much of a love/hate prospect as Love. Like you said...the lack of velocity really sticks out (I don't like his throwing motion either). The quick release is evident...but I think he is going to struggle making certain types of throws in the NFL. NFL players are bigger, faster, more athletic and have better awareness...and those windows close fast.
Throw in the footwork...and I just don't see it. I wouldn't mind him as a backup...but he's not a guy I am banking the future on.
Love...I at least have hope he can improve his vision and field reading...because the arm talent is fantastic. And he does have some good mobility.
-
Hargrave belongs in the top batch of FAs...he is going to command Grady Jarrett type money.
-
No mention of Tyler Johnson? I hope teams are sleeping on him as well.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, chad72 said:
Lamb didn't have to play top corners in the Big 12, and that is one reason I am not sold on him as much. The corners in the NFL are good, for the most part. I think Lamb will go late first round like a Calvin Ridley.
He did put up 100+ against both Bama and LSU.
-
20 hours ago, stitches said:
At the time I thought he overdrafted him, but at this point is has to be Braden Smith, right? Like... if you get a top 10 RT in the league(this is conservative, he was ranked top 5 by PFF) with a second round pick, I feel like you've done very well.
Willis seems to be a good pick right now, but I want to see more of him... Okereke is on the right path and Turay seemed poised for a breakout too. Lets see how they do next year.
Anthony Walker and Marlon Mack are the other two IMO.
I really loved the Hooker pick at the time, but injuries have stunted his development. I still think he's a good player, but he was a mid-first pick. You expect him to be a good player at the very least. Lets see how he does next year with hopefully healthy season.
But yeah, if I had to choose one it's Braden Smith.
Yeah...I think Smith is in a class of his own. I don't see any of those other guys being in the top tier of players at their respective positions...but Smith was also an early 2nd round pick.
"Best" is subjective...but I think Smith would satisfy just about any interpretation.
-
23 hours ago, WarGhost21 said:
I’d say Smith or Mack. Mack is a legit top 10 RB in the league, and Smith, who was projected as a guard, is now one of the top tier RTs in the league. Gotta love Ballard, he finds value better than almost anyone!
Mack is a good RB...but I think there is about 14 or so that you can put ahead of him. Still good value for the 4th round though.
-
1 minute ago, richard pallo said:
Be careful Chris. Remember the last time you thought you had a Patriot signed and he left you holding the bag and he stayed with them. "The rivalry is back on".
Yeah I see no way this would happen. -
I disliked both...and wanted to move on very early in the process. So I think the blame is on both. Grigs was a poor talent evaluator.
I get blaming it on Grigs...but BA won 11 games when Pagano was out.
-
2 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:
Well it’s official lol.
I think this is happening...it makes a lot of sense...so I hope everyone gets on board.
-
1 hour ago, stitches said:
It's possible they go for Lawrence/Fields next year, aka "tank"... But this is in the realm of Ballard's "jury's still out on Brissett". Smoke screens and non-committal nonsense. Will believe it when I see it.
I would love if part of that tanking is letting Hunter Henry leave via FA.
-
4 hours ago, funktacious2 said:
Is it just me or does it seem kind of too far out there that a team would give up a QB and a 1st round pick to save 20mil? Which was only really made viable in this scenario when they presumably needed to make even more cap room for Rivers. All that just to have Rivers over Foles?
No...it's an absurd scenario.
-
3 hours ago, ColtJax said:
The Jags would save under 4 million in 2020 by trading him, no way do they even THINK about giving a 1st. They might for a 4th.
The Jets might try to dump Bell too, his hugh contract and 3.3 ypa might make that a much higher pick..
Correct...they still have to eat the signing bonus...which is why these trade offers a bit silly.
Trading Foles does save them a lot when you compare it to cutting him...but that's not even an option for them right now...given that the dead cap hit is significantly more than his actual cap hit in that scenario.
Really...the benefit to trading Foles would be to save a little cap space now...as well as the $12.5M dead cap hit next season. That might be worth it to trade something...but not a 1st round pick when they need cheap talent to balance out the roster.
I think...if I was Ballard...I would be all over trying to swap #9 and #13...which is the draft value of a mid 3rd round pick...but allows them to keep all of their picks now and in the future.
-
3 hours ago, Zoltan said:
I'd have to look more in-depth at the Foles contract, but I like the idea of Foles being our starter next year and help teach a rookie like Love.
Edit: Just looked at Foles contract and after 2020, there's an out for 2021 which his cap hit drops to 12.5 mil instead of about 33 mil for this coming year. I think we would be able to handle that
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/jacksonville-jaguars/nick-foles-9898/
The Colts would "only" be on the hook for base salary for this upcoming season ($15.125M) + a $5M roster bonus (due on 3/20)...if he is traded before 3/20. So $20.125M total. After that...there are no guarantees and no dead cap it...so they cut him at any point...or they can keep him for his base salaries (if they want to).
I don't hate the idea of Foles either...I think he's an upgrade to JB...and he knows the system. If they could trade JB...they would save ~$16M...and Foles would only cost $4M more in cap space than what is currently on the books. Then they could just keep him for base salary next year...which isn't unreasonable.
These scenarios where JAC gives up a 1st round pick are out there. HOU traded a future 2nd round pick...which was likely to be a mid-late 2nd round pick...and HOU got back a 4th round comp pick for the upcoming draft. So it was really a pick swap... And that trade was for Osweiler...who wasn't even rosterable. $16M in 2017 (Osweiler's gtd base salary) is pretty similar to $20M in 2019...especially when you factor in the rise in QB contracts.
Foles is not Osweiler...so JAC isn't going to have to give up an even more valuable draft pick that is not a future pick. I actually think they might not have to give up anything...but I could see a pick swap...which is something I would be very interested in...like swapping 9 for 13...which would be a huge position shift for the Colts.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, chad72 said:
That is why Polian hit a lot of early round picks, because he believed in "football players", guys that may not fly out of the gym but had high football IQ that placed them at the right spots at the right time more often than not, with good college production. Early round prospects (Day 1 and Day 2), I'd prefer "football players that have shown a potential ceiling" over "raw without much ceiling shown". QBs, however, have to be slightly treated differently since there is work that needs to be done on any QB prospect coming in, whether from the SEC or Big 10 or wherever.
Raw skill position prospects amongst WRs and RBs, save them for later rounds on Day 3 like Pierre Garcon, because some work out, and some don't.
Polian might not have picked raw players...but they were definitely guys that would fly out of the gym.
Freeney, Sanders, Hughes, Clark, Wayne, AGon, Donald Brown...even Addai...were all very athletic relative to their positions...and many exceptionally so.
-
2
-
-
My thoughts...
Not a fan...I don't want Fromm...especially with that top pick in the 2nd round. Would much rather take Eason later...but really don't want either. If you are passing on Love...you are likely punting QB early for this draft (in which case Ballard is probably thinking about how he can get premium draft capital for next year...which would require trading down much further than #18).
But I don't see how you pass on Love there...if you think there's a better than 50% chance he's your guy...draft him. I think the gap in NFL potential between Love and Fromm is an ocean.
And if you are feeling lucky and do trade back...and he's still there (after TB passes)...then you take him and thank your lucky stars for the extra pick. OR you start working feverishly to move up from #34 to get in the early 20s before you make you make that pick at #17...because he like isn't getting past NO/NE.
But I don't even understand the trade back...for what...a 3rd round pick? In this scenario they obviously aren't targeting Love (since they didn't take him)...so then they are gambling that both Kinlaw and Epenesa will still be there after three more picks...which if they are truly the prospects they are being touted as...then that's a big risk. If it doesn't work...you are left picking from a huge pool of similarly-ranked players (imo)...and all you have to show for it is pick #82 (maybe...could even be less).
I am also not even sure about Epenesa. He is an impressive player...but I think he could be more of a 3-4 DE than a 4-3 DE. Versatility doesn't always equate to impact.
I do like the WR pick. But there are a half dozen WRs I like...so I hope they are planning to draft a couple of them.
All in all...does not seem like the type of moves that would set the Colts up to compete in the near future...which given the resources they have right now...that should be the main goal of this offseason (imo)...because they likely aren't going to have these going forward.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, John Waylon said:
He’s not available yet. They’ve just announced that they won’t be re-signing him, so he will go through the free agency process. At least in theory. We can’t sign him until mid-March when the new league year begins.I didn't mean right now...I meant in comparison to weeks ago when he still might stay with LAC.
-
2 hours ago, stitches said:
This is something I had wonderd about...if they couild trade this. I already thought moving on from JB was the correct course...but hat if that roster bonus can be traded...then it's a no brainer. Of course it makes JB less attractive as a trade option for teams...but it's not like he was all that attractive to begin with. I think even at that rate...teams might throw a late round pick/swap to have a legit backup for a year. OR Ballard could throw in a late pick or pick swap.
-
7 hours ago, John Waylon said:
Peter King put a single line blurb in his column this morning in the things he thinks section. He said he thinks Rivers and us make a sound marriage.
Now, it’s not surprising that he is being let go, but at the time the article was written and published is was also not a given.
Obviously King has all kinds of great reliable sources. Did King, who has always had a bit of a flare for Rivers, know this was coming? My guess is yes. He knew well before the rest of us.
The fact that he mentioned us, and in such a low-key way makes me wonder what else he knows that we don’t. He didn’t expand on the thought, he just casually floated it as a one sentence bullet point and moved on, almost like he was leaving more to write about the idea down the road.
I dunno. At first I didn’t buy it. But now I’m starting to think it may have some legs.
I believe Dan Patrick said it as well on his radio show. I couldn't tell if he as being facetious or not...but he said he had a source tell him Rivers to Indy was going to happen when FA opened. Seems even more likely now...since Rivers is officially available now.
-
I have been saying I want to get a vet upgrade AND a top QB prospect...change up the QB room.
And Rivers on a "reasonable" two-year deal grooming one of the top QB prospects...is probably the most realistic best case scenario for this offseason.
Not only does he have the Reich/Sirianni connection...but he is also only one year removed from a legit Pro Bowl season...helping lead a top 3 offense (according to DVOA) and a 12-4 record.
He did look bad at times last year...but I am more than willing to roll the dice...especially with this OL in place.
And I would love to see him get Henry here as well...IF LAC doesn't franchise him.
-
7
-
-
On 2/8/2020 at 10:47 AM, Moosejawcolt said:
And as far as we know, none of the above mentioned had anything to do with drafting the qbs u listed.
True...and Ballard wasn’t it with KC at that time. Veach was the main catalyst.But Ballard was there for the discussions about moving on from Alex Smith...so it gives me confidence that he will do the same with JB.
-
On 2/8/2020 at 7:53 AM, Imgrandojji said:
you literally have no way of knowing this
Carr costs assets we could be using to accomplish other objectives. you can bet that Ballard will be aware of this. He won't make moves just for the sake of making moves. Which is basically what you're calling for.
Plus whatever it costs in draft assets to replace Brissett with another veteran, minus the return we get for Brissett himself, which as you note, is going to be pretty paltry for a number of reasons, including this one.
Not sold on keeping JB. Also not sold on making moves for the sake of making moves.
BTW your math is off. You're ignoring the guaranteed portion of Brissett's and Hoyer's money. Like you said, there's actually only about 11 mil of cap room in play right now, but you're ignoring the fact that guaranteed money also counts against the cap, so bringing in an expensive veteran like Carr or Rivers would result in some pretty significant dead cap until the end of this season. The only way to clear that cap is to find a buyer for Brissett. Do you see that happening?
We're kind of "pot committed" to Brissett for next year.
It's not an insurmountable issue, but it's worth thinking about.
They are not “pot committed”...JB’s a sunk cost...and his contract should not influence how the team upgrades the QB position...both in FA or the draft.
I actually think they can save $9.M of it. So for $6-7M more in cap...you could likely get a better vet.
-
On 2/7/2020 at 9:43 AM, Imgrandojji said:
You're not a good guesser.
The point of this thread is to note the win as an interesting bit of trivia that's maybe worth a bit of optimism.
Frankly, JB did not play that well in this win. He didn't play awful but it was a low scoring game that was dictated mostly by the defense.
I do love the conspiracy theory though. A+ for effort.
And for the record, Brissett is nowhere near the natural thrower Jimmy G is.
JB (as a passer) was in fact awful that game...it was his lowest passer rating of the season.
And regarding conspiracies...why did you change your name to BleedBlueShoe or whatever.
-
Who are you getting at #18 that compares to Jeudy as a prospect? 2nd round picks are great and all...but this team needs potential impact players...not more defensive project players.
-
1
-
-
I was confused and took the “Round 2”
to mean “in the 2nd round.” Thinking that, there is no way I am drafting a DT (in a pretty weak class) over the plethora of WRs that will be available.
But as far as overall need...definitely DT. I really hope Jones becomes available so they can cross that off.
-
1
-
What if Game??
in Colts Football
Posted
D) None of the above.
I don't think they go into 2020 with him as the starter...but if they did...and they improved...then let him walk. A young QB on a rookie contract is likely to be a necessity in a couple years.