EastStreet
-
Posts
26,341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
258
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by EastStreet
-
-
48 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:
https://www.nfl.com/prospects/darius-leonard?id=32462018-0002-5598-185a-4784aff66bfa
I'll just leave this here...
you can take this a few different ways.
1. 5.81 (Leonard's rating) players can be great. Which means a 5.81 S (who can be had in the late 3rd or 4th), will be just fine.
2. WLB value is typically higher than a S.
3. Leonard had a huge ceiling, but simply was undervalued because he went to a lesser college. He was player of the year in the MEAC.
50 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:I mean, it could be possible that Ballard has a bit different grading scale than NFL.com... lol
Nobody knows what grading scale Ballard uses lol. But we know, that it's directionally correct. If anything (and based on the above), we can say that the top 3 to 5 Ss might be over valued based on the big name school they went to. And if we're using Leonard as a point of reference, we might be better suited grabbing a guy from a smaller school in the 4th or later rounds that is also undervalued based on small school size.
-
1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:
Ballard just said on 1070 radio that they really like the safety class in this draft... So I would venture to say he might go much earlier than you would think.
It might also mean he likes the depth of the safety class, which could mean he takes one later. Just going by NFL.com's grades (and others), none are considered instant starters. Adderley is probably the best if you are looking for a pure FS. At SS, which is our need, there's not a lot of can't miss guys.
NFL.com's rating system, has the highest rated S is at 5.91. That's a "chance to become an NFL starter". There are a ton (15) of guys in that same category range (5.5-5.99). 6.0 is the start of the range for "should be a starter". Only 6ish will go in the first 3 rounds. So do you really use one of your first couple picks on a "chance to become an NFL starter" when you can get a 5.7 or 5.8 guy in the 4th.
-
NewColtsFan,
Here's some of the info I mentioned.
On PFF
https://bostonsportsmedia.com/2014/06/04/can-pro-football-focus-stats-be-blindly-trusted/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_Football_Focus
QuotePFF has been criticized by the analytics community regarding the accuracy and veracity of its ratings.[9] In contrast to the purely quantitative ratings released by sources like Football Outsiders, TeamRankings, and numberFire, PFF uses qualitative and opinion-based grading as the root of its 0-100 Player Grades -- not its advanced statistics. As such, the 0-100 Player Grades are not truly quantitative and could be seen as being prone to bias, poor sample sizing, or other issues.
On Kelly
PPF ranked 11th best center. But there's more.
Ranked top 25 out all linemen, also Colt's coaches calling him the best center in the NFL. While that's sunshine pumping, I do think he's top 5.
DeGuglielmo on Kelly:
Quote“I have NO DOUBT that he is the best center in the national football league. He is the most complete guy. Turn the tape on, find me one better---strength, athletic ability, intelligence, quickness. You have to struggle to find a flaw, at that position, with that guy. He’s exactly what you want in terms of understanding the game and being a football player. It all starts with the middle guy. If you have an elite middle guy, that changes everything. Because we have a guy like Kelly, it allows us to adapt our protections and our run game completely different than if we were just playing with a run of the mill guy. A lot of the people don’t invest in that spot because they say they’ll make a guy. Listen, I’ve been on winning teams that just made a guy and that’s okay, too because there are a lot of those guys in the league. Those guys keep the league afloat. But when you have an elite one, that changes things a little bit. He’s not just elite physically. He’s elite mentally, too, which allows me to put a lot on him in the protection world. The difference in his play now and his play last year is he’s letting that natural aggression, his physical play is really coming out. He’s always been a smart guy. He’s always been athletic. But now, he’s actually physically moving people and getting after people on the second level and getting out to people on the edges. He is everything you look for. The fact that he’s finishing players better than last year shows up on game tape.”
On Smith
Made PFF's all rookie team, and also ranked him 25th best T on the season. AC was not listed (which is why I question his 2018 rating/grade... doesn't compute when Smith is graded lower, but makes the top 25 OL list, and AC is left off).
DeGuglielmo on Smith:
Quote“We had him (at right tackle) a little bit in camp for a reason. He is a tremendous athlete. He is big. I don’t really go by the labels. People say he is mainly a guard, or he is a natural guard. I’m not buying that. He’s an offensive lineman, he is a football player. How many times do they draft a tackle to play guard? They do it all the time. I mean this guy is six foot six and a half. He played some (at right tackle in college). He played tight end, so does that qualify? The bottom line is he’s a good athlete, a good football player, smart, tough, strong. Probably one of the strongest guys on the team. I don’t know, if he had played for Michigan State he would have been a tackle and he probably would have been a first-round tackle. So it’s circumstance. He’s an offensive lineman. He’s a big, strong, hardworking guy. You can build on that. Has he had some struggles? I think everybody has struggles when they play as a rookie no matter who you are, including Quenton. He’s had his up moments, a few blemishes but those two young men are as good as you can get.”
On AC
DeGuglielmo on Castonzo
QuoteAnthony is no longer an elite guy around a bunch of guys. He’s around a bunch of elite guys. That’s a lot of relief off of him. He doesn’t have to be the guy and carry the line. He’s just one piece of a line that’s some pretty talented cats.”
There's a bunch more out there. I didn't include any on Q as there's really no debate lol. Anyway, that's why I ranked them as such.
-
17 minutes ago, stitches said:
Yes, when I said "last year" I meant 2017, when I said "this year" I meant 2018. The point is his best season so far has been without Quenton or much of anything good around him.
It's probably easier to stand out when you'r the best guy on a sub par group (2017). I hope is was the injury issue that kept him from his peak in 2018, and not simply age. I'd love to see him be 100% this year (2019) and ball out. Indy could be stellar, if not the top OL if hitting on all cylinders this year. I expect Q, Smith, and Kelly to all be improved. If AC gets back to form, and if Glow can take a step forward, things could be incredible.
-
4 minutes ago, stitches said:
Yep, his grade was in the 80s last year, which was a career year by PFF... and also by Ballard's evaluation.
In fact you can argue that the OLine continued being trash this season without him and only got its % together once he returned... this includes Quenton. The point is... the whole left side of the line(Kelly included) has been playing out of their mind once AC returned. They are developing quite a chemistry between them and they are playing well both as a unit and as individuals.
but you also said he was rated higher in 2017 than 2018????
having a career year in 2018, but rated higher in 2017 is not computing with my old brain.
and wasn't AC out in the beginning of the season?? not sure that you would expect a line with an injured starter, plus two new guys to play well regardless. and smith wasn't even starting until like week 5 or 6, and that was at RG. Then moved to RT around week 8 or 9. the OL was a work in progress the first half of the season. not sure you can say AC was thing that made them good all of sudden. kelly was banged up early too.
-
4 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
I don't understand the bold at all...
AC enjoyed his best season last year. Ballard said he thought AC was playing the best ball of his career. And that was WITHOUT Q playing next to him. He didn't become good overnight this year. He's been good for a while now....
You're confusing me. What game was Q not beside AC? Q played 100% of the LG snaps last year.
Again, not saying AC is bad. I am say though that when you put an all pro G next to you, it makes your job a ton easier.
-
Just now, NewColtsFan said:
OK.... if you're building for the future, that's a fair argument.
But if you're only interested in today, this season, then I think the rankings would be different.
Like I've said, I really like AC. And without a doubt, I want to keep him. I just don't have as much confidence in him as I do others. And that goes for short and long term. Out of the OL, I think CB would go father dollars (respectively at their position) and length on Q, Kelly, and Smith, than AC.
And let's be honest. AC is benefiting a ton from the monster standing beside him. Before Q, AC while he might have been our best OL, was not killing it IMO.
Give me some time on the links of rankings/ratings. I'll also dig up some of the criticisms of PFF. I like PFF, but they do have some big misses, and their ratings/rankings have a lot of head scratchers. I love stats and stuff, but IMO, you have to take it all from different sources, and form a composite view or average.
-
15 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
?????
You'd have Kelly and AC behind Smith? What am I not understanding?
By the way, I didn't call anyone a stud. I just explained why AC not being mentioned isn't a sign that he's not highly thought of.... it's not, because he is.
Based on age, performance, and long term stability at position, yes. If you told me I could only keep 3 OL, I'd take Nelson obviously, Smith, and Kelly. Kelly is ranked higher at position than AC and is 5 years younger. Smith is younger, has a great ceiling, and has position flexibility.
-
1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:
And he's not below 20, either......
Well, that's PFF's opinion. Keep in mind PFF gets a lot of criticism over it's "ratings". PFF mixes opinion with numbers, while other stat/ranking services use only quantitative.
But if you prefer opinion based, there are many opinion based rankings from the talking heads that do not include AC in the top 20. The purely quantitative rankings I've seen do not include AC either.
If you rely just on PFF, it's pretty fair to say confirmation bias is playing a part.
-
25 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:
They also didn't meantion Kelly or Glowinski.... and they both enjoyed their best seasons.
Just because they didn't mention AC doesn't mean he's not very good.
If you want further proof... what happened to the Colts OL once AC came back. We won 9 of 11 games with dramatically improved offensive line play. Most here don't think it's a coincidence the OL became a force when AC returned. Yes, there's plenty of credit to go around. Everyone played to, or exceeded expectations. But that includes AC as well.
Kelly was actually ranked as a top 25 guy on some lists. Haven't seen Glow on anything.
Just because they had "their" best seasons, doesn't necessarily mean they're studs. If I had to rank our guys regardless of position, and purely on performance, I'd say it's 1) Nelson, 2) Smith, with Kelly and AC tied for 3, and Glow in 5th.
-
7 minutes ago, stitches said:
Here's his end of season ranking:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/nfl/players/anthony-castonzo/6174
No.14 among all tackles(again, this includes both left and right tackles). He was ranked no. 9 the previous season.
What is interesting, is that while ranked 14, he's graded at just "above average". He didn't even make "good".
-
1
-
-
couldn't find AC ranked on PFF. not saying he isn't, but I couldn't find it (please post if you have it handy).
here's PFF's end of season unit ranking summary. AC is not mentioned, but Smith ended as the 25th rated T of the season. If AC was graded high, I think they would have mentioned him along with Smith and Nelson.
QuoteWe knew they’d be better, but I don’t think even the biggest Colts homer could have foreseen this coming. Drafting the highest-graded rookie guard though and the second-highest-graded rookie tackle will do that. Everyone and their mother predicted Quenton Nelson would be a stud, and he was as a second-team PFF All-Pro, but Braden Smith going from college guard to pro tackle was a wildcard. Fortunately, that card came up aces as Smith was PFF’s 25th-highest graded tackle on the season.
-
10 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:
As stitches put above just check the lists again. Maybe you glossed over his name because he has been top 20 almost every year. Top 10 last year. A contract can always be worked out but again if he plays like he did last year I could easily see CB resign him. I highly doubt a 5 year deal or something but a good contract. Money goes up every year based on salary cap so I’m not concerned about Solder and his contract. Obsolete to the times.
I haven't seen the PFF list, but I've seen many others. Top 10 would put you at least in Pro-Bowl alternate status, which he hasn't been.
I definitely want to re sign him. If he comes asking for Solder like dollars, I just don't think CB will pay. He'd rather go draft the year that AC's contract expires.
-
1 hour ago, akcolt said:
I know don’t feed the troll but AC isn’t a top 20 T? Then insinuating that there is reason to think Castonzo won’t be healthy. The guy had missed 3 starts since his rookie season prior to last season. He had started 97% of the regular season games(93 of 96).
I've seen many articles ranking OTs pre, and post 2018 season. AC was not listed in any of them that I saw. I'd be happy to dig up a few and post them. Again, not saying AC sucks, he's just not a T1 guy. If you're assuming their are 32 teams with 2 starting tackles, 64 starters overall, he'd grade out mid 20s or early 30s. That's not bad, just not Tier 1.
He's also going to be 31. While that's not terrible, it is a time when injuries can start impacting OL. The fact the injury was "nagging" is a bit of a concern. I expect him to be 100 to start this year, but it is something you have to watch for with an aging T.
In short, it is a concern, but nothing to panic over. I'd take a T in the late rounds regardless for depth and development. I would not take one in the first 2 rounds though.
-
6 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:
I agree. I don't believe Ballard is banking that he is going to get his safety/receiver duo that he wants this draft... but I think he knows there will be several opportunities. Too many things can happen in a draft to rely on filling certain positions, which is why I think Funchess and Geathers was somewhat of a priority. It frees up the draft completely.
Receiver/safery are obvious areas of need though and that is why I find the one year deals interesting. Hell, both those guys could play at an all-pro level this year and earn multi year contracts... i just know that isn't the realistic thought process in Ballard, who seems to have a plan for everything.
I think Geather's 1 year is a combo of 1) he knows the system, 2) we need depth, 3) we're not sure what we're doing with the first 4 picks yet, and 4) prove it type deal.
Funchess IMO is a combo of 1) experiment as he offers position flexibility (he's got TE size and can work there or as #2 or slot), 2) we're not sure of what we're doing with the first 4 picks yet, 3) he's an upgrade at this point over existing depth, 4) both Doyle and Ebron's contract expire next year, 5) prove it, 6) Doyle's injury and age, and 7) he should be at minimum a good RZ target.
Purely my opinion, but WR (along with Edge and DL) are tier 1 needs, while S is tier 2. If we get a early contributor at Edge or DL with pass rushing skill, that will make things better from a DB perspective in general. I definitely think we'll go S in the draft, but I just think it will be later rounds. The position is so devalued right now, and this class has zero can't miss guys. The delta between a 4th/5th round pick compared to a 1st/2nd at S, is much smaller than the delta at some of the other positions.
-
5 hours ago, DaColts85 said:
Where as Solder is a solid LT let me again battle this pointless rhetoric of AC is not good crap. AC is easily a top 20 LT. if you don’t see that then please watch more tape or study the position. If he plays like he did last year I see Ballard giving him an extension but not some historic one. A good short term deal to finish his career as a Colt.
I'm a fan of AC, but I'm not going to pump sunshine. He's solid, but I've never seen him on a top 10 or 20 list at position. I'm all for an extension. My point is that he's not worth the money that Nate got. And if that's what he demands, CB will let him walk. He's not going to settle though for a "short" term deal IMO.
-
10 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:
Yeah, he screwed ND...F that guy lol
I'm a huge ND homer, but honestly he should have never come to ND. I was pumped when he committed but it was pretty obvious he wasn't a good fit. His mom was so pro-ND and I think she may have probably pushed him to ND.
I moved on pretty quick when he left, and I'm happy to take him IF his head is in the right place now.
-
1
-
-
BTW, Hernandez slipped to the 4th round because he had a chronic habit with the chronic, and Urban basically kicked him off the team. Urbs wanted him gone earlier, but supposedly Tebow talked him out of it. NFL coaches knew that if Urbs wanted to throw you out, there was something really wrong. His talent/skill grades were 1st/2nd round. His flags moved him to 4th.
Simple and clear example of red flag value, but risk, in the later rounds.
-
Nate is arguably a top 10 LT in the league and played 98% of O snaps. AC isn't a top 20 T, and played around 65% of snaps last year. I'm sure he'll want a raise if he's healthy through 2019, but doubt he gets NS level pay. Regardless, I think it's silly to do it this year when we have far more pressing needs.
-
On 3/18/2019 at 10:28 AM, jskinnz said:
There is an outstanding article in today's MMQB on why some teams have been light spenders so far in free agency. They specifically focus on Dallas but the theory applies to Ballard and the Colts.
Interesting tidbits
* Weak overall FA class
* A study from one team that suggests only 30% of unrestricted free agents plays as well or better than they did the previous year.
* Big spending teams are chasing draft mistakes - Kwon Alexander getting a big deal because of the Foster fiasco
* Scheme fits - big deal. Trying to un-ring a bell in many cases
* Comp Pick formula is more of a factors
NFL channel talked about several of the same data points last week on one of their shows.
It is a very weak FA class IMO. They made a great point (similar to the 30% above) about the trend of production (last 2-3 years), and that the trend didn't substantially change in 90+% of FAs. That's why I'm not sunshine pumping on Funchess. Hope he's one of the 10%. Even if you look at Ebron's past stats, his production and stats (yards and catch rate) didn't really improve. What improved was his TD production, and that's because Indy targeted Ebron in the RZ 3x more than Detroit did. All they did was simply change when and where they targeted him. Upward trending FAs generally stay good. Topped out, or declining trends generally stay where they're at.
-
16 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:
Sorry if this has been mentioned already, as I haven't taken the time to read through very many comments on this thread, but in my eyes (which is often wrong) Ballard bringing in Funchess and Geathers back on one year deals is to build depth for whoever he is bringing in the draft. I could see a safety picked high and a 2nd or 3rd round receiver. These are low risk, high reward moves. Both of these guys could perform at a high level and make a compelling case for a multi year contract next offseason.
I'm just happy to see Clayton back for another year. He's had poor luck with injuries. He's a good dude that players obviously relate to and love (based on several twitter posts.) I hope for his best and healthiest year this fall...
one year deals can be a lot of very different things. could be stop gap to bridge a young developing player or planned draft pick, could be an experiment, could be short because of age or injury history, could be a prove you got your sheite together, could be a short term replacement for a recovering injured player, some are insurance in the case you don't what you want in the draft, some a trial for an assumed/expected need in a year or two, and some are just short term depth and insurance policies... etc..
Funchess and Clayton could be one or a combo of a few of the above.
-
If our need is SS, Adderley is definitely not our guy. Abrams is a "low" S, and struggles in coverage. Rapp is more well rounded but still nothing special. Thompson has good physical skills, but not the best instincts or FB IQ.
None are rated higher than 5.91 (NFL.com) which means "chance to become an NFL starter". In other words, none of them are no brainer locks. Like I said earlier, it's a very meh year for Ss.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:
Wilkins at 26, Omenihu at 34, I'm in heaven!
Wilkins at 26? Not happening lol.
Omenihu... like him, but not at 34. That would be a huge reach.
-
34 minutes ago, Coltsman1788 said:
Why do you say he is above average? Nothing about his stats would imply that. I think he had 3 sacks last year. Nothing too special there. Am I missing something?
he played behind Khalil Mack. 3 sacks in only 3 starts, and total 13 games. only played about 1/3 of snaps.
aside from the above suggesting quality depth, many feel he might excel in the right system IF he has gotten past his maturity issues.
-
1
-
Colts are signing Justin Houston [Merge]
in Colts Football
Posted
Love this for many reasons.
I don't think he's a rock star, but I do think he will improve our pass rush big time. He'll demand more attention which will open up lanes for other guys. He doesn't need to be a double digit sack guy to make the front 4 a lot better.
Love the money and term as well. He's a clear starter caliber guy, at a position of great need, and didn't break the bank, or break it long term.
It will be very interesting to see how the line up shakes up. It also allows us to prioritize interior DL in the draft this year. Interior is deeper than Edge.