sheppard hughes trade

[Dustin]

He played DE at TCU. I think you're trying to say his skill set and abilities were more suited for a 34 OLB opposed to playing DE in the NFL? To which I agree. I remember Mathis talking about Hughes last year, when Pagano was getting the players up to speed in his system, and Mathis raved about how natural and good Hughes looked playing the position.

I guess you could say it was a win for Buffalo, but would he have been as good here? That we will never know. Sheppard will more than likely be gone next year or a special teamer at most. Freeman and Mcnary will be the horses inside next year, and I would keep a watchful eye on Justin Hickman, I think he might be another star in the making if he can get healthy next year and continue his transition inside because he looked very promising. The Colts could actually have 3 stud ILB's if all goes well.

Yeah my mistake. I meant his skill set was more fit for a 34 OLB. He did play DE at TCU.

[MaoBerry]

Mcnary rogers and whalen all look good. These udfa could propel us to great things.

 

 

Our UDRFA'S are looking to be stars/above average role players! I'm thrilled with them! And we added kory sheets for next year! REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT!

[MaoBerry]

The bills kicked us on that trade...almost as bad as the T-RICH failure.

[NewColtsFan]

This is not hard to figure out....

 

Bills win this trade. 

 

Colts may have gotten a solid if unspectacular player,  but giving up a guy who goes on to get 10 sacks (and counting) for the other team is a loss.....     there's always room for a player like that -- always.

 

Just sayin.....

[colts8718]

why have you only seen him a f

 

why have you only seen him a few times

Exactly he is so bad you hardly see him making play's I watch every game and I have friends who are Buffalo Bill fan's and everyone said he was terrible I guess you don't watch many games

[K-148]

Marcell Dareus: 7,5 sacks.

Mario Williams: 13,0 sacks.

Kyle Williams: 10,5 sacks.

Maybe this D-line makes Jerry a 10-sack player?

[Crunked]

Hughes was showing signs of coming into his own as a pass rusher last year, so this "break out" isn't a total shocker, but what people fail to remember when saying this was a horrible trade for the Colts is that, it was all he could do....he would consistently get pushed out of a run play like a 100 pound DB.......he is a one trick pony....in this defense the only effective way he could have ever been utilized was as a pass rush specialist......and GOD forbid on a given passing down, the opponent did a delay or draw......Sheppards play has been back-up worthy, but he misses as much as he hits.....so maybe some may argue he is situational as well....so I view it as a rub, we needed situational LB'ing more than situational pass rushing......

[dudeski]

Exactly he is so bad you hardly see him making play's I watch every game and I have friends who are Buffalo Bill fan's and everyone said he was terrible I guess you don't watch many games

i watch all the games and have seen him plenty. Maybe I just have more eyes

[Rich Cannon]

We could have used 10 extra sacks over in Indy, to go along with Robert Mathis 17.5 , would have been a lethal pass rush combo 

[husker61]

Hughes was showing signs of coming into his own as a pass rusher last year, so this "break out" isn't a total shocker, but what people fail to remember when saying this was a horrible trade for the Colts is that, it was all he could do....he would consistently get pushed out of a run play like a 100 pound DB.......he is a one trick pony....in this defense the only effective way he could have ever been utilized was as a pass rush specialist......and GOD forbid on a given passing down, the opponent did a delay or draw......Sheppards play has been back-up worthy, but he misses as much as he hits.....so maybe some may argue he is situational as well....so I view it as a rub, we needed situational LB'ing more than situational pass rushing......

 

most of the sack leaders have about the same tackle stats. would you call mathis a one trick pony? i wold much rather have a situational pass rusher than a a player that is only a back up, and not to a top linebacker. he just isn't very good. to me a situational player isn't someone that only plays when a player gets hurt.

[Dark Superman]

Werner seems to be coming along though..

[JoKeR]

Clearly the Bills came out ahead but oh well.

[BleedBlu8792]

The bills kicked us on that trade...almost as bad as the T-RICH failure.

Hughes' playing time would have been probably half if not less than he's getting at Buffalo. HE wasn't going to play ahead of Mathis and he can't play the run like Walden or even Werner can, so how did we lose so bad to Buffalo in this trade when he wasn't going to play anyways?

[Superman]

Hughes' playing time would have been probably half if not less than he's getting at Buffalo. HE wasn't going to play ahead of Mathis and he can't play the run like Walden or even Werner can, so how did we lose so bad to Buffalo in this trade when he wasn't going to play anyways?

 

Hughes would have gotten more snaps for us than Sheppard has. And with Werner being injured and Walden missing a game, Hughes would have had a few chances to really step in. He wouldn't be a starter for us, but we would have used him plenty. Even if we only used him as much as we did last year, he'd still have done more for us than Sheppard has.

 

There's no question the Bills got the better player, and there's no question they've gotten the most production. It's not a hard conclusion to reach.

[basketballsteve]

Bills won the trade. They got a very good pass rusher and we got a guy who's losing playing time to an UDFA.

Not trying to be antagonistic but would you trade McNary for Hughes? Not only is McNary playing solid and contributing, but he looks to have a very big upside for growth into a star. The more UDFA's on our team the better provided they can really play and contribute. Show me a team with several great talented UDFA's and you'll find a team that is better able to manage their salary cap issues. Please, please, please  fill my team with Jarrell Freemans, Griff Whalens, Da'rick Rogers, Josh McNarys, Darius Butlers, and so on cause that means that down the line we'll be able to keep Andrew. Life isn't fair and neither is the salary cap in football

[basketballsteve]

The Bills this year got Hughes from us and we got Sheppard and Rogers from them...... whom was the transaction winner between them and us?????

[coltsfanatic24]

Grigson made the right decision in trading Hughes because he wasn't physical or good against the run, the problem was he should have traded him for a pick instead of Sheppard.

 

I have a friend who's a Bills fan and i asked him how much of Hughes sacks are because of the scheme or Hughes is just playing at a pro bowl level. He said Hughes has played good but he doesn't start and he got most of his sacks because he's playing alongside Mario Williams, Marcel Darues, Kyle Williams, and the emergence of Kiko Alonso who also blitz. One of the top 3 most talented front 7 in the NFL. Manny Lawson is the starter, Hughes is playing the side that Mathis plays, Mario plays the side that Walden plays.

 

The Bills obviously won the trade because Sheppard isn't good at all but Hughes production won't prevent them from drafting Khalil Mack or Anthony Barr. He needed a change of scenery he wouldn't have been that productive if we kept him because our d-line isn't good.

[coltcub64]

Hughes would have gotten more snaps for us than Sheppard has. And with Werner being injured and Walden missing a game, Hughes would have had a few chances to really step in. He wouldn't be a starter for us, but we would have used him plenty. Even if we only used him as much as we did last year, he'd still have done more for us than Sheppard has.

 

There's no question the Bills got the better player, and there's no question they've gotten the most production. It's not a hard conclusion to reach.

 

 

And our run defense would have been worse.....

[Hoosiernsavga]

This question is a joke. Hughes is twice the football player Sheppard is. I may be wrong but I'm not so sure Werner will be a better football player than Hughes, time will tell.

[Superman]

And our run defense would have been worse.....

Because Sheppard has been so fantastic against the run?

How does Jerry Hughes playing his situational pass rusher role hurt the run defense?

[Gavin]

And our run defense would have been worse.....

Colts are currently ranked 28 in the league in rushing yards allowed a game and 26th in the league allowing 4.5 ypc......Doubt it would get worse

[dudeski]

Because Sheppard has been so fantastic against the run?

How does Jerry Hughes playing his situational pass rusher role hurt the run defense?

dheppard has been better than angerer. So playing sheppard probably would have helped

[Superman]

Colts are currently ranked 28 in the league in rushing yards allowed a game and 26th in the league allowing 4.5 ypc......Doubt it would get worse

Neither of those stats does a good job of analyzing run defense.

[colts8718]

i watch all the games and have seen him plenty. Maybe I just have more Then

Maybe you need more eyes you can't DISTINGUISH  between a good LB and a bad one most Colt fan's can its obvious with SHEPPARD he is awful

[Superman]

dheppard has been better than angerer. So playing sheppard probably would have helped

We didn't play Sheppard ahead of Angered anyways. That's very much irrelevant to the discussion. More of a reflection on how bad Pat was playing. McNary has been better than Sheppard.

[Gavin]

We didn't play Sheppard ahead of Angered anyways. That's very much irrelevant to the discussion. More of a reflection on how bad Pat was playing. McNary has been better than Sheppard.

Besides I think Angerers played better then some think except when Manusky expected him to play man coverage while dealing with a bad knee , Now I dont think he has played great or good enough to be retained but if it comes down to him or Sheppard Ill take Angerer if he comes back healthy.....But I think it will take well into next year before he is back to 100 percent

[Superman]

Besides I think Angerers played better then some think except when Manusky expected him to play man coverage while dealing with a bad knee , Now I dont think he has played great or good enough to be retained but if it comes down to him or Sheppard Ill take Angerer if he comes back healthy.....But I think it will take well into next year before he is back to 100 percent

 

I'm convinced Angerer is gone. We can do better than him for our front.

[dudeski]

I'm convinced Angerer is gone. We can do better than him for our front.

i hope he is gone. That dude is way overrated with colts fans

[braveheartcolt]

Hughes was terrible, and a liability. Just moving him on was a win for Indy.

[Superman]

Hughes was terrible, and a liability. Just moving him on was a win for Indy.

 

That's silliness, born out of contempt for Hughes more than real analysis. The Colts have struggled to generate a consistent pass rush all season, and have struggled with substandard ILB play. Hughes could have helped with one of those; Sheppard helps with neither.

[jameszeigler834]

Ya and hughes gos to bills who also now run 3-4 and has like 10 sacks I think if they gave him one more year he could have been good. but oh-well.

[esmort]

The Bills this year got Hughes from us and we got Sheppard and Rogers from them...... whom was the transaction winner between them and us?????

 

That might be a legitimate argument if we had acquired Rogers as part of the trade instead of picking him up off the waiver wire.  Since he was not part of the trade you can't try to dress up the horrible Sheppard trade by using Rogers.

[braveheartcolt]

That's silliness, born out of contempt for Hughes more than real analysis. The Colts have struggled to generate a consistent pass rush all season, and have struggled with substandard ILB play. Hughes could have helped with one of those; Sheppard helps with neither.

I beg your pardon. I watched every game Hughes played in. He was a waste of space, and management agreed. Hypothesising due to what he has done somewhere else is silly. Because I see thing differently does not make my views any sillier than yours.  

[Superman]

I beg your pardon. I watched every game Hughes played in. He was a waste of space, and management agreed. Hypothesising due to what he has done somewhere else is silly. Because I see thing differently does not make my views any sillier than yours.  

 

Sure thing. 

 

Except it's not hypothesis based on what Hughes has done elsewhere. I'd rather have Hughes' production from last season than what little Sheppard has done this year. I can't understand anyone suggesting that Hughes was a waste of space, or that getting rid of him was good for this team. Ironically, your point of view would be more valid if the team had simply cut Hughes and let him move on.

[basketballsteve]

That might be a legitimate argument if we had acquired Rogers as part of the trade instead of picking him up off the waiver wire.  Since he was not part of the trade you can't try to dress up the horrible Sheppard trade by using Rogers.

It's not an argument.

 

If you read carefully I've taken no position on how "good" or "bad" the trade is. What I will take a position on is trades like the Hughes trade, the Cam Johnson trade, the Cesar Rayford trade, along with the wavier wire acquisitions like Rogers, and UDFAs like McNary (who had to arrive here late yet still made the practice squad) make it's own argument that Grigson and staff have improved what was the bottom 1/3 of our team with so many good pick ups that He/They are allowed to miss on a trade without all the hand wringing from the fans on this thread. As Hillary said "What difference does it make". We have  a very good young player coming forward from the bottom of our roster at ILB in McNary (Sheppard will soon be irrelevant), that's because Grigson keeps working and churning the roster to our teams betterment, fans should be thankful for that. Have your esoteric debate about the two players and enjoy winning your argument……I apologize  for trying to bring the discussion to the larger view, clearly that's a mistake on this thread.

[Crunked]

most of the sack leaders have about the same tackle stats. would you call mathis a one trick pony? i wold much rather have a situational pass rusher than a a player that is only a back up, and not to a top linebacker. he just isn't very good. to me a situational player isn't someone that only plays when a player gets hurt.

I guess I wasn't clear about what I was saying.....let me take another stab at it....

We have Mathis as a rush linebacker, at the time one could have argued we drafted Werner to be his primary back up (hasn't exactly played out that way but still) so the need for a situational Hughes was minimal, however the need with other LB'ing positions for depth was real, and with Angerer's injuries from the year prior depth was needed just in case he and/or Freeman was injured....therefore, trading Hughes whom at best would have only been a situational guy, for someone who might actually be needed on the field in (best case scenario) situational use....in worst case scenario (injuries) more often.....made total sense......Hughes was never going to be "that" guy in this defense that was an every down end, who could also rush the passer. Is mathis the best against the run? NO is he light years better than Hughes against the run? YES Mathis on occasion gets blown off the ball in run situations, Hughes, well I cant really recall him ever making a tackle against the run that didn't include chasing the guy down from behind.....

[Superman]

I guess I wasn't clear about what I was saying.....let me take another stab at it....

We have Mathis as a rush linebacker, at the time one could have argued we drafted Werner to be his primary back up (hasn't exactly played out that way but still) so the need for a situational Hughes was minimal, however the need with other LB'ing positions for depth was real, and with Angerer's injuries from the year prior depth was needed just in case he and/or Freeman was injured....therefore, trading Hughes whom at best would have only been a situational guy, for someone who might actually be needed on the field in (best case scenario) situational use....in worst case scenario (injuries) more often.....made total sense......Hughes was never going to be "that" guy in this defense that was an every down end, who could also rush the passer. Is mathis the best against the run? NO is he light years better than Hughes against the run? YES Mathis on occasion gets blown off the ball in run situations, Hughes, well I cant really recall him ever making a tackle against the run that didn't include chasing the guy down from behind.....

 

Say we had both Sheppard and Hughes on the roster right before final cuts. Do you think it would make more sense to cut Hughes than to cut Sheppard?

[Crunked]

Say we had both Sheppard and Hughes on the roster right before final cuts. Do you think it would make more sense to cut Hughes than to cut Sheppard?

At that point in time, if I was playing GM.....and who doesn't want to be GM for a day LOL....I would look at Hughes body of work to that point, and say...here is guy who was a non factor on special teams and will be a 3rd string pass rush specialist (because of Mathis and Werner) making first round draft pick money...or here is Sheppard, he may never make a starter, but he could fill in, in a pinch. His cap # is lower which is also a plus........and maybe he can be serviceable in special teams. So I would cut Hughes, however in your scenario Superman it now brings salary cap into play....so without the specific numbers for each, I might be forced to keep Hughes in that scenario based on how bad his cap hit is for cutting him.

[Dustin]

At that point in time, if I was playing GM.....and who doesn't want to be GM for a day LOL....I would look at Hughes body of work to that point, and say...here is guy who was a non factor on special teams and will be a 3rd string pass rush specialist (because of Mathis and Werner) making first round draft pick money...or here is Sheppard, he may never make a starter, but he could fill in, in a pinch. His cap # is lower which is also a plus........and maybe he can be serviceable in special teams. So I would cut Hughes, however in your scenario Superman it now brings salary cap into play....so without the specific numbers for each, I might be forced to keep Hughes in that scenario based on how bad his cap hit is for cutting him.

 

He would start over Werner.

[Crunked]

He would start over Werner.

Dustin, that may be todays assertion....(by some) I don't think you could find a single human on this planet that was saying that at the time all of this went down.