EastStreet
-
Posts
26,341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
258
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by EastStreet
-
-
This is silly. We could easily end up with 2-3 starters at S, WR, and CB from the next three picks alone.
No glaring holes, but there are definitely several areas that require upgrading.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
Yeah, I can't wait to see what Ballard does with Malik Hooker. Assuming he plays well and lives up to his draft position. That should tell us how he is going to handle his guys moving forward.
Personally, I hope he rewards his guys after the 4th year and the 5th option is a non-issue, which would mean drafting in the bottom of the 1st isn't really that much better than the top of the 2nd, like what he's doing.
He's definitely going to have some decisions to make. And while the guys might be Grigson drafted, I'm sure Ballard tells them they are all his guys now. If you treat them different, you're going to have morale issues with the Grigson drafted guys that you want to keep.
I hope he rewards our guys too. It's important for morale. But I also hope he rewards performance/production. It's a tough job regardless. It's going to be a tough situation with Ebron and Doyle next year. I think Doyle will be gone unless he has a very good year this season. How he handles Funchess will be interesting if DF is in the 500 yard range.
-
10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
Yes.... all the possible hits, and all the possible misses are what makes the draft such a great event.
Back in 2012, Grigson's first draft was judged to be the 9th best draft of all-time. Everyone raved.
Then guys like Fleener and Allen under-peformed. Then Vick Ballard got hurt. Then Brazil smoked his way out of the league. And Chapman put on too much weight and was never the same after his injury in college. Suddenly, that historically great draft doesn't look nearly as great. It's basically Luck and Hilton.
And that could happen to Ballard's draft last year. What if Turay and Lewis don't become what we hope they will? What if Fountain and Wilkins don't turn into anything. What if Cain's off the field issues come back? All sorts of things COULD happen. Not saying they will.
That's why not everyone is cut-out to be a GM. It's not for the weak, the meak, or the faint of heart!
And that's exactly why I love Ballard, but not blind love level yet.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:
Not sure I agree as we have thecsame interior lineman that we had last year and they held up pretty well. Khalen Saunders is one of the guys I'm betting on to fill out the middle of our line.
well, almost all "experts" said DT is our biggest need. it was also the most voted in a few of the board poles.
it's not just my opinion.
-
15 minutes ago, LockeDown said:
So he got lucky? Very well, then why don’t you expound for everyone the probability of a new GM having one of the best drafts in NFL history? I’d like to see those numbers.
I didn't use the word luck.
Off the top of my head (I really don't follow GMs from other teams)
Ozzie Newsome hit a homerun in his first year 1996
John Schneider did awesome his first year 2010
Colbert, also in 2010, hit a homerun
-
7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
I don't agree that it's ALWAYS bad. When you have roughly 55 players who have Round 2 grades, you've got some manuevering room. And I'm sure you've seen the buzz that Ballard might just trade down from 34. Dont' know how far, and I hope it's not a lot. But if he drops say 6-8 spots and gets a high 4th round pick, I'd be OK with that. I'm sure you'll disagree. Fire away!
I already said I'd be OK with dropping a few spots...
I said it's always good to get extra picks and always bad to miss out on legit players at positions of need. Both are true.
It's the value calculation or delta between the two (when both happens in a trade) that determines what the ultimate product of the two are. If we get an extra pick and luck out by getting a good player in the reduced spot, AND we do well with the extra pick, they heck yes, the overall product is a positive. But that's assuming all of those things are positive.
If we get one guy that pans out and one that doesn't, vs the guy we could have got, the product is not so clear. If the guy we missed out on is a stud, and we get two guys that don't work out, that's a failure. We won't know until it pans out.
-
2 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
Yeah, that would be a good reason to maybe be slightly disappointed.
I also don't know how to factor in the 5th year option with Ballard.
He's only completed his 2nd full year as our GM, so we don't really know how he's going to utilize the 5th year option with his own players. He might be less inclined to use it on Grigsons' players, and more inclined to use it on his own. Or vice versa, trying to hang on to Grigsons' players for an extra year for cheap, and more willing to reward his own players with a big contract after their 4th year.
The draft calculator factors in the 5th year option value.
Players hate 5th year options lol. Read an article where most teams that are very happy with the player, extends without using the 5th year, and teams that are on the fence about a guy, use the 5th. Some very contradictory stuff on the 5th out there.
It's going to be interesting next year when we're dealing with Ebron, Doyle, AC, Sheard, Funchess, Rogers, Kelly, etc.. At least Moore is a RF.
-
9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
I don't believe Ballard made reference to specific positions, only that it looks like another good draft.
And if he's got another top-40 pick, clearly that would be helpful.
extra picks are always good, but missing out on good prospects at a position of need is always bad.
i'd move back a couple spots for extra picks, but not way back. I'd prefer to keep a pick in the 30s, and in the 40s. Moving out of those ranges will make pickings very slim if you're expecting multiple starters from this draft.
with what we have in picks, and with whats left, we could easily get 2 starters out of 3 positions of need (S, WR, CB), and maybe all three.
-
3 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:
@Irish YJ I'd like to vote on this poll, but I haven't because I don't agree with the "reasons" listed with each choice.
Someone could be Very Happy with the trade without "worshiping at the alter of Ballard".
Better be careful, that's sacrilege to some around here :-)
QuoteSomeone could be A Little Disappointed, but because they feel Ballard could have swindled an extra late-round pick out of WAS instead of the loss of the 5th-year option on a 1st round pick.
From a pure value perspective, we can't lose from a pure value calculation. It's a question of if the value is in the range of +20% or +50% (dependent on their performance next year). Sure, I'd would have loved to get over a little more, but can't complain too much. If it's closer to the 20%, I would have rather had JT or Sweat. If it's closer to +50%, I'll be OK assuming we get a good prospect next year with it.
QuoteI would say I'm Indifferent, but just because I'm reserving judgement until we see how this all plays out, not because of who I wanted or who's left.
But but but, who do you feel now :-)
-
7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
NFL Scouts are ALWAYS looking a year ahead.
Grigson said that’s, in kart why we took four OL in the 16 draft, because his scouts had hold him the 17 class looked very poor.
Turns out, they were tight. The 17 class of OL talent was called historically bad. I believe Ballard said the 20 class looked good enough to make the deal worth while.
Of course they are always looking forward. I said they will not be that deep into it.
What position did Ballard say were good in 2020 (I don't recall him saying anything)?
And what position would we be waiting for? DT isn't going to be any better than what it was this year. This year's DT and Edge class was called the best in a long time by many of your favorite experts.
We know we have current needs at DT, S, CB, and WR. Three of those 4 have great value in the second, no?
Next year (like I posted in another thread) is assumed better in QB, RB, and OT. Aside from OT (which is not as urgent as S, DT, CB, or WR), not feeling the push off to 2020.
-
9 minutes ago, Finch23 said:
Guice will be back
Good call. Forgot about that. Even more reason.
-
1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:
That comes from last nights Ballard press conference. It’s about 6:00 minutes long. Ballard was asked and said there were indeed several.
Not sure why you think Washington’s second round pick is going to be a mid-round pick? I think it’s more likely to be top-40. Who does Washington have at QB? Case Keenum, and the rookie, Haskins. I don’t see that team winning 7-8 games. They might, but don’t think it’s likely. Feels more like a 5-6 win team. That would make our pick likely top-40-ish.
If Sweat plays, they'll have one of the top DLs out there. They were top 10 last year in sacks, INTs, and forced fumbles.
Washington has a good young WR (Doctson) and good TE. They need another WR and someone to take over for AP.
Not saying they're going to be great, but I doubt they suck. Their D will keep them in games and if Haskins hits the ground running, they could surprise a lot of teams mid year and late.
-
3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:
My prediction is still in play. I said Ballard would trade back and Adderley would be the first pick he made.
Adderley is more of a FS or S/CB hybrid. Not seeing it but who knows. I think we'll go with more of a traditional SS.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, stitches said:
I'm judging him for what he does. Picked a RB no. 2 instead of Darnold, then traded away OBJ and got a Nose tackle with the 1st while shipping his all pro nose tackle for a 5th... then picked a QB that's widely considered a future backup.
What would you rather have?
-Darnold + OBJ + Josh Allen
or
-Jones + Barkley + Dexter Lawrence
?
I hate when people say "not close" for things that are obviously close, but this is not even close IMO.
Like I said earlier, I think G'man is a clown.... but, I think OBJ was cancer. I also think the NYGs have bigger holes/issues than Eli at QB. Eli was still top 10 in yards while being one of the most sacked QBs. Throwing Darnold or Jones or anyone to the wolves would not be good. I think they got Jones as they knew it would be a good transition from Manning, and I think that's smart in a lot of ways.
The only headscratcher to me is that they didn't take any OL with the next two picks, and they don't have any second rounders IIRC.
-
Just now, chad72 said:
Yep, a swing tackle with the potential to be a starter at LT or RT is what he is, definitely high on my wish list
I don't see any legit LTs left, except maybe Roemer, who is a project and head case.
Risner I think would be a good RT, solid backup for LT, good C (we already one), good RG (I'd prefer Braden move back first), and decent LG backup.
If Glow got hurt this year, I'd move Braden in, and Risner at RT. If we didn't extend Glow, grabbing him would make perfect sense. Regardless, he's a great multipurpose tool.
My only issue with any OL this year, is either they should be 1) a legit LT (non really any left), or 2) capable starter at RT, and a good backup for RG and C. He fits 2 better than Taylor IMO.
-
29 minutes ago, stitches said:Trade down again is legit option ^^^
if we do, we need to really "get over" on value.
i'm not really in the mood for more future picks lol.
i want guys this year
-
13 minutes ago, chad72 said:
Yep, that is what I meant.
I feel like Ballard and Reich will get their player they really want at 34.
Then, if a run on WRs or safeties is happening, based on what they think would be available at 46, I would not rule out improving 46 to 43 (or early 40s) with a 4th or 5th rounder thrown in. That is what I meant.
value wise,
our 46 and 129 is equal to 40
our 59 and 129 equal to a 51 or 52
our 89 and 129 equal to 80
Our 59 and 89 equal to 36
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:
What would be good compensation to slide back 4-5 spots?
here's an easy pick value calculator
-
1 minute ago, krunk said:
Yeah it's taking me a little bit to get past that one to be honest.
me too, but i'm going with the flow right now lol
-
2 minutes ago, krunk said:
I just knew Ballard was going to take Sweat but it didn't work out that way. The commentators during the draft kept insinuating that there were other issues with Sweat outside the Medicals but they would not mention what that was. I assume some character concerns maybe.
Yup.
I have a feeling he's going to kill it if he can stay healthy and keep his nose clean.
-
1
-
-
I could see a move up from 59 or 89, using one of our 4th round picks.
No way we trade away the future 2nd we just picked up. If you meant moving up from 46 (giving up the 46), then yes, but I'd think we'd try to improve 59 more.
-
1 minute ago, John Hammonds said:
I would disagree slightly on this one. With Wilkins taken at 13, Lawrence taken at 17, and Simmons gone at 19, we didn't necessarily pass on them, but rather they got scooped up before our chance. Only Tillery got taken after 26. Seems to me we would have had to trade up to get into the DT derby. I wish we could have gotten in on them, too. But that's how the cookie crumbles.
By most ratings from the "experts", JT was absolutely a 1st round guy. The guys that are left are mid tier 2 guys. I know it's their boards, and not Ballards. but the consensus drop off is overwhelming. Next best DT is a mid T2. I'd add that I would have taken Sweat over JT if the reporting is true that he was misdiagnosed.
Crumbled cookies can turn out to be good though lol. Love them in ice cream.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:
I love the trade.
Look at what is still left on the board.....tons of talent at Safety, Corner and Wide Receiver....our three "weakest links" so to speak.
There are still disruptive interior dlineman available and a few edge rushers that are skilled but not refined yet that can learn - plus we still have Lewis and Turay and Muhammad learning as well.
This draft played right into the positions that Ballard et al apparently wanted all along....
our weakest link on D is DT though. we passed on likely T1 guys.
steep drop off.
-
16 minutes ago, stitches said:
Great summary there. I would add some interesting bits here(not necessarily surprises, some are just notable things):
Great adds stitches.
Quote-Savage went higher than a lot of people thought he would go and was S1 in the draft.
A few on the board said he'd go 1st. Props to them.
Quote-Gettleman continues to show that he doesn't know what he's doing. Saying he will keep Jones on the sidelines for the next 3 years is just the cherry on the top.
I'm in the camp of letting Eli keep playing, because his numbers are good, and the team has so many holes. But I agree Gettleman is an *.
Quote-Juwaan Taylor is dropping... rumor is teams worried about a knee injury he has. IMO he was about top 10 player in the draft. If his injury is short-term issues only, IMO it's no-brainer pick for us since he will sit either way... unless he ousts Braden from RT spot.
I've never been all that high on Taylor. I like Risner better to be honest because of his flexibility. If the plan is for AC's replacement, than I'd prefer Taylor to Risner, but don't really want either as AC's replacement.
Quote-Matt MIller was right about his Jeffery Simmons to Tennessee rumor. He continues to have those nuggets he finds in every draft and slots unlikely player to team pairings perfectly.
Out of all the "experts", he had the best call so far. Better than the ESPN guys that's for sure.
QuoteWhat I want from day 2:
- I still have my WR1 on the board; only WR2(Hollywood) is gone. We have great pick of the litter scenario here. I still have most of my best safeties and CBs on the board. Again pick of the litter scenarios. We are in a great position, IMO.
AJB is my number one WR, so I'm happy too. Love the Ss and CBs too.
It could be the best D2 for the Colts ever, and that's saying a lot after last year.
Quote- I expect a weird pick today on the DLine... something like Anthony Nelson... or Ben Banogu... or Khalen Saunders ... or Trysten Hill. Just watch...
Dre'mont Jones is the only guy I like for D2 to be honest. I'd be fine with BB, KD, or TH in the 3rd though.
-
QuoteWhat will make me happy? 34-Taylor, 46-Butler, 59-Chauncey GJ, 89-Anthony Nelson
AJB, Rapp or CGJ or Thornhill as 2 out of the 3 second round picks would make me very happy.
-
1
-
What we got wrong, what now, and do you like it
in NFL Draft, Scouting, and Free Agent Talk
Posted
You're post made me question some things, and stimulated me to go look at some stats. Thanks for that :-)
based on snap counts
We used CBs 273.26 or 2.73 CBs on the field during standard downs
We used Ss 219.19 or 2.19 Ss on the field during standard downs
So seems like we're playing more 3 CB packages than 3 S packages (I think the league is trending that way in general).
Also saw an article about being in Press Cover 3 a lot where the CBs take deep L and R, FS in the middle, and SS on the strong side.
FO had a good article in general that said teams are only in Base a third or less these days, and in Nickel 50+%, and dime the rest.
Can you point me to anything that talks about % package usage specifically for the Colts?