Grigson Speaks

[HtownColt]

Grigson speaks on plan for draft:

“We’ll see how that board starts falling,” he said. “And, of course, if there’s not a player sitting there at 24 where that room is excited and we’re not high-fiving and things like that and we’re not even doing a little fist-bumping, we probably shouldn’t take that guy.

“We’re going to probably look to trading out if there’s a player there that we feel is just OK. We want players at that spot, especially in the first round, that are going to substantially help us get to our goal.”

But Grigson said recent history suggests there will be a solid player at that position. Past No. 24s include quarterback Aaron Rodgers, running back Steven Jackson and tight end Dallas Clark.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130418/SPORTS03/304180060/2013-NFL-Draft-Colts-GM-Ryan-Grigson-his-plans-24th-pick

[Tark The Shark]

Reggie Wayne was also taken late in the draft.

[Smonroe]

Grigson speaks on plan for draft:

“We’ll see how that board starts falling,” he said. “And, of course, if there’s not a player sitting there at 24 where that room is excited and we’re not high-fiving and things like that and we’re not even doing a little fist-bumping, we probably shouldn’t take that guy.

“We’re going to probably look to trading out if there’s a player there that we feel is just OK. We want players at that spot, especially in the first round, that are going to substantially help us get to our goal.”

But Grigson said recent history suggests there will be a solid player at that position. Past No. 24s include quarterback Aaron Rodgers, running back Steven Jackson and tight end Dallas Clark.http://www.indystar.com/article/20130418/SPORTS03/304180060/2013-NFL-Draft-Colts-GM-Ryan-Grigson-his-plans-24th-pick

Just like every other GM before the draft, he's saying nothing.

[HtownColt]

Just like every other GM before the draft, he's saying nothing.

yea pretty much

[Superman]

Just like every other GM before the draft, he's saying nothing.

 

 

yea pretty much

 

I think what he said is pretty significant, actually. That bit about being willing to trade down was more than we've heard from him in a while.

[NewColtsFan]

I'm going to echo Superman....

 

I think Grigson is giving the fan base a heads-up ahead of time...

 

Don't be surprised if we trade back.

 

This is just as he did for Free Agency when he said he would not chase big names.    And then, of course, fans were shocked when he didn't chase big names.

 

Grigson is sending smoke signals....    do not ignore them.

[Smonroe]

I think what he said is pretty significant, actually. That bit about being willing to trade down was more than we've heard from him in a while.

I think he just said we could do anything. Trade up, trade down, or stay there. In other words, he's not showing any cards until the draft.

[Buck Showalter]

I'm going to echo Superman....

 

I think Grigson is giving the fan base a heads-up ahead of time...

 

Don't be surprised if we trade back.

 

This is just as he did for Free Agency when he said he would not chase big names.    And then, of course, fans were shocked when he didn't chase big names.

 

Grigson is sending smoke signals....    do not ignore them.

or on the flip side if Grigson drafts someone at 24 apparently there were some high fives & fist bumps going on in the draft room

[BlueShoe]

Grigson speaks on plan for draft:

“We’ll see how that board starts falling,” he said. “And, of course, if there’s not a player sitting there at 24 where that room is excited and we’re not high-fiving and things like that and we’re not even doing a little fist-bumping, we probably shouldn’t take that guy.

“We’re going to probably look to trading out if there’s a player there that we feel is just OK. We want players at that spot, especially in the first round, that are going to substantially help us get to our goal.”

But Grigson said recent history suggests there will be a solid player at that position. Past No. 24s include quarterback Aaron Rodgers, running back Steven Jackson and tight end Dallas Clark.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130418/SPORTS03/304180060/2013-NFL-Draft-Colts-GM-Ryan-Grigson-his-plans-24th-pick

 

This means that we are not trading the pick. How can he trade back now? If he wasn't pumping his fist on a player at #24 then how can he like them any more at 30, 31, 40, and so on.

 

We are taking a player with the #24 pick.

[21isSuperman]

I like his strategy.  Don't reach for a player and trust in your board/scouts

[21isSuperman]

This means that we are not trading the pick. How can he trade back now? If he wasn't pumping his fist on a player at #24 then how can he like them any more at 30, 31, 40, and so on.

 

We are taking a player with the #24 pick.

Because the player might not be worth the salary/draft pick in the first round, but he would be of better value in the 2nd round, where you pay him less and he is less of an investment than a first round pick

[TKnight24]

Larry Warford to the in the 2nd. I'm calling it

nah I'm joking, I'm done predicting Grigson. I'm just gonna enjoy the ride

*kicks feet up*

[Superman]

I think he just said we could do anything. Trade up, trade down, or stay there. In other words, he's not showing any cards until the draft.

 

I didn't see anything about trading up. He pretty much said if he doesn't love who's there at #24, he's gonna try to trade down. He wants an impact player at #24, or more value in additional picks.

[BlueShoe]

Because the player might not be worth the salary/draft pick in the first round, but he would be of better value in the 2nd round, where you pay him less and he is less of an investment than a first round pick

 

That is not the point. The point is that how can we NOT be excited about a player at #24, but be excited about him at #30? Who cares where they are picked? If you want a player that much then you don't risk falling back and losing him. Grigson has set himself up with his statement, or revealed his true intentions. Either way, we are taking a player at #24 now.

[21isSuperman]

That is not the point. The point is that how can we NOT be excited about a player at #24, but be excited about him at #30? Who cares where they are picked? If you want a player that much then you don't risk falling back and losing him. Grigson has set himself up with his statement, or revealed his true intentions. Either way, we are taking a player at #24 now.

Maybe we don't trade down to 30.  Maybe we go lower, like to 40.  There is a big difference between taking a player at 24 and taking him at 40

[TKnight24]

That is not the point. The point is that how can we NOT be excited about a player at #24, but be excited about him at #30? Who cares where they are picked? If you want a player that much then you don't risk falling back and losing him. Grigson has set himself up with his statement, or revealed his true intentions. Either way, we are taking a player at #24 now.

"Who cares where they're picked?"

Please tell me you're not serious right now. Questions like that are why people like Blaine Gabbert get drafted in the 1st. It matters where a player is picked. You wouldn't take a K with the #1 overall. You wouldn't take Manti Teo with the #1 overall. It matters where players are picked.

[BlueShoe]

"Who cares where they're picked?"

Please tell me you're not serious right now. Questions like that are why people like Blaine Gabbert get drafted in the 1st. It matters where a player is picked. You wouldn't take a K with the #1 overall. You wouldn't take Manti Teo with the #1 overall. It matters where players are picked.

 

If a team is that high on a player then it will take him when the opportunity is there. Grigson said that if the room is not high on a pick and pumping fist then we will attempt to trade down. The player is not going to get any better at #30.

[BlueShoe]

Maybe we don't trade down to 30.  Maybe we go lower, like to 40.  There is a big difference between taking a player at 24 and taking him at 40

 

This is just my assumption, but I would bet there is not a single NFL team who would rather pick a player at #33 than at #32. Why? Because we are talking about an extra year on the players deal, and that is on a rookie pay scale.

[Dustin]

If a team is that high on a player then it will take him when the opportunity is there. Grigson said that if the room is not high on a pick and pumping fist then we will attempt to trade down. The player is not going to get any better at #30.

They'll get more draft picks if they trade back to 30 though.

[TKnight24]

If a team is that high on a player then it will take him when the opportunity is there. Grigson said that if the room is not high on a pick and pumping fist then we will attempt to trade down. The player is not going to get any better at #30.

You're misreading it. He means if the player isn't "wowing" them at #24 trade back for more picks and get morr value. You don't "reach" for a player at 24 if they're not projected to go in the first or have the skills to be a first round talent. Like my example, Blaine Gabbert does not have the talent to be a 1st round talent but he was drafted in the 1st

[BlueShoe]

They'll gwt more draft picks if they trade back to 30.

 

And that makes the player they draft better? I am not buying it. I am convinced that Grigson is locked in on a few players who he believes will be there at #24. After hearing his comments, I think if we do anything, it might actually be to trade up if our players start falling quicker than anticipated.

[Qwiz]

You're misreading it. He means if the player isn't "wowing" them at #24 trade back for more picks and get morr value. You don't "reach" for a player at 24 if they're not projected to go in the first or have the skills to be a first round talent. Like my example, Blaine Gabbert does not have the talent to be a 1st round talent but he was drafted in the 1st

Blaine Gabbert was projected as a high first round talent though.

[Dustin]

And that makes the player they draft better? I am not buying it. I am convinced that Grigson is locked in on a few players who he believes will be there at #24. After hearing his comments, I think if we do anything, it might actually be to trade up if our players start falling quicker than anticipated.

If he feels he could get the player at 30 + an extra pick than it wouldn't make sense to take him at 24.

[BlueShoe]

You're misreading it. He means if the player isn't "wowing" them at #24 trade back for more picks and get morr value. You don't "reach" for a player at 24 if they're not projected to go in the first or have the skills to be a first round talent. Like my example, Blaine Gabbert does not have the talent to be a 1st round talent but he was drafted in the 1st

 

Because I am not agreeing with you, now I am misreading it? sorry but it doesn't work that way.

 

We disagree and that is that. My "reading" stands firm - We have no intentions of trading back.

[Slick_Rick]

This means that we are not trading the pick. How can he trade back now? If he wasn't pumping his fist on a player at #24 then how can he like them any more at 30, 31, 40, and so on.

 

We are taking a player with the #24 pick.

Think of it this way, if a player is there at 24 that we would like at a later time, you trade out of that pick to still get that player, but you also are able to pick up another player or two, because you didn't reach. There are players every draft that slide. Grigs is just willing to take advantage of that.

[Buck Showalter]

I think

 

And that makes the player they draft better? I am not buying it. I am convinced that Grigson is locked in on a few players who he believes will be there at #24. After hearing his comments, I think if we do anything, it might actually be to trade up if our players start falling quicker than anticipated.

with limited picks, I think trading up is the LAST thing that will happen in this years draft , at least in round 1...

but who knows...

[Dustin]

Blaine Gabbert was projected as a high first round talent though.

Cam Newton wasn't even being called a 1st round talent. Being projeted to go in the first doesn't necessarily make you a first round talent.

[BlueShoe]

If he feels he could get the player at 30 + an extra pick than it wouldn't make sense to take him at 24.

 

If it is a player he wants then why would he risk it over a late draft pick? He wouldn't. There are no guarantees, so once you have the player you want, you have to pull the trigger.

[Qwiz]

Cam Newton wasn't even being called a 1st round talent. Being projeted to go in the first doesn't necessarily make you a first round talent.

Aside from the few who talked about his troubles at Florida, everyone else pretty much agreed that Cam was going to go somewhere in the first round, even if not 1st overall. I'm not saying Blaine was worth the first round pick but he was projected as such.

[Dustin]

If it is a player he wants then why would he risk it over a late draft pick? He wouldn't. There are no guarantees, so once you have the player you want, you have to pull the trigger.

If there's a player there he wants then sure. If there are only players he feels, "meh" about than he'll trade back.

[BlueShoe]

Think of it this way, if a player is there at 24 that we would like at a later time, you trade out of that pick to still get that player, but you also are able to pick up another player or two, because you didn't reach. There are players every draft that slide. Grigs is just willing to take advantage of that.

 

How would you know the player will be there? You don't, so you either trade up if your players are dropping off the board or you take a player you want and feel good about at #24.

[Dustin]

Aside from the few who talked about his troubles at Florida, everyone else pretty much agreed that Cam was going to go somewhere in the first round, even if not 1st overall. I'm not saying Blaine was worth the first round pick but he was projected as such.

Right but that doesn't make you a first round talent. Christian Ponder and Jake Locker weren't 1st round talents and they still got taken in the 1st round. Much like this year Geno Smith isn't a 1st round talent, but he'll be taken in the first.

[ztboiler]

That is not the point. The point is that how can we NOT be excited about a player at #24, but be excited about him at #30? Who cares where they are picked? If you want a player that much then you don't risk falling back and losing him. Grigson has set himself up with his statement, or revealed his true intentions. Either way, we are taking a player at #24 now.

Based on this logic, it would be impossible to get excited about taking a player in your 2nd, 3rd, any later regularly scheduled pick, because you didn't think they were good enough to be drafted with your 1st Rd. pick.  C'mon man!

[BlueShoe]

If there's a player there he wants then sure. If there are only players he feels, "meh" about than he'll trade back.

 

You see one thing and I see another. My take is that Grigson is not going to put himself in a position to where we are setting at #24 and our player is not there. He will move up before he moves back.

[BlueShoe]

If there's a player there he wants then sure. If there are only players he feels, "meh" about than he'll trade back.

 

And you believe he will be ok with "meh" at 30? Reading between the lines is not that hard. Grigson has his guys on the board and he will get one of them. He is not moving back to do it either, because it makes no sense to take a chance. If he feels his players are going to quickly then he might move up and secure the pick.

[Qwiz]

Right but that doesn't make you a first round talent. Christian Ponder and Jake Locker weren't 1st round talents and they still got taken in the 1st round. Much like this year Geno Smith isn't a 1st round talent, but he'll be taken in the first.

We can say that in hindsight now, but Gabbert impressed in the Big 12 and was considered a much better QB than Ponder. Locker wasn't even being rated as high as he was given his dropoff from the previous year. I do agree that sometimes teams reach for QBs in the first but back then, Blaine was indeed a "first-round talent" according to Mayock and Kiper.

[Dustin]

And you believe he will be ok with "meh" at 30? Reading between the lines is not that hard. Grigson has his guys on the board and he will get one of them. He is not moving back to do it either, because it makes no sense to take a chance. If he feels his players are going to quickly then he might move up and secure the pick.

If it's "meh" at 24 vs. "meh" at 30 + another draft pick then yeah I think he's ok with it.

[Dustin]

We can say that in hindsight now, but Gabbert impressed in the Big 12 and was considered a much better QB than Ponder. Locker wasn't even being rated as high as he was given his dropoff from the previous year. I do agree that sometimes teams reach for QBs in the first but back then, Blaine was indeed a "first-round talent" according to Mayock and Kiper.

Gabbert sucked in college He only got picked because of measurables.

[BlueShoe]

Based on this logic, it would be impossible to get excited about taking a player in your 2nd, 3rd, any later regularly scheduled pick, because you didn't think they were good enough to be drafted with your 1st Rd. pick.  C'mon man!

 

We must be fluent in different languages. You believe we would drop form #24 to a third round pick? C'mon man!

[BlueShoe]

If it's "meh" at 24 vs. "meh" at 30 + another draft pick then yeah I think he's ok with it.

 

So you think Grigson is okay at risking  a "meh" pick at #24, and the risk could be getting a "blah" pick at #30? For what? A fourth round pick.