Better Draft Based On Who Was Available

[mvbighead]

It is the biggest drawback to online forums. Unfortunately there is no way to fix it. 

 

I had an issue with a poster right before the draft, because he said there was no way we would take a certain position. I would not have had an issue had he said "I do no believe we will draft so-and-so because....". I would have enjoyed that debate. However, he insisted that he had a crystal ball and the Colts front office on speed dial. In the end he was wrong. 

 

What can you do besides try your best to ignore stupid? That is usually my game-plan anyway.

 

Yep.  It's generally been my problem with some individual's attitudes.

 

Take for instance a general assumption that we would never draft a WR in this draft because our roster has 6 of them...

 

Low and behold, a very talented prospect dropped further than we had expected he would and they took him.  To me, that lends itself to the possibility that we may trade one of ours away when the time comes.  But as far as the draft, if Moncrief is a legitimate player, it would make more sense to use a 3rd this year instead of potentially having to use a 1st or 2nd next year (and we may still have a WR need at that time).  But all in all, do you draft a player you think can be a star, or a player that fits a need.

 

Instead, we get the usual there's no way we'll ever draft a WR in this draft.  But then it happens... and it is the "wrong" choice.  Gets kind of annoying.  To me, if Grigson drafted a guy, he has a reason for it... especially in the 3rd rounds and above.  But the absolutes to me just make me laugh.  I strongly doubt the Colts would ever draft a QB in the 1st round in the next 6-8 years, but I would never say never.  They can always do that and try to produce trade value out of it.

[BlueShoe]

Yep.  It's generally been my problem with some individual's attitudes.

 

Take for instance a general assumption that we would never draft a WR in this draft because our roster has 6 of them...

 

Low and behold, a very talented prospect dropped further than we had expected he would and they took him.  To me, that lends itself to the possibility that we may trade one of ours away when the time comes.  But as far as the draft, if Moncrief is a legitimate player, it would make more sense to use a 3rd this year instead of potentially having to use a 1st or 2nd next year (and we may still have a WR need at that time).  But all in all, do you draft a player you think can be a star, or a player that fits a need.

 

Instead, we get the usual there's no way we'll ever draft a WR in this draft.  But then it happens... and it is the "wrong" choice.  Gets kind of annoying.  To me, if Grigson drafted a guy, he has a reason for it... especially in the 3rd rounds and above.  But the absolutes to me just make me laugh.  I strongly doubt the Colts would ever draft a QB in the 1st round in the next 6-8 years, but I would never say never.  They can always do that and try to produce trade value out of it.

 

I agree with everything except trading a receiver. I don't believe our lower roster receivers present enough value. That said, I could see a team that is cutting a position of need, such as a safety, and we make a swap so each team does not have to make the cuts, and play the song and dance of fighting for rights over other teams. 

 

As far as the reactions; it has been comical at least.

[Coffeedrinker]

Grigson definitely didn't pick the people I thought the Colts should but I will wait awhile until I call it a good or bad draft.  I posted a breakdown of Mewhort from a couple of games I was able to watch on youtube and Moncrief seems like a good value pick in the 3rd.  The only concern I have about the draft that both Jackson and Newsome have some character problems. If something happens one time that one thing but Newsome left OSU because he was was academically ineligible and because he wasn't good enough to move up the depth chart.  And then serves a two game suspension before his first game at Ball State.  Jackson had problems in high school and then suspended for a game in college.

 

Again these are not show stoppers and by no means do I think they shouldn't be drafted because of those incidents it's just a concern, especially when the team only had 5 draft picks and now you have to hope 40% of them have changed enough that they can make it through training camp without getting into trouble.

[mvbighead]

I agree with everything except trading a receiver. I don't believe our lower roster receivers present enough value. That said, I could see a team that is cutting a position of need, such as a safety, and we make a swap so each team does not have to make the cuts, and play the song and dance of fighting for rights over other teams. 

 

As far as the reactions; it has been comical at least.

 

Eh, that is more or less what I meant about a trade.  Whether it be body for body or whatever, but by no means is a Whalen or Brazil a reason not to draft a guy they feel has legitimate talent.

 

By and large, we need depth at CB/S, but that doesn't mean we pass up a talented player when we could just as easily sign UDFA CB/S prospects after the draft.  If Moncrief is someone they feel had better value at that draft spot, i see no reason to pass on him simply because we have Whalen and Brazil on the roster.

 

And when you look at the current situation, that's exactly what they did.  Purifoy was recently signed as an UDFA, and while he has character concerns, there is a low risk high reward scenario which is ideal in the NFL.  I really feel the same way about Jackson, who looks every bit the part of a run stuffing ILB.

[BlueShoe]

Eh, that is more or less what I meant about a trade.  Whether it be body for body or whatever, but by no means is a Whalen or Brazil a reason not to draft a guy they feel has legitimate talent.

 

By and large, we need depth at CB/S, but that doesn't mean we pass up a talented player when we could just as easily sign UDFA CB/S prospects after the draft.  If Moncrief is someone they feel had better value at that draft spot, i see no reason to pass on him simply because we have Whalen and Brazil on the roster.

 

And when you look at the current situation, that's exactly what they did.  Purifoy was recently signed as an UDFA, and while he has character concerns, there is a low risk high reward scenario which is ideal in the NFL.  I really feel the same way about Jackson, who looks every bit the part of a run stuffing ILB.

 

Yep. We are saying the same thing.

[Superman]

Players get moved from tackle to guard all the time. That doesn't automatically make them "developmental,"  and it doesn't mean they can't play right away. You think Zack Martin is going to be held back because he's moving to guard? 

 

Considering a move inside to guard as a negative is kind of close-minded.

 

The Rams are saying Greg Robinson might move to guard as well. 

[braveheartcolt]

Because it's a hell of a lot less fun to hang around here when the end argument to every single disagreement is "well you're not a coach/scout/GM so you don't know what you're talking about and you're and *."

If that's what every debate around here is gonna end, the way it always does, what is the point? If you dare disagree with something around here THIS is the argument that gets shouted at you.

Despite the fact that coaches play bad players (satele) GMs draft bad players (justin Anderson) GMs sign bad players (winston justice) and GMs make bad trades (Jerry Hughes for Shepard)

And in all honesty, the people questioning this draft are not at all being unreasonable. Our 2013 draft, so far, has been one of the least helpful in recent history. 2 of the 7 players taken didn't even make the final 53. 2 of the remaining 5 were signed away after we bounced them to and from the practice squad. We traded up to take a guy whose production wasn't even pedestrian. We took a guy who was a healthy scratch most of the season DESPITE injuries at his position and the fact that we needed help. The remaining two showed some flashes of both good, and truly awful in their limited playing time.

It's ok not to agree with every move and decision the team makes. Most people around here don't get that. Some people around here go willfully out of their way to ignore some of our less prosperous decisions.

You totally missed the point. It's the ludicrous arrogant way some of the 'opinions' are spouted that drew my pretend ire. Then you spin up your messiah like rant as if you are the saviour of the down beaten.

Look in the mirror pal. And stop taking a couple of pretty minor comments so darn serious.

[C0LT5]

Bailey doesn't have the speed or range to be a starter most likely.  But he a terrific and aggressive tackler that would have been a very good back up FS, and a special teams standout.  Some people were saying 3rd round for him.  Getting him in the 5th would have been fine. 

 

We absolutely need a CB and S, in this draft for depth.  We didn't get a S and we didn't get a CB.  Nothing.

 

And when T. Reilly is sitting there in the 7th, we couldn't take him because we already took 2 other linebackers......so we took an OL that probably won't even make the practice squad. 

 

In hindsight you're still saying drafting Bailing in the 5th would have been fine? 

[John Waylon]

This is where I think a lot people would be well-served to take a look around the league and gain some perspective.

 

I don't think you're arguing that Grigson is a bad GM, just that he has made some bad moves and isn't immune to some criticism. But the thing is, every GM makes bad moves, and every GM can be criticized from time to time (especially with the benefit of hindsight). I think the Seahawks made some really unnecessary moves last offseason, and in the previous two or three years, some I would call bad moves. They won the Super Bowl last year. They have a good GM, and they're a well-run team, but they make mistakes.

 

So when people complain about late round draft picks not sticking, it's kind of comical. Most late round draft picks don't stick. When people complain about signings like Winston Justice, it makes me shake my head. The worst move Grigson has made is the Richardson trade, and as bad as that was, there have been worse moves by good GMs recently (I think the Percy Harvin trade was worse, but at least it wasn't for a RB, so maybe it's a wash, but still...)

 

It is okay to disagree with decisions. It gets tiring when people go to the extreme, when they judge with the benefit of hindsight and not being in a position of accountability (or even attempting to hold themselves accountable when they were clearly wrong), etc. It's also tiring when people run to the trite and cliched "you're not a GM, what do you know?" nonsense. I much prefer a discussion that makes room for perspective and acknowledges that no one gets every decision exactly right.

 

 

I approve of the job Grigson has done. I haven't agreed with all of his moves, but I don't think he needs to be run out of town, either. I'm just saying, there is a HUGE contingent around here who has come to believe all that glitters is gold with him, but that's just not the case. But if you oppose anything he does, within no time someone will be breaking out the argument I cited. Every time. It gets tiring because it seems that having an opinion around here isn't acceptable. Worshiping everything the team does unquestionably is the only acceptable behavior. I just used the examples above to show that yes, Grigson HAS, in fact, made mistakes, and that gives way for people to doubt him. Some do it more than others, and that's fine because on the flip side, some ignore the things that haven't worked out and follow Girgson to the point they would buy a beach in Montana from him. It's how those two viewpoints interact that has become the problem here. 

 

Case in point: I said I didn't agree with the Mewhort pick on Friday night. I gave a whole host of logical reasons why. And some guy went off on me as if though I had said I was going to murder his mother slowly while the rest of his family watched. And of course, the whole "You're not a GM/scout so you're clueless" card was immediately pulled. 

 

If we're all clueless, what are we here for?

 

It's funny though, because if that really is the case, doesn't that mean we're also incapable of agreeing with the decisions made by the establishment since, as evidenced, they miss as well?

 

Everyone is so caught up in the chase to be "right" that actual debate and differing opinions is frowned upon.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

Honestly I am cool with our draft. The Tackle at the end? whatever. Would like to have seen a CB and or safety, like everyone else. I don't think your draft is better, and I don't think ANYONE will know WHOSE draft is the best until 3 years from now!

[lollygagger8]

Next time just put LOL after whatever you say. Then you can say whatever you want. 

[mvbighead]

Honestly I am cool with our draft. The Tackle at the end? whatever. Would like to have seen a CB and or safety, like everyone else. I don't think your draft is better, and I don't think ANYONE will know WHOSE draft is the best until 3 years from now!

 

This makes me laugh a bit.  Getting even the least bit miffed about a 7th round selection just seems like a waste of time.  At that point, the pickens are slim, and we're simply ensuring that a particular player can't go to a different team.  But after a handful more picks, we're able to run about and sign anyone left, so it doesn't really matter all that much.

 

The good thing about losing Bethea and not drafting a single DB is that now UDFAs can look around for teams that have the biggest needs for their services who haven't addresses that need in the draft.  That could be a good part of the reason why Purifoy signed here, who knows.  But at that stage of the draft, the guy that we draft is far from a sure thing to be on the 53 man roster.  And based on our largest quantity of losses (OL), we addressed the biggest need we had.

[Horse Shoe Heaven]

This makes me laugh a bit.  Getting even the least bit miffed about a 7th round selection just seems like a waste of time.  At that point, the pickens are slim, and we're simply ensuring that a particular player can't go to a different team.  But after a handful more picks, we're able to run about and sign anyone left, so it doesn't really matter all that much.

 

The good thing about losing Bethea and not drafting a single DB is that now UDFAs can look around for teams that have the biggest needs for their services who haven't addresses that need in the draft.  That could be a good part of the reason why Purifoy signed here, who knows.  But at that stage of the draft, the guy that we draft is far from a sure thing to be on the 53 man roster.  And based on our largest quantity of losses (OL), we addressed the biggest need we had.

Yea I hear ya, the tackle to me was hum we have 4 Costanso, Reitz, Nixon, Cherilius. Chances of making the team humm none! Draft I guy with a chance who you like  & has a chance to make the team, & you have him now, you don't have to go to free agents an HOPE to get him! Given what I just said apparently they like the kid!

[BOTT]

I'm a ND fan and his injuries are more than what's being told. And that championship game is still fresh in my mind where he got man handled 1v1 by their center. Barrett? A dude who got drafted like 5th I think. I actually wanted him bad after that game, lol

I didn't see the game, but I just listened to a podcast (Kiper/McSahy, Ross Tucker??) where they said Nix manhandled Jones.

[BOTT]

I would've rather seen us draft O-linemen that were specific at each of their respective spots. If we need a guard, draft a guy that is 100% good at guard. Not draft a guy that is 75% good at guard or 50% good at Tackle and 25% at center, etc. 

 

I get that it's nice to have that versatility, but even Grigson has said continuity is the most important thing. I would think he'd want more position specific guys. 

 

I like a lot of these UDFA names (and there's a ton) so thank God we got some CB's to compete. Maybe one will be used as a FS since our depth needs help. Zach Kerr @ NT might turn out to be a surprise as well.

As has been pointed out, where these guys played on the line in college doesn't matter that much. A lot of guards played tackle in college simply because they are the best athlete on the line.....Logan Mankins just being one example.

[mvbighead]

Yea I hear ya, the tackle to me was hum we have 4 Costanso, Reitz, Nixon, Cherilius. Chances of making the team humm none! Draft I guy with a chance who you like  & has a chance to make the team, & you have him now, you don't have to go to free agents an HOPE to get him! Given what I just said apparently they like the kid!

 

He's a tackle in college.  That doesn't mean he's a tackle in the NFL.  Considering that we parted ways with Satele and McGlynn, we could potentially have the following lineup next season:

 

Castanzo, Thomas, Mewhort, John, Cherilus.

 

By no means do i see that as likely, but it is possible.  All in all, I expect any lineman without a starting position to be someone usable in both the G and T spots at a minimum.  Heck, who knows, perhaps we lose a guard and they kick Cherilus inside to pave the way on inside runs and allow someone like John to work the outside.  But it all depends on who the coaches see as the best fit for each position.  As far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter what label a lineman is given in the draft, it is highly likely he'll move around on his actual team.

[mvbighead]

As has been pointed out, where these guys played on the line in college doesn't matter that much. A lot of guards played tackle in college simply because they are the best athlete on the line.....Logan Mankins just being one example.

 

Logan Mankins is a great example.  Played LT during the entire duration of his college career.

[Nesjan3]

Ok so what your saying is you should be the Colts GM?

[ponyboy]

Yea I hear ya, the tackle to me was hum we have 4 Costanso, Reitz, Nixon, Cherilius. Chances of making the team humm none! Draft I guy with a chance who you like  & has a chance to make the team, & you have him now, you don't have to go to free agents an HOPE to get him! Given what I just said apparently they like the kid!

 

Regarding John.. my guess is they drafted him intending to stash him on the PS for a year while they coach and condition him.  Probably very little risk of another team claiming him as we try to move him to the PS too.  So while it's true there is very little chance of him making the final 53, I'd bet he'll be on the team as a PS player this year.

[NewEra]

I didn't see the game, but I just listened to a podcast (Kiper/McSahy, Ross Tucker??) where they said Nix manhandled Jones.

I watched it and still have nightmares because if it, lol. He got worked by jones. 1v1. One of the reasons I wanted jones that year.