EastStreet
-
Posts
26,341 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
258
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by EastStreet
-
-
On 1/12/2023 at 11:27 AM, John Hammonds said:
I agree. I'm not in love with any of the top three, but I do believe that we must take one of them. And I don't think any of them are worth the price to trade up for. If we sit at #4, we're pretty certain to get one of them. If they go 1-2-3, then we're going to get an excellent non-QB at #4, and potentially pick up one of the lesser QB's in the 2nd round.
I'm ok with taking any of them at #4
If it's Bryce Young, then we'll work with his ability to throw with anticipation
If it's CJ Stroud, then we'll work with his athleticism and skills
If it's Will Levis, then we'll work with his arm strength and competitiveness
But I'm not ok with trading up for any of them.
Yup.
I have different worries with the 3 though.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Stephen said:
Which is why he will be the next purdy
Purdy > Stetson... in short, Purdy's profile was/is better than Bennett's. Bennett is sub 5-11, and sub 200. And arm strength is mediocre at best. Stetson is a great kid, and a great college QB who was surrounded by 5 star kids. Purdy landed in the perfect place for his skill, or lack of... SF has a sweet roster.
-
15 minutes ago, Stephen said:
Honestly i think if we get one of the top three or hooker should be able to compete in this league. I think those 4 are the best passers in this draft. If it wasnt for the injury and his age hooker would be mentioned with the top 3. After those 4 there are alot of guys like hall, ward,mckee,richardson that are hard to project. Bennett is good enough to win with imediately if he goes to the right team, but because of his size, age, and the team he was on he us over looked.
I like Hooker, but no where the polish that the top 3 have. He's a project with high ceiling. Footwork is sloppy, mechanics are raw, and is a bean pole right now. He's a dice roll that will take investment/time.
Stetson... lol... Great kid. But nobody is gong to draft with him thoughts he'll be their franchise QB, or even a starter.
-
9 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
So in your opinion is any of the top 3 worth gambling multiple picks to aquire?
Watching the Bears sites they seem to think the #1 pick is worth a kings ransom.
I mentioned earlier in the thread. I see all 3 as tier 2 guys, not tier 1 (no brainer stud, guarantee).
So definitely not worth giving up our 2024 first round pick. In short, I like our situation, and would be good with any of the 3.
The worst thing we could do, is fall in love with one, and mortgage our future.....
-
3
-
-
17 hours ago, Solid84 said:
I agree. Stay at 4, take the best available.
I'd even be fine with trading back if Ballard felt none of the top 3 QBs were significantly better than the next tier guys. I do think we need to draft a QB in the first 2 rounds.
IMO, we need a top 3 (Young, Stroud, Levis). Only entertain one of the others in the unlikely situation all 3 are taken 1-3...
The delta between the top 3 and the next 3, is pretty wide. All have good ceilings, but the 2nd group of QBs have lower floors.
-
3
-
-
18 minutes ago, Stephen said:
The thing that is appealing about Richardson is he is 6 4 238 and probably runs 4.4. I think we could win immediately with him especially if harbaugh is the coach. Him and taylor would be a nightmare to defend. Obviously his passing must improve but his running should keep the team afloat til then.
Harbaugh is not happening. But if it did, not sure Richardson is a good match for JH's scheme. IMO, JH likes mobility to an extent, but easily prioritizes passing skill. He's lacked a legit elite passer at UM, which has led to issues. He can do well without an elite passer, but he's best with a true passer.
-
18 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:
I think this is a bit of what I struggle with, especially this year when the QBs are all do different. I can't imagine a front office selling themselves on the skillset of Young for example and convincing themselves he's the future and then watching him taken and going "ah yeah, well Lewis will be fine instead".
And I don't think you dump a high QB after a single year unless they're absolutely horrendous - which then would make our process questionable - most rookies get a year or even two of "growing pains".
To me if you're willing to give up a 1st for Buckner or a 1st and 2nd for Wentz I have no issue with giving up two firsts to make sure you get a QB you really believe in rather than taking that chance. Just feel it's too passive for a team at such a crucial juncture.
I agree with some, but totally disagree with some.
Buckner was a totally known talent. Not comparable.
Wentz. We paid the price, and abandoned after one year. IMO, we looked silly, and he was not a good fit for the scheme anyway.
I agree most QBs (rook or vet) need more than 1 year in any scheme. But we see too much where guys get too much time. How many rooks are in year 2 or 3, and still working out? Not clicking? Sometimes guys click, or show improvement. Some just bust.
Regardless, I'd prefer having the option.....
-
16 minutes ago, rockywoj said:
Honestly, I hope the Texans trade with the Bears. I have tried researching the top 4 QBs and it seems like every article of evaluation I go to has them in different order. On the surface that tells no one is THAT much better than the other three. Ergo, unless the team definitively KNOWS something we do not, I strongly advocate preserving draft and player capital by staying put at the 4 slot and letting one of the top 2, 3, or 4 QBs fall to us.
Texans are interesting.
2, 12, 34, 66, 74 picks... first in draft capital.
I'd need to see who the next HC is...
Lots of needs though. Can't see them spending much to move up regardless.
-
9 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:
I am thinking the same way. While I do like Stroud I'm not sure he is the QB that makes us even with the other AFC QBs we are going up against. If we swing for the fence and hock the future and miss, it would be catastrophic.
Not too many are thinking about taking offers for our #4 pick.
What you think about that?
Same. Just no reason to swing the fence this year. If there was Manning, maybe, but not this year. I like QBs, but no guarantees. With #4, we don't need to mortgage things, and still have the same %s...
The biggest thing... or perhaps the most vital bridge to cross.... is the next HC... That will my shape my 23 QB view. I don't see Jim or Sean realistic (could be wrong) given the situation. Whoever it is, it will impact the QB choice because of the scheme. And if we go with someone like Saturday or a Defensive HC, it'll be about the OC.... Regardless, not willing to mortgage the future with QB class.
-
3
-
-
17 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:
I think it’s highly unlikely all three go before the Colts. As it stands now only one of the three teams needs a QB. So you’d have to have two teams trade out. Not impossible but also not likely. It’s even more unlikely I think because I don’t think the Bears are going to do a deal that causes them to miss out on both defensive studs in this draft. So at most I could see them going back to number five. so let’s look at that:
1. They take Anderson
2. Texans trade doesn’t hurt the Colts chances of getting a QB.
3. cardinals aren’t trading up.
4. colts pick
5. Seahawks…this is the one scenario that COULD hurt the Colts.
Youd need Seattle to trade up to number one and then another team to trade with the Cardinals to keep the Colts from getting a QB. While it’s not impossible the Seahawks could go QB if one slips to them I don’t see them going up to number one to get one either. They are in good position to get the third QB off the board or the second defensive stud or trade out with a team that wants a QB at number five. I think that’s far more likely.
Agreed.
I think Seattle will stay at #5 though.
It's my gut, could be wrong. They have great draft capital (ranked 2nd), but they also have a ton needs. They can flip their roster this year with their capital. They could stay at 5th, get a could a good QB, and still get great players too. They have 5, 20, 38, 54, 85..... Carroll is a D guy, and smart. He needs both Edge and DT. He could fill QB, DE, and DT given his capital this year. And keep Geno to start and mentor the rook QB. Seattle could be scary good in a year or two.
-
Just now, ClaytonColt said:
Yes it's an "if" but we need a plan given its a possibility? So what it is?
There's one definite QB needy team above us, two who wouldn't massively hurt themselves by a trade down and three teams behind us who who are screaming out for a solution at that position. The danger couldn't be aligning any more clearly.
And I don't disagree with your tier theory in general but if you don't believe in the QB why are we picking them at #4 anyway? If you don't love them don't pick them, if you do love them make sure you get them.
There's no point falling in love with Stroud (for example) through the process and then watching the Raiders, Falcons or Panthers jumped into 3rd and take them and then shugging our shoulders and saying "ah well, at least we've got our #1 pick next year eh?"
I'm not a believer in "love" when it comes to players. Maybe for Tier 1 QBs, but not when multiple T2 guys are there. So while Stroud is my fav, not in love. I'd be happy with Levis. And even though I'd be worried about Young's height, I'd be OK with him if our new HC wanted him (and has the scheme that fits). I'd give any of the 3 a chance.
Let's say we stay at #4, we take the best available QB... And the QB bombs... What happens... We'll likely have a high draft pick next year, and can go after another QB... I'd be OK with rolling the dice two years back to back..... If you give up a 2024 1R (for a 23 pick), if you bust, you can't even roll the dice again...
I'm good with playing the probability. Let other teams mortgage their futures. Hope Texans go Young, but it will depend on new HC IMO. Our new HC will impact things too.
-
5
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Dobbinblitz said:
Yep, that is about where I am at. There is just not a clear cut QB head and shoulders above everyone.
Yup. Started watching film, and digging. Just no need to be desperate.
We're in a good place.
-
40 minutes ago, ClaytonColt said:
And if all 3 go before us? Or Lewis and Stroud go one and two.....what then? That's the issue with being passive.
If we feel like our guy is there for the next 10 years then no point being cute about it.
That's a huge "if", and unlikely. The "pros" can't even agree who is #1, #2, #3, and #4... And we have teams in front of us that have big needs at DL (edge and 3T), and DL are rated above most QBs.
To be specific.... I see QBs as:
- Tier 1 (no-brainer stud) - zero in this draft
-
Tier 2 (high ceiling, good chance to be successful, at worst good floor, and perhaps scheme dependent)
-
Young (most have him the #1)
- Pros - good technique, good stats, good athletic profile (except height)
- Cons/risks - surrounded by 5 stars, height (sub 6ft), likely scheme dependent
-
Levis (most have #2 or #3)
- Pros - good technique, laser arm, successful under 2 schemes/OCs, successful with mediocre talent around him
- Cons/risks - inconsistent play vs elite teams (understandable) like Bama teams with elite rosters.
-
Stroud (a few have him #1, but most have him #2, and few have #3)
- Pros - best stats of all QBs, hard working kid, good technique, consistent, etc. Probably best overall athletic profile.
- Cons/risk - surrounded by 5 stars, and in OSU scheme.
-
Young (most have him the #1)
- Tier 3 (high ceiling, but lower floor, bigger project) - Richardson, McKee, Hooker
So I would not mortgage the future on a Tier 2 guy, and certainly not a Tier 3 guy. The chances of all 3 Tier 2 guys being gone by #4 is incredibly low.
To add, just to level set draft capital.... Just to move up from #4 to #1, means giving Chicago our 2024 1st round, and probably more. That would be silly, and desperate. If it was our just 2nd round, or 3rd round, I'd be OK...
We'll see. But doubt Irsay and Ballard are desperate given the situation.
-
1
-
NFL mocks are all over the place this week.
Hope we stay at 4, and take the best QB available. Don't really want Young. Too short. I'd be happy with Stroud (my fav), or Levis, at #4. Just no need to waste draft capital to move up.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, RollerColt said:
I’m avoiding any videos of it. It was bad enough in person, but most of us had no clue how bad it was until we checked our phones…
It was scary. Wasn't too violent, just a freak accident. Sad.
Glad they called the game. Most important is they let the players let go so they can support each other and Hamlin.
The game can be played later.
-
1
-
-
Looks like they've made a decision.
Packing things up.
Prayers to him and family.
-
2
-
-
Go
Browns
Bears (unless we want to trade with them lol)
Saints
Jaqs
Texans
Raiders
and Rams....
Not sure if we should cheer for Denver or Cards lol.
-
6 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:
Lol we ended every drive with a punt... Not a problem?
Matt Ryan is the MAIN issue. There are many. But he is the main offender.
Time of possession was pretty even. I listed the specifics in the post game thread.
I'd guess a 36 pt half (D allowed), is top 10 in the history of NFL.
And doubt any of the games had similar ToP. I'd guess most, if not all, had lopsided ToP.
Like I said... Ryan was not good. But a 36 point half is the most atrocious aspect of the loss.
If you have a different opinion, great.
-
2 minutes ago, Dobbinblitz said:
Yep, thanks for those stats- Vikings absolutely needed to score quick. The Colts needed to have drives longer than 3:29 in the second half even if they did not score and to maintain field position for the defense. Defenses do not respect Ryan’s ability to stretch the field and 3rd down intermediate coverages are so tight Ryan throws behind the sticks = another punt. Seems to be the recurring theme with this offense.
MN is a quick strike team. So not shocked.
But our O went uber conservative. Mostly super short passes. When we threw intermediate and long, we did well.
I'm tired of our O scheme in general. Way too much short passing for years.
Looking forward to a new playbook/scheme, and a new QB.
-
8 minutes ago, Dobbinblitz said:
It was atrocious, but Ryan,’s inability to manage the offense and sustain drives thus burning the clock had the defense on the field time and time again against a no huddle offense.
Everyone will point fingers at the defense, but the Colts scored 3 points in the second half, and handed the ball back to the Vikings Offense with little time off the clock on multiple drives.MN had one drive 3+ minutes (3:40). Indy had one drive 3+ minuts (3:29).
Both teams had 3 drives between 2 and 3 minutes.
Both teams had 2 drives between 1 and 2 minutes.
Not counting the last series, both had 2 drives sub 1 minute.
Our O went super conservative. Their O was super aggressive.
And still scored 5 TDs vs our prevent D.....
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, coming on strong said:
when your offense keeps going 3 and out the whole second half that happens . they both stunk today not having a real QB guts this team . i dont know how you can keep defending matt he is so bad . his stats on the season are worse than curtis painter
Not saying Matt is good. I'm saying he was not horrible today. He didn't cause turnovers.
Our 2nd half D was atrocious. Look at the MN series. Quick scores, after quick scores.
-
16 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:
Well the good news. There is no way Ballard and Saturday can survive a game like this. It screams a rebuild all around.
Doubt it will matter.
And doubt it will be a total rebuild.
-
11 minutes ago, coming on strong said:
under 200 yards passing under 60 percent completion percentage one touchdown one fumble that is average . you cant win with this guy he is the definition of average
Average is more than fine with a 33-0 lead...
13 minutes ago, AustinnKaine said:Ryan is absolutely to blame when you can't score. IDC what the stats say.
Our D gave up 36 in one half... not a problem? lol..
-
1 minute ago, coming on strong said:
at this point im convinced matt has dirt on saturday or irsay . how does this guy start every week with these stats
Actually, Ryan's stats aren't horrible today. No turnovers either.
Colts have 4th pick (Official Discussion Thread)
in Colts Football
Posted
I have no clue who will be the top 3 QBs when is all done. But the pros are all over the place right now.
PFF and The Draft Network for instance, have Levis has the #2 QB.
Most big boards have Young #1, but lot of chatter that he will be #2 or #3 due to height.
IMO, the combine will be big for the top 3 guys.