Superman

It's like no one wants to come out and say it, but it's not a radical proposition to think that Nabers is better than MHJ.

This is fair. It's one thing to say that he might not fit the Colts profile, it's another thing to freak out because he's not a corner.

I've been saying this for a month. I didn't know whether we'd keep Stewart, but it doesn't really change the strength of the draft class. It's highly possible that Murphy (or Newton) is rated higher than any player at one of the positions everyone wants in the first round, and it wouldn't surprise me if the Colts drafted him. Everyone is foaming at the mouth over corner right now, and I don't think the Colts value corner like that. Also, the corners at the top of the draft aren't great fits for the Colts preferred size profile. And I don't think the Colts value WR like that, plus it's the deepest position in this draft, IMO. You've pointed out a lot of this as well. So yeah, get ready for the meltdown, 29 days and counting.

Yeah, I've never bought it. If all things are equal, I can see players preferring LA, NY, Miami, Dallas, whatever... that's fine. But if the Colts were offering top of market money to free agents, they'd sign free agents. The reason the Colts don't sign top of market free agents is because it's not how they want to spend their resources. For better or worse, whether we agree with that strategy or think it's holding the team back, that's the fundamental reason the Colts don't get free agents. Chris Ballard is notoriously conservative. Ryan Grigson's free agent approach is somewhat exaggerated, IMO; but he didn't seem to have trouble getting the free agents he wanted. Bill Polian hated free agency.

The Texans have one good season and all of a sudden they're a top five scouting department...

To play devil's advocate, him saying that after the fact doesn't necessarily mean it was a major part of his decision making process. It's not hard to believe, though.

It makes sense for 2023, coming off a year of significant instability (and multiple years of QB changes). New HC, and knowing you want to draft a QB, just leave the defensive staff alone for now, especially since the HC is already familiar with him. I think it makes less sense for this offseason.

I thought Holder said it last week, but I could be confused. It does seem like multiple issues are being conflated -- whether Hunter wanted to play in Texas, or turned down "more money" from other teams, or was attracted to no state tax... And maybe someone sprinkled some opinion on a valid report, and now it's become accepted as fact. To me, it seemed like the 'he wanted to play in Texas' part was reported by someone credible, but maybe not. I don't think it's something that people on this site made up, though. I don't think this is anything like the Destin/Sneed situation, or the response to it. That was, IMO, crazy. We agree on the more money / less money reporting, without proper context it makes sense to withhold judgment on what that actually means. One thing on the state tax: Robert Kraft said the Patriots tried to get Calvin Ridley, and offered to make up the difference in state income tax on the contract. He signed with the Titans, partly because his girlfriend wanted to be in the South. He's getting $23m/year. Massachusetts state tax is 5% flat (per Forbes), which is about $1.1m. Divide that in half (the tax is only owed on home games), and you get about $550,000, per year. So the Patriots were presumably willing to offer four years, $95m, instead of the four years, $92m that the Titans offered. To me, it signals that there's a willingness from teams with higher state tax to make up the difference. It also makes me think it's not as big of a factor as some people think.

I'm not necessarily co-signing all of this, but I do find it hard to believe that Ballard was offering Hunter better than the $24m/year that he got from the Texans. The guaranteed money seems like it's more doable, to be honest. It's a two year deal for a highly esteemed free agent. If you do a four year deal for the same player, you're effectively guaranteeing the first two years, so I don't know if there's really a difference. The Texans were likely willing to go higher on the yearly average because they'll use cap tricks like backloaded structure and void years to mitigate the Year 1 cap hit, and the Colts won't. Anyway, multiple things can be true in this situation. Hunter might have preferred to play in Texas, the Colts might have been offering more overall money, the Texans might have been offering the highest yearly average... None of the reporting is necessarily contradictory, but we're also not getting full details.

My interest in Worthy is limited to late third round, and beyond. Not my kind of receiver. I'll probably watch more of AD. I started off not liking him very much, then watched more and became a fan. I also think his QB is awful, but that doesn't explain why Worthy would have a high YPRR with the same QB. I thought I just saw that he was high on a contested catch list, though; I'll try to find it.

I don't know that everyone is forming their own narrative. It was reported that Hunter wanted to be in Texas.

It was a hypothetical. My point was that “more money” needs context.

"More money" could mean three years, $60m. I honestly doubt Ballard was offering better than $25m/year.

What metrics are those? Honest question because I'm curious, not trying to make a point. The 1.8% catch rate looks good...

I don't have a lot of disagreement with this, maybe a player here or there. But yeah, the idea that we have 40-ish players who should be on the final roster makes sense. I might not call them all "locks," but that's semantics. And there are probably 3-4 that we think will make up but wind up on the chopping block, plus another 3-4 who wind up in IR or PUP. So there are some roster spots available.

I thought it would be more. My projection was four years, $84m. I think his market is pretty clear, and it's a big part of why I never expected the Colts to make the move in the first place. I mean, do you like AD Mitchell? If the Colts traded down and came away with him later in the first, what's the problem?

I don't watch XFL, besides a few random times when I've seen a couple minutes of it. I had this backward. I didn't realize the blocking and coverage units were already downfield, within 20 yards of where the return starts. I thought they were still lined up close to where the kicker is. This is going to be interesting.

Realizing some of the potential value of the surveys:

Looks like it.

N'Keal Harry 2.0. Wild talk.

Thanks for posting. One of the first names I think about when thinking of ball skills is Keon Coleman, probably just from a couple of highlights, and he's the worst on this list. I feel like he's a third round guy.

Mitchell is more AJ Brown, Thomas is more CeeDee Lamb. I like them both. Not worried about Mitchell's ball skills on a fundamental level, but I do wonder why he developed that habit in the first place. It's not just in traffic over the middle, he does it when it's not necessary, like it's instinctive, and I don't like that. But he has the obvious ability to catch with his hands.

I'm Thomas over Mitchell. His breakaway speed is mesmerizing, and Mitchell's habit of body catching is a slight downgrade for me (not huge, Mitchell's hands are fine, and he uses his catch radius often). But I wouldn't complain about a trade back that yields Mitchell later in the first.

What did you expect his contract to look like?

Strong disagree. DT: Buckner, Stewart, Davis DE: Paye, Dayo, Lewis, Ebukam Those seven are the only DL that I would say are definitely going to be on the roster on opening day. Paye and Dayo are going into their contract year. If you don't see how there's room for more DL -- particularly a potential game wrecking pass rusher -- then I don't know what to tell you.