Colts select montori Hughes -- traded 2014 4th rounder

[Frank S.]

with all these huge guys were getting i almost always hear double teamed well....you can only double team so many guys before you have one charging you down  also theres pundits and fans that arn't excited about this draft but we drafted alot of skilled players last yr, linemen isnt really a glamours role but deff a very important part of the puzzle once all the pieces are set in place yaw can step back look and see the monster we created

[4thjames]

He is huge strong guy. Started at TENN then has issues and had to move to Tenn Martin. Explosive upper body doesn't get moved and has a great interior spin move so he can get some qb pressure. If he keeps his head on straight he will be a steal

[NewColtsFan]

Oh mercy, then I really think you're crazy. ;)

 

No way would I think there's more value in giving up all those rather than next year's 4th. Nope. I don't care what the point chart says.

 

Look....   not only are you one of the most logical posters here,  you're often fact based.

 

So, the facts are a 4 has a higher chance of turning into something than a 5.

 

And certainly much higher than a 6 and especially a 7.

 

In short,  i'd rather take the chance on the 24th pick in the 4th round,  than I would the 24th pick in rounds 5/6/6/7 over a two year span.

 

I want to hit in the sweet spot of a draft....   not typically where the lesser players are....

[dw49]

I'm the poster who noted Grigson's love for this draft in the middle rounds.

 

I'm the poster who said we'd trade back into the 5th round.

 

I'm the poster who proposed a deal to get us into the middle of the 5th round.

 

I'd always prefer giving up the lower picks than a future higher pick.    So, I would've given up a 6 & 7 this year plus our 5 and 6 next year,  before I'd give up the 4 next year.

 

The odds are, the 4 has a much higher chance of being an impact player than the lower picks I'm willing to trade....

 

 

 

Sounds like you actually think they should have called you and checked with you before making this trade. I've seen some pretty silly rants before , but this one ranks right up there. Maybe Cleveland didn't want all those 6th and 7th rounders ?

[NewColtsFan]

Sounds like you actually think they should have called you and checked with you before making this trade. I've seen some pretty silly rants before , but this one ranks right up there. Maybe Cleveland didn't want all those 6th and 7th rounders ?

 

 

Since there are few posters here with greater respect for Grigson and his staff,  I'll ignore your cheap shot and stupidity.

 

I was simply responding to your post to me which stated what I already know.   I was simply trying to explain my position.

 

I'm stunned at the number of people who ignore what I consider to be obvious....

 

That a 4th round pick is far more valuable than 5's and 6's and 7's....    I didn't think that was a hard concept to grasp.

 

Apparently,  I was wrong.

 

I've also stated in post after post,  that no one will be happier than me if I'm wrong and Hughes turns into a very good player.

 

I just think there was a different way to go about getting into the 5th round.    That's all.......

[RomanianColtsFan]

I am really impressed by this guy after watching the videos. He is penetrating, demanding double teams. I wish the Colts had him in the past at 3 tech.

[CjMcGirt23]

Yeah, watch the tape on him, he has a high motor. Always is commanding double teams and ,when one on one, he dominates. The only person who did pretty well against him at the Senior Bowl when one on one.....Hugh Thornton. I beleive Pagano will groom him for the Ngata role

[dw49]

Since there are few posters here with greater respect for Grigson and his staff,  I'll ignore your cheap shot and stupidity.

 

I was simply responding to your post to me which stated what I already know.   I was simply trying to explain my position.

 

I'm stunned at the number of people who ignore what I consider to be obvious....

 

That a 4th round pick is far more valuable than 5's and 6's and 7's....    I didn't think that was a hard concept to grasp.

 

Apparently,  I was wrong.

 

I've also stated in post after post,  that no one will be happier than me if I'm wrong and Hughes turns into a very good player.

 

I just think there was a different way to go about getting into the 5th round.    That's all.......

 

 

 

No one said that next year's 4th is not worth more than that pie of poop you suggested . LOL saying that I can't grasp that. Find something that backs that ridiculous statement up please.  The stupidity of this lies in the fact that you are saying Grigson should have done the trade the way you suggest. Ever occur to you that he wanted the player and couldn't send the package you suggest ? Really you are being totally silly.

[HtownColt]

Since there are few posters here with greater respect for Grigson and his staff, I'll ignore your cheap shot and stupidity.

I was simply responding to your post to me which stated what I already know. I was simply trying to explain my position.

I'm stunned at the number of people who ignore what I consider to be obvious....

That a 4th round pick is far more valuable than 5's and 6's and 7's.... I didn't think that was a hard concept to grasp.

Apparently, I was wrong.

I've also stated in post after post, that no one will be happier than me if I'm wrong and Hughes turns into a very good player.

I just think there was a different way to go about getting into the 5th round. That's all.......

Polian did the samething, traded a future 4th to get back in the 5th to select this guy out of Alabama A&M named Robert Mathis

[krunk]

This is a massive man. I'm cool with this pick, but I had in my mind Brandon Williams who got taken by the Ravens. I'll take this guy just the same. It's likely he can do some of the same things Williams has potential to do. The only pick of ours that I'm scratching my head on is the Khaled Homes pick.

[notlucktyballard]

with all these slow huge guys were getting i could see us rushing the QB but i can allready see him getting away Russel and Kaepernik for ex that reserve from the army looks pretty fast but he wont be starting

I have no idea what you are saying. 

[dw49]

This is a massive man. I'm cool with this pick, but I had in my mind Brandon Williams who got taken by the Ravens. I'll take this guy just the same. It's likely he can do some of the same things Williams has potential to do. The only pick of ours that I'm scratching my head on is the Khaled Homes pick.

 

 

 

Played on a bad ankle all season. S Cal was very thin due to NCAA stripping scholarships. The guy gutted it out and played hurt.

[Kyle]

don't be misled...we've got our fare share of Debbie Downers but the guys here who know, are loving this draft too. ;) Let the rest keep fainting off of their couches.

CHEERS TO THAT ONE BROTHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[NewColtsFan]

Polian did the samething, traded a future 4th to get back in the 5th to select this guy out of Alabama A&M named Robert Mathis

 

 

I'm well aware that trading a future 4 for a current 5 is how it's normally done.    Honestly,  I get that.

 

I just don't like it for two reasons.    

 

I think there was another way to do it, that I prefer (but clearly no else does)

 

And I question doing it on a Boom or Bust player with very questionable character issues....

[Hans Moleman]

Played on a bad ankle all season. S Cal was very thin due to NCAA stripping scholarships. The guy gutted it out and played hurt.

 

The Holmes pick is growing on me for that reason. He actually was pretty good as a junior, so there's hope he gets back to and beyond that level. 

 

As for the Hughes pick, I love it. The kid's the exact kind of linemen I was looking for that offers size, explosion, and versatility, and we got him at a bargain price. This draft was about solidifying the trenches, and so far, I'm psyched with what we've wound up with.

[krunk]

Played on a bad ankle all season. S Cal was very thin due to NCAA stripping scholarships. The guy gutted it out and played hurt.

We have Shipley and Satele. I didn't see it as a huge need, but I assume it can't hurt. I'm wondering if Satele will stay around or will he be shown the door? I don't think they will get rid of Shipley.

[NewColtsFan]

No one said that next year's 4th is not worth more than that pie of poop you suggested . LOL saying that I can't grasp that. Find something that backs that ridiculous statement up please.  The stupidity of this lies in the fact that you are saying Grigson should have done the trade the way you suggest. Ever occur to you that he wanted the player and couldn't send the package you suggest ? Really you are being totally silly.

 

 

It absolutely has occurred to me that Grigson could have offered that and been rejected.    But, without knowing,  I don't think he did.    Grigson loves his picks and is confident he'll find talent in lower rounds.   Hey, it's part of what I love about him.

 

I was fine with him trading this year's 5 as part of the TY Hilton deal.

 

But I think it's dangerous to trade a future 4 for a Boom or Bust type player.   Clearly the kid has talent, and yet he had trouble showing it for 4 years.    He had trouble at Tennessee and got kicked out of school.   Do you know how hard it is to be a talented kid in an SEC football factory and get kicked out?!?   Tyrann Mathieu failed more than 10 drug tests before he got kicked out.

 

Then, Hughes goes to Tennessee-Martin and doesn't dominate there either.   I've seen reports wondering how much football is important to him or not?     I don't like trading 4th round picks for players like that.

 

Those are my reasons.   Hey, I've got zero support here for my view -- that's not lost on me.   I'm only responding because people here who I respect are asking.    I'm not trying to spam my view all over the place.

 

I still love Grigson.   And I'm hopeful that I'm flat-out wrong.   I'd love to eat crow on this.   Seriously.   I just hope I do.....

[Kyle]

I'm well aware that trading a future 4 for a current 5 is how it's normally done.    Honestly,  I get that.

 

I just don't like it for two reasons.    

 

I think there was another way to do it, that I prefer (but clearly no else does)

 

And I question doing it on a Boom or Bust player with very questionable character issues....

you do realize that grigson might have offered the exact trade you are proposing and was turned down.  just sayin....

 

EDIT: you answered my question in your previous post

[Malakai432]

The Holmes pick is growing on me for that reason. He actually was pretty good as a junior, so there's hope he gets back to and beyond that level.

As for the Hughes pick, I love it. The kid's the exact kind of linemen I was looking for that offers size, explosion, and versatility, and we got him at a bargain price. This draft was about solidifying the trenches, and so far, I'm psyched with what we've wound up with.

No I wanted flashy players with big names!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Or a long snapper and punter!!!!

I do like the draft thus far as well.

[Superman]

Look....   not only are you one of the most logical posters here,  you're often fact based.

 

So, the facts are a 4 has a higher chance of turning into something than a 5.

 

And certainly much higher than a 6 and especially a 7.

 

In short,  i'd rather take the chance on the 24th pick in the 4th round,  than I would the 24th pick in rounds 5/6/6/7 over a two year span.

 

I want to hit in the sweet spot of a draft....   not typically where the lesser players are....

 

To the bolded, that's obviously correct. That's why this is a trade. I'm not denying that there was value in what we gave up, otherwise we wouldn't have a trade partner. And depending on how you look at it, what we gave up might have more value in a straight across comparison than what we received. A fourth rounder is more valuable than a fifth rounder, all things being equal.

 

But it could be argued that a fifth rounder now is more valuable than a fourth rounder a year from now. I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, right? Depending on how hungry I am, I might promise you more than the value of the hamburger for the advantage of getting it now. So we added a player that the team obviously thinks can contribute now -- that goes without saying, right? You might not agree with their assessment of the player, but they obviously like him -- and gave up the possibility of adding a player that might be slightly higher rated (13-15 spots or so) next year. You give, you get.

 

As for hitting the sweet spot of the draft, again, this pick is about 13 spots lower than what we can reasonably project next year's 4th rounder to be. This pick is just as firmly in that sweet spot of the draft as next year's fourth rounder.

 

Again, I know you're not just being irrational and resistant to contrary viewpoints. But I do think your viewpoint is somewhat narrow here. Of course a 4th rounder is more valuable than a 5th rounder. The difference is that we're cashing that 4th rounder in a little earlier, and it's costing us about half a round.

[dw49]

I'm well aware that trading a future 4 for a current 5 is how it's normally done.    Honestly,  I get that.

 

I just don't like it for two reasons.    

 

I think there was another way to do it, that I prefer (but clearly no else does)

 

And I question doing it on a Boom or Bust player with very questionable character issues....

 

 

Dropping all bad banter stuff , here's one more way to look at this. If you accept the fact that Grigson was going to trade up and take Hughes , it really leaves a huge need left before camp breaks. We have only have 3 legit safeties on the roster as we speak. Without looking at available URFA are left , we really need to add DB's. If we traded the picks you suggest , it would only leave us the last pick in the 7th to address this in the draft. This is suppose to be one of the best drafts ever at the safety position , so maybe we can add a little depth there ? I realize there are the undrafted rookies , waive writes and trade options... but those option normally stink. 

 

That said , the way these drafts unfold , we probably won't even take a DB with one of the last 3 picks. Although I wouldn't be surprised if we took 3. 

 

I appreciate the fact that you came back in a civil way with your last post. I was doing the same before reading it. 

[dw49]

To the bolded, that's obviously correct. That's why this is a trade. I'm not denying that there was value in what we gave up, otherwise we wouldn't have a trade partner. And depending on how you look at it, what we gave up might have more value in a straight across comparison than what we received. A fourth rounder is more valuable than a fifth rounder, all things being equal.

 

But it could be argued that a fifth rounder now is more valuable than a fourth rounder a year from now. I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, right? Depending on how hungry I am, I might promise you more than the value of the hamburger for the advantage of getting it now. So we added a player that the team obviously thinks can contribute now -- that goes without saying, right? You might not agree with their assessment of the player, but they obviously like him -- and gave up the possibility of adding a player that might be slightly higher rated (13-15 spots or so) next year. You give, you get.

 

As for hitting the sweet spot of the draft, again, this pick is about 13 spots lower than what we can reasonably project next year's 4th rounder to be. This pick is just as firmly in that sweet spot of the draft as next year's fourth rounder.

 

Again, I know you're not just being irrational and resistant to contrary viewpoints. But I do think your viewpoint is somewhat narrow here. Of course a 4th rounder is more valuable than a 5th rounder. The difference is that we're cashing that 4th rounder in a little earlier, and it's costing us about half a round.

 

 

No doubt the "I'll pay you Tuesday " is correct and I'm sure NCF realizes that. That's why you discount the following years draft a round when making these kinds of trades. What's a little odd is that it often seems not to take into account where the team is probably drafting next year. An example would be this very trade we are looking at. A 2013 pick 5.3 for something that would probably look like a 2014 pick 4.24.

[NewColtsFan]

To the bolded, that's obviously correct. That's why this is a trade. I'm not denying that there was value in what we gave up, otherwise we wouldn't have a trade partner. And depending on how you look at it, what we gave up might have more value in a straight across comparison than what we received. A fourth rounder is more valuable than a fifth rounder, all things being equal.

 

But it could be argued that a fifth rounder now is more valuable than a fourth rounder a year from now. I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today, right? Depending on how hungry I am, I might promise you more than the value of the hamburger for the advantage of getting it now. So we added a player that the team obviously thinks can contribute now -- that goes without saying, right? You might not agree with their assessment of the player, but they obviously like him -- and gave up the possibility of adding a player that might be slightly higher rated (13-15 spots or so) next year. You give, you get.

 

As for hitting the sweet spot of the draft, again, this pick is about 13 spots lower than what we can reasonably project next year's 4th rounder to be. This pick is just as firmly in that sweet spot of the draft as next year's fourth rounder.

 

Again, I know you're not just being irrational and resistant to contrary viewpoints. But I do think your viewpoint is somewhat narrow here. Of course a 4th rounder is more valuable than a 5th rounder. The difference is that we're cashing that 4th rounder in a little earlier, and it's costing us about half a round.

 

As usual, you're logical and I do appreciate that greatly!

 

My other concern is we invested this future #4 for a Boom or Bust player.   Great if the kid has figured it out and now 'gets it'...

 

Not so great, if he's not mature enough to be a professional.   Then, we have a bust, and a lost #4.

 

I'd have felt better with a more solid individual.    But again,  I suspect Grigson and company have done their homework and really, really love this kid.

 

I'm hoping and praying they're right.....    I'd be thrilled to be wrong....

[NewColtsFan]

Dropping all bad banter stuff , here's one more way to look at this. If you accept the fact that Grigson was going to trade up and take Hughes , it really leaves a huge need left before camp breaks. We have only have 3 legit safeties on the roster as we speak. Without looking at available URFA are left , we really need to add DB's. If we traded the picks you suggest , it would only leave us the last pick in the 7th to address this in the draft. This is suppose to be one of the best drafts ever at the safety position , so maybe we can add a little depth there ? I realize there are the undrafted rookies , waive writes and trade options... but those option normally stink. 

 

That said , the way these drafts unfold , we probably won't even take a DB with one of the last 3 picks. Although I wouldn't be surprised if we took 3. 

 

I appreciate the fact that you came back in a civil way with your last post. I was doing the same before reading it. 

 

No worries.    You and I don't have bad history.....

 

Honestly,  I thought we'd draft a safety or a corner when we took Holmes.

 

I thought we'd draft a RB or WR when we took Hughes.

 

So,  while I correctly predicted a trade into the 5th round,  I'm WAY OFF on who we'd take!

 

Oh well.....   much to my shock,  I picked the Colts to take Thornton.   I'm one out of 3 on our last 3 picks....   go figure....

[Superman]

As usual, you're logical and I do appreciate that greatly!

 

My other concern is we invested this future #4 for a Boom or Bust player.   Great if the kid has figured it out and now 'gets it'...

 

Not so great, if he's not mature enough to be a professional.   Then, we have a bust, and a lost #4.

 

I'd have felt better with a more solid individual.    But again,  I suspect Grigson and company have done their homework and really, really love this kid.

 

I'm hoping and praying they're right.....    I'd be thrilled to be wrong....

 

That's the other thing, I think maybe the concerns about the player are a little overblown. You're right, if he doesn't perform or if he messes up, we're out of a 4th with nothing to show for it. But I think our locker room and coaching staff really bring the goods when it comes to reclaiming guys like this. Most of his issues were academic, if I understand correctly.

[ConBro]

A trade up to get him tells me that Pagano and Grigson see his play outweigh his off the field issues. The kid has awesome size for the run-stop. Welcome to the shoe!

[Scott Pennock]

Why in there world are we spending picks on DL....we got depth(4 NT on the roster now?).....we  NEED depth at S and CB!!!!

Apparently the coaching staff does not agree with your assesment of the roster, but thanks for providing your opinion on the matter!

[dw49]

No worries.    You and I don't have bad history.....

 

Honestly,  I thought we'd draft a safety or a corner when we took Holmes.

 

I thought we'd draft a RB or WR when we took Hughes.

 

So,  while I correctly predicted a trade into the 5th round,  I'm WAY OFF on who we'd take!

 

Oh well.....   much to my shock,  I picked the Colts to take Thornton.   I'm one out of 3 on our last 3 picks....   go figure....

 

 

 

 

 

I had Eric Reid as my choice for our first round pick , so you can imagine how I feel about the fact we are in round 6 with no DB taken. This is the problem you have  when you go into a draft picking 24th and have 3 picks in the first 5 rounds. Just no ammunition to add picks other than moving down or trading future picks. 

 

But I'm not hating this draft at all and I realize we had more needs than picks. I mean who would have thought we would be this good this quickly ?

 

Sorry about making a few comments that weren't necessary.

[superrep1967]

I watched the tape on him for the life of me I don't know what Grigs saw in him. But there supposed to know more then me. He was manhandled against Northern Illinois. What's he going to do NFL then? I would definitely say he's just going to just be a body in there do the injuries that's all. 

[NewColtsFan]

I had Eric Reid as my choice for our first round pick , so you can imagine how I feel about the fact we are in round 6 with no DB taken. This is the problem you have  when you go into a draft picking 24th and have 3 picks in the first 5 rounds. Just no ammunition to add picks other than moving down or trading future picks. 

 

But I'm not hating this draft at all and I realize we had more needs than picks. I mean who would have thought we would be this good this quickly ?

 

Sorry about making a few comments that weren't necessary.

 

 

Appreciate the thought....   but no worries....    we're good!      

 

FYI....   I don't dislike Boyett or Williams as our next two picks....   I'm good with both....

[Frank S.]

I have no idea what you are saying. 

lol sorry about that...try reading it..realll..slow..this time

[HtownColt]

@KBowenColts: Pagano says that Montori Hughes moves like Ravens' All-Pro nose tackle Haloti Nagta.

@KBowenColts: Grigson on Montori Hughes: "He can move like a cat. There's just very few that have that ability (at 340 pounds)."

[Jay Kirk]

I don't mind giving up a future 4th for who could be an impact player this yr.. I really like Hughes and think he will be a great fit as a rotational 5 tech DE and plus he can play DT in our 4 man front. This kid has crazy talent, but does have issue's with lazyness. I'm sure that will be fixed right quick with Pagano. If not, he'll be gone.

I agree to a T with this assessment think your right on the mark on all counts

[Jason_]

 

 

But I think it's dangerous to trade a future 4 for a Boom or Bust type player.   Clearly the kid has talent, and yet he had trouble showing it for 4 years.    

 

here's my 2 cents....I have no problem trusting our staff taking a chance on a player who the media puts in the "tons of talent but off field issues" category.  Pagano and Grigson have both preached from day 1 about how they want to take high character guys, guys with non-stop motors, guys who have a passion for the game.  If your heart is not truly in it then they want no part of you.  I do not at all see them drafting a guy, especially trading away picks for the opportunity to draft a guy, if they have any concerns about his passion, character or whatever off the field issues.  

 

when it comes to just drafting a guy with one of their existing picks I think that Pagano, Grigson and co. would have to be at least 95-100% sold on the emotional and mental capacity of a player, so to trade away a future pick that is more valuable than the one you're receiving, I have to think they would have to be 150%+ sold on the player in question.  

[weslo1812]

Supposedly he draws double teams with no problem and handles them well to. Sounds like he can clog some holes. Just needs to keep his act together and refine his game. We have definatley gotten a lot larger on the defensive front now. Gone are the days of a bunch of 300lb and under D linemen. Excited to see how the defense does.

[JWF]

Dont know much about him. Beastly though in stature.

 

Would be nice if him, Chapman and Nevis/Francois turned into a monsterous Dline down the road.

[LockeDown]

Like Pagano said. If you can get both sides of your line working correctly, it will make the game easier for the rest of the team. That's what he is doing this draft. We could have 7 new starters potentially on our oline and dline this year. There should be a domino effect on the rest of our team.

[John Dee]

I'd like to see this kid drop 20 lbs..        Then he would really be "cat" quick...   

 

Intriguing player....     

 

 

That is a huge DE. But I wouldn't mind it. Either way, glad we are beefing up the front seven. 

[HtownColt]

Pagano compares him to Ngata so he should be all over the DL wrecking havoc

[GoColts8818]

I don't think the Colts would have traded a pick unless it was for a player they wanted pretty bad even in the fifth round and if they wanted him pretty bad I think they are fairly sure that he can over come his issues and make the final roster.  I am not saying he's a lock I am just saying right now I am not overly concerned about his weight issues.