EastStreet
-
Posts
26,341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
258
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by EastStreet
-
-
7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Chargers should be good but it always seems like when they have a good year they fall back. I do not think Mahomes will duplicate last year that is for sure so it will be interesting.
If the Chargers can remain the same on D, and up their O a bit in the draft, I think they'll be fine.
-
5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
Yeah Cowboys/Eagles are 50/50. I still think KC gets it done in the AFC West.
KC will be interesting to watch. With that D, Mahomes is going to be asked to do even more. I think teams will be much more prepared for him this year. I see a lot of sacks and INTs for him.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:
It's so early but right now if I had to choose who I like to win each division it would be:
AFC East - Pats
AFC West - KC
AFC North - Browns
AFC South - Colts
-the 2 are in bold because they did not win their division last year
NFC East - Eagles
NFC West - Rams
NFC North - Bears
NFC South - Saints
-Wentz in a prove it year gets it done, Cowboys aren't trustworthy to repeat as division champs.
I'd go Chargers in the AFC West. KC lost a lot on D, and their D was already questionable.
I might even take the under on KC. I think we'll see a slump from Mahomes. Wouldn't be shocked if his happy feet got him hurt either.
I agree on the rest. NFC East is a toss up for me. I might lean Cowboys. Eagles to me are boom or bust.
-
1
-
-
I'd take the over
I'd take the over on the Browns too.
-
I'm guessing the 3 year plan is based on achieving a healthy roster balance of rookie contracts vs others. It's also likely assumes a certain draft success rate.
If 2018 was the start, I'd say we're ahead of plan on draft success rate, and thus a bit ahead on roster balance.
Two year, three year, four year, or whatever time frame... etc.. it's all just a road map that any owner would expect of his GM. And, we never know how much the owner impacts the road map. Some owner may even provide the road map. I'm sure Irsay signed off on Grigson's game plan. Was it a bad game plan, or was it just not executed well? How much of that plan was Irsay's?
Regardless, we had a damn good year one. I don't think we'll ever see Ballard go gangbusters in FA ($ and term). Let's all hope for a stellar draft this year, and another big step forward in road map.
I'd also note that any good GM or owner, knows that sometime you need to deviate from plan from time to time based real time events/changes.
-
3
-
-
now we know why he was working on those dance moves.
-
18 hours ago, stitches said:
I've come down on Jones too, but worth pointing out that speed is not anywhere close to the most important thing for interior linemen.
I think he was a late bloomer. He's athletic (played bball) and had pretty good "game" speed. while i like others more, i can see him developing into a very solid starter if he takes S&C seriously.
-
26 minutes ago, rock8591 said:
Not a fan of Dremont Jones after the combine. Size of a DE, speed of a NT.
dropped for me too, but i still think he will be good.
-
7 minutes ago, akcolt said:
I like a lot of the players you selected. Montgomery is one of my favorite players in this draft and Brown one of my favorite small school kids. I love the Irish flavor. Barr and Boykins could be steals where they are picked. I think whete Mack goes is going to surprise you. I wish you could have found a way to get Tillery.
The problem I have is I don't see us taking 2 WR's. The draft is supposed to be one of historic proportions at DL a point of focus for CB. We only draft 1 that would really surprise me.
Tillery wasn't available :-). Montgomery will definitely be a great value. Won't likely be superstar, but will be a solid starter, or very good back up. I like Snell too, but he's less well rounded. He is definitely a power guy though.
a
I think we have plenty of good pieces on the DL. Getting Houston and guy like Lawrence is a big boost in both passing and running downs. I think you will be surprised at the shuffling that's going to happen. When the dust settles, we're going to have a top 10 front 4 IMO.
On WR, I doubt we take 2 either, but I would not be shocked in the slightest if we do. One big possession guy, and one small speedster.
Take a look at Pope (OL) when you have a chance. I'd take him in a heartbeat in the 5th or later. If he has his head on straight, he'll be as starter.
-
I'd be stoked with this. Used the most updated (today) "Draft Countdown" for big board, and "NFL Mock" for team needs.
26: R1P26 DL DEXTER LAWRENCE CLEMSON
Run stuffer but more than adequate against the pass if needed given the guys around him. If Ballard is serious about stopping the run, this guy can definitely contribute right away on early downs.
34: R2P2 S TAYLOR RAPP WASHINGTON
Was torn on this one, but think it was the right pick given available. Average in coverage but great hitter and fits.
59: R2P27 WR DEEBO SAMUEL SOUTH CAROLINA
Tough speedy fearless gamer. If he polishes, could play any WR position.
89: R3P25 RB DAVID MONTGOMERY IOWA ST.
Good vision and power. Thought about going Snell here, but DM is more well rounded. Not a speedster, but great production.
129: R4P27 CB JORDAN BROWN SOUTH DAKOTA ST.
Small school stud who is raw but good ceiling. x-WR late bloomer at but was all conference, but also 3rd team AA overall.
135: R4P33 WR MILES BOYKIN NOTRE DAME
Great combine, so might go earlier. Big body, good control, and could compete at X.
164: R5P26 G ALEX BARS NOTRE DAME
Hurt last year, but very promising. Was the best on ND's OL before injury.
199: R6P26 OT RYAN POPE SAN DIEGO ST.
Another small school stud with high ceiling. Suspended, and jumped to the NFL early. Flag?
240: R7P26 TE ALIZÉ MACK NOTRE DAME
IMO, not utilized well at ND, but has crazy ball skills. Definitely worth a shot in the 7th.
-
16 hours ago, Superman said:
I think you're just kind of glass half empty on this one. I'm talking about ideal usage. So if the Colts have figured out where Funchess excels, and where he struggles, and they play to his strengths, then we're pursuing and hopefully achieving ideal usage for him.
And that's what they did with Ebron. They didn't necessarily make him a better player, but he had a career highs in catches, yards, and more TDs in one season than he had in his entire career to that point. The situation is different, but I mentioned Ebron because it's proof of concept, with this staff and this QB. They didn't make Ebron a complete TE, they just figured out ideal usage.
Regarding the dig and drag routes, the lesser production on those routes lines up with the other stat showing that Funchess was less effective from the outside than in the slot.
The question is who plays X?
The glass isn't half full or empty, it's at 50% :-).
Like I've said, I'd love it if their plan is to use him at slot. My biggest issue with DF is I didn't see him as a legit X.
And...If that's the case though, do you really see a possession type slot getting 800+ yards?
Like you said, who plays X. That's been my biggest concern on O.
I'd assume they're not assuming Cain will be 100% able to fulfill X this year, and if that's the case, leads me back to taking a WR in the first 3 picks.
-
I love Mack, but he isn't a top 5 or top 7 guy IMO. I wasn't a fan of a guy like Bell, but Bell is a top 5 guy. Neither Mack or Wilkins have a lot of power. Mack is pretty average in all advanced stats. Can he handle more workload? IDK.
Wilkins is a good back up for Mack, but he was described as more flight than fight. Both have good wiggle and evade well but again, neither fill the need for power.
Either you increase his load and see what happens, you add a power compliment, or you get another #1. We don't necessarily need a Bell to improve our running game. I think you can increase Mack's load a little, and get power back in the mid rounds.
With our improving OL, I think Snell would be a nice compliment. Downhill guy who has power and is patient. He's definitely not a burner, but he'd probably do very well in short yardage situations.. And is the type of guy to beat up a worn down D in the second half.
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:
This is taking a weird turn. You can see both sides. If the surgery does not go well he could lose millions. The cowboys don’t want to give him a new deal until they know the surgery was a success.
on a normal labrum surgery, it's a 3-4 month recovery per Dr. Google.
i wouldn't sign him unless i know it went well. wonder how serious they doctors say it is.
-
1
-
-
hey @akcolt
just did a quick google and saw this.
QuoteGrade: B+
7. Indianapolis Colts
Key additions: DE Justin Houston, WR Devin Funchess
Key losses: WR Ryan Grant, WR Dontrelle Inman, TE Erik Swoope, WR Zach Pascal
The Colts didn’t end up with Bell or a big wide receiver prize despite their fortune to spend under the salary cap, but Chris Ballard didn’t need to do much after keeping Pierre Desir and Clayton Geathers in the secondary. Funchess can be a good, big catch radius No. 2 to T.Y. Hilton, while Houston should transition well to give Matt Eberflus needed outside punch. Indy didn't need to do much to remain a strong AFC title contender.
-
17 hours ago, akcolt said:
Pascal is under contract until 2020 This is a good place for contract questions
not really confident in overthecap. he is also shown as an ERFA on other sites like sportrac. I provided a few links earlier as well as an article.
His history, IIRC, is he signed a two year deal in 2017 with the Skins, waived quickly, picked up quickly by Titans. Was placed on waivers the next year, and we picked him up. If that's correct, then we picked him up with one year to go. Since he's an UDFA, it mean the next year would be ERFA, which would require us to tender an offer. Colts have tendered 3 ERFA's, but could not find anything on Pascal.
-
15 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
I was playing football in high school when you were born.
Look, in an earlier statement I said we would have to agree to disagree. You couldn't just leave it at that could you? Do you know the meaning of harping?
I am pretty sure the others are tired of this back and forth so I will ask once again. Can we just agree to disagree and let time show the answers?
If you look back at our back and forth, I replied to Chloe2164, not you. You're the one that felt the need to disagree, and reply to my post to Chloe. As I said earlier, I'm happy to agree to disagree. Feel free to ignore my posts on the topic.
-
5 hours ago, Superman said:
I hear everything you're saying about Funchess, and I have similar concerns.
But this analysis is incredibly enlightening to me. We have plenty of evidence that players can be misused by one staff, then used in a more ideal way by another staff. Jared Goff and Todd Gurley are good examples; I just listened to Kevin Demoff sing Robert Woods praises also. Three examples of players who are being used ideally by the Rams new staff, but were misused to varying degrees by different coaches.
One that hits closer to home is Ebron, and we witnessed that firsthand last year. Every situation is different, and it's unrealistic to suggest that just putting a guy with Luck and Reich will automatically make him a better player. But there is evidence and proof of concept here.
So with this particular analysis -- not the slot production, the specific route production -- it shows that the routes that Funchess is most successful with are the same routes that Luck throws the most, and with pretty good success. Those routes -- outs and curls -- are routes where size and body control are considerable factors; those two traits are right in Funchess' wheelhouse. They don't rely greatly on straight line speed, which is not one of Funchess' best traits. Those routes don't lend themselves to yards after catch, which is something that Funchess doesn't do well anyway.
And then the sluggo production, in a small sample size, might give Luck and Reich a new weapon that they can use effectively. The slant production is something that might improve because of Funchess' size.
This speaks to the idea that Reich and Ballard saw a guy that could be used effectively in the Colts offense. It suggests that they are going to ask Funchess to do the things at which he's shown he can excel, just like they did with Ebron. They probably won't ask him to be a downfield threat, because he's not effective in that role. Ballard talks about wanting the coaching staff to have a plan for a player, and that analysis helped me to see clearly what the plan for Funchess will likely be.
And hopefully, they have a plan for a guy who will take shorter passes -- whip, stick, flat, dig -- and then get yards after the catch. And based on the strength of the draft, I think that player can be found and acquired at some point in the middle of the draft.
Long story short, this breakdown shows me specifically that Funchess can be used in a way that will help him produce and add a new element to the offense. That's without expecting him to do something that he has never been good at.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but I'm a little less comforted by the graphic. To me, yes, there are some good connections between DF and AL, but there are also bad. The curl and out are great. The dig and drag not good. I'd love to see a larger sample size on DF. On a positive note, there are areas where Luck has struggled (for whatever reason) where DF is good at. Perhaps those numbers improve for AL with the addition of DF.
Overall, what the graphic says to me, is that DF is erratic and an incomplete WR. I do think being paired with Luck will help him though, I just don't think it's going to make him a complete WR. I know that "use" matters, but having to limit "use" is a factor in itself. The fact that his use might be highly "crafted", could mean limited snap count, or limited play calling when he is in.
On the Ebron comparison. High level, sure you can say some players improve in different situations. But Ebron really didn't improve per say. His y/r was about the same, and his catch rate actually declined a bit. What changed was where they used him. The Colts did increase his targets, and more than doubled (may have been tripled) his average RZ targets. His production didn't really improve (avgs and %), they just were maximized in the RZ. Brilliant job by the coaches, but the situation (performance) is different from Funchess.
As I said in the other replies above, if he's primarily used out of X, then I'm not optimistic. If we're using him out of the slot, I'm more optimistic. If he's in the X, I think Ds will be able blanket TY and we're limited. If he's in the slot, and we have a legit X, they I think that line up is legit on fire.
-
2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
Being what you call a #2 receiver is not all about numbers. Is the so called #2 getting enough attention to help other receivers get open? Is so called #2 making his blocking assignments? Football is a team game and all you are doing is using numbers to judge a player.
Numbers do not tell the whole story of any one player on a team.
The so called #1, #2 and so on changes from game to game depending on what the defenses do. You take out the team aspect of the game when you use numbers to judge.
Then don't talk #1 or 2. I was attempting to be specific talking X, Z, slot, because you didn't want to talk 1 and 2. Please feel free to give me your take on best use using those terms.
Again, I hope he succeeds, but I'm not ignoring past performance. At least I have given opinion on specifically how I think he can be a success in our system. Help change my mind using specifics instead of all the extraneous stuff.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
With all do respect I do not need a lesson in football 101. I have been watching football longer than you have been born.
I was translating WR2, which you specifically asked in your first sentence.
I'm 50, and have been watching a long time too.
No comment on the rest?
-
15 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:
I think you're overstating your case a bit...
You no doubt saw the graphic in this thread that said Funchess had a 100 % catch rate when in the slot.... and even his drop rate was roughly 10 percent when split out. Those are not numbers you've been quoting. So, clearly there were numbers you were not aware of that the Colts front office was. Otherwise, you're accusing the Colts front office of being intellectually dishonst. Let's not go there. I appreciate that they have to sell the decisions they've made, but those stats put out today should offer some modest level of encouragement to those who still question the signing...
I've been pretty consistent that he would be best at slot, not X or WR2. Fill free to review my posts. Additional down below...
14 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:A WR #2? Exactly what is that?
A good QB will use his weapons according to what coverage the defense he faces. It might be a WR? It might be a TE. It could also be a RB.
When Manning played you never knew who was #2. He found the open receiver and it made no difference who was #2, #3 or #99.
Same thing with Luck. If he is finding the open receiver it makes no difference what number you want to call a receiver. Our TE position could be considered #2 if he is used in that capacity.
Just because #2 is put on a receiver does mean his numbers have to be the 2nd best on the team.
Note - the first section is to ensure we are on the same page in terms of terminology.
Instead of WR1 or 2, I'll use basic football 101 terms X and Z. You can have your best WR at either X or Z (or even slot). TY is our Z typically (generally lines up off the LOS, motions). When I say WR2, In the Colt's line up, I'd be talking about the X, which typically lines up on the LOS, and opposite side of TY.
My criticism has been 1) about the value/$, and 2) his history playing both the primary/lead and secondary WR in Carolina.
On the value. We are paying TY at WR1/Z the 13th highest WR (general) salary at 13M/year. In general, you would expect to pay your top guy top 36 money. Funchess is making 10M which is the 21st highest WR (general) contract. If he makes his bonus (which I hope he does), he'll be top 15 at 13M like TY.
In terms of general production, a top 15 WR, regardless of X or Z or slot is at around 1200 yards or more. A top 20, 1000. If you want to normalize his contract because it's one year, correct it by 20%, and say it's 8M which would rank 29th. 29th in production is 800+.
I've been clear that I'll be happy if he hits 800, unhappy if not.....
Back to production, he's been both the lead and secondary WR for Carolina. He really never met the standard of primary WR, and was demoted to second when they brought in DJ Moore.
--------------------------------------------------------------
If we're in sync now (on terms, not agreement), then I'll say the following.
If he's been signed to be the primary X, then I have a lot of doubts. A typical X is a well rounded WR that work all 3 levels. He doesn't have to be "the speed guy", but he should have enough speed to challenge the CBs deep, and have good to great hands. Based on his history at both UM and Carolina, he's not been reliable at that position.
Now if we have signed him to work primarily out of the slot, then I'm all for it, and have said several times it would be his best position. If that's the case, there's several head scratching questions.
1) you'd be more or less replacing Rogers, who took a big step forward last year (improved yards by 200) and catches the ball at 73.6.
2) If he's primary slot, who's got X? Are they assuming Cain will be ready? Are they drafting?
3) It's not unheard of to pay a slot like that, but high paid slot guys are normally good to high YAC kind of guys, not necessarily possession guys. And, unless he's targeted a ton at slot, it will be pretty hard to hit 800.
-
15 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
You see, you throw out all these numbers to try to prove your point but throw my numbers out because they don't fit your narrative.
Only time will tell how Funchess fits in, till then we will just have to agree to disagree.
I'm following simple logic without twisting.
My opinion on the value of the signing is also in the majority of what folks graded (poll) and what the talking heads said.
If you'd like me to take you're assertions apart piece by piece, I can do that. I've looked at his performance at a game level and have watched him since college. His simple and advanced stats are both concerning. To say they are not is intellectually dishonest.
Again, I hope the staff uses him in a way to maximize his talents. I'm just not going to sunshine pump and act like he's a no brainer answer to our WR2 need. I'll be cheering for him regardless.
-
2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
Wow, a whole 10%?
Your narrative all along has been Funchess was a bad signing and you have been non stop harping on that narrative.
My narrative has always been he is not as bad as you make him out to be.
Then when another poster showed some positive numbers for Funchess out of the slot position you couldn't come up with numbers to dispute that.
What Moore did and didn't do has nothing to do with what Funchess did and didn't do.
You can't judge what the receivers are with a QB that was injured all season and was shut down before the season ended. Cam didn't come close to utilizing his receivers as needed.
The Panthers were 7-9 and did not make the playoffs. The team as a whole did not play well because of Cam's injuries.
10% is huge in terms of grade. recommend you go look at players catch rates to determine what is good and bad....
I actually said his best position would be slot... and i said that on more than one occasion. not sure what you are suggesting here. feel free to look back at my posts.
And I can absolutely compare what different WRs do with the same QB. it's common sense, and simple logic. To say it's not is silly and defies comparative logic.
-
3 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:
2
Hilton(3rd)
Cain(6th)
LOL. Cain hasn't had catch one in the NFL yet. I love Cain's ceiling, but you can't even start to grade him yet.
-
1
-
2
-
-
depends where you start.... both Browns (WR) were once 1st round.
i could see QBs dropping.
wouldn't be surprised at all if Fant dropped. He wasn't that high up, then rose fast after the combine. CBs have fluctuated too.
Early Vegas over/under lines: Colts line at 9.5
in Colts Football
Posted
yup. i keep waiting for Rivers to take a step back, and he never does.