2014 Colts Draft Discussion

[Surge89]

I think you are confusing the desire for an impact player on defense at 59 with availability of said player. Ealy is the only D player picked in the following 8 picks - not a scheme fit for the Colts in all probability.

In a cornerback hungry league, and supposedly deep draft class, there were only 2 taken in the 2nd round, both before our pick. In the 3rd round, also 2. Cornerbacks really didn't start running again until the 4th. It is fair to conclude that GM's didn't see impact.

Dez Southward went earlier than projected in the 3rd. He was on the Colts radar, but probably not at 59. Brooks goes at 79 - maybe he was on the radar at 90, and maybe not, but that's 20 picks after our pick at 59. There is not much going on in the 3rd round for game breaking D talent.

Mewhort was a surprise to me, but I don't see any logic to question him as BPA or that we overlooked any impact players for our defense there. Furthermore, I don't see how anyone could look at what Seattle did at 64 and not think that they'd have picked Mewhort there.

A couple of things here. We run a hybrid front. I'd say Ealy does well here.

Corner isn't necessarily what I'm talking here. Our board shouldn't be like anyone else's board so basing a pick off what others pick isn't a good measure.

The defensive talent though was supposed to be rich in rounds 2 - 4. Are you saying none of those defensive players left deserved a pick until late 3rd/4th? This would then lead to Grigs made a good choice but that's my issue. There were players such as Ealy, Southward, Brooks, Gaines, Nix (all in round 3 btw) that seemed like better value.

[AntonMcG]

Two things:

 

1) In order for Holmes to become that kind of player, he has to be given a chance to play, right? Why draft another guy before you've given him a shot? Especially at that position? It's not a need at this point, especially in the draft. 

 

2) In 2014, Holmes is as good, if not better, IMO than any of the centers in this year's draft. Again, that's my opinion, but the point is that even if center was a need, drafting one doesn't make it any less of a need. Holmes is the guy. Let him be the guy.

 

Can't agree with that strategy to be honest and I think most of the best talent evaluators would agree...

 

If the Colts had a C at the top of their board at 59 I have no doubt they would have pulled the trigger. Holmes may be good, but why not have two good Centers and hope that one of them pans out, rather than throwing all your eggs in Holmes' backet... who was only a 4th round pick afterall.

 

BPA is always that way to go... and I mean BPA as in the actual football definition... which includes weighing up positional value, scheme etc.

 

If they found a can't miss guy at C... draft him, and let him and Holmes fight it out in camp, because that would be a great problem to have.

 

I actually believe this was a major reason in Mewhort being drafted... he provides an insurance policy at the Center position.

[ztboiler]

A couple of things here. We run a hybrid front. I'd say Ealy does well here.

Corner isn't necessarily what I'm talking here. Our board shouldn't be like anyone else's board so basing a pick off what others pick isn't a good measure.

The defensive talent though was supposed to be rich in rounds 2 - 4. Are you saying none of those defensive players left deserved a pick until late 3rd/4th? This would then lead to Grigs made a good choice but that's my issue. There were players such as Ealy, Southward, Brooks, Gaines, Nix (all in round 3 btw) that seemed like better value.

True that our board doesn't and shouldn't look like everybody else's, but to ignore how the rest of the league valued defensive players in the 3rd round doesn't make sense if you're trying to argue that we overlooked a defensive impact player @ 59.

 

The impact we need is at S/CB or OLB....and there is evidence to suggest that those players simply weren't available with 2nd round value.

[Pelt]

I believe that with key players back from injury on offense, combined with the offensive picks and free agents we acquired (Or retained) this off-season, it will be beneficial to our defense. Also throw in the fact that our rookie OC will have that experience under his belt and now will have Chud to lean on for advice. All this should help to remedy one of our glaring problems last year, which was all the too-numerous-to-count 3 and outs we had in the first half of games this past season. Our defense was gassed in many of those games because of that and I don't care how great the talent is on the defensive side of the ball, if you are continually losing the time of possession battle, your defense is going to suffer from it.

 

That is why I'm fairly pleased with the first couple picks of this year's draft. I believe we have strengthened our offense's ability to stay on the field for longer spells and I hope that results in us winning the time of possession battle. Our defense was stout in those rare instances this past season. I point to the Niners game as an example of this.

 

I'm also pleased with the defensive picks to help strengthen our interior play. I'm extremely intrigued to see what Andrew Jackson can bring to the table.

 

I see Grigson being patient and still building this team with balance in mind.

 

I also do not believe that Grigson is done with addressing the Safety issue. There is still a lot of time left until the first game of the season and it wouldn't surprise me to see a solid safety get cut loose from another team and we end up nabbing him.

 

EDIT: And as I type this (Regarding my last thought on Safety), I see we just signed Purifoy. lol

[Surge89]

I will completely agree that people tend not to read full posts and quickly jump to knee jerk reactions. I thought your post was well written. I did not agree with all of it, but it was communicated in a professional manner.

That said, Superman is not an extremist. There are many on this board, but he is not one of them. He just disagreed with you. Sometimes the good guys can get lost in the shuffle.

I believe that Grigson gave good reasons as to why we chose Mewhort. The value was there, because Mewhort likely would not have made it to us in the third round. And because of how many injuries we have experienced on our offensive line, we needed this guy. He can plug and play in several different positions. He has the "position flexibility" that Grigson and Pagano coveted in this draft.

No worries, not directed to Superman :-)

I agree Mewhort wouldn't have been there but I would like to think a G of equal value would have been. But then again why pass on Moncrief lol. So I dunno maybe I'm just nitpicking like I said earlier it was just an observation that the value seemed lower than what Grigs usually drafts.

[AntonMcG]

Agreed....Though a healthy Bryan Stork reallyyyyyyyyyy intrigued me in the 3rd-4th...But he wasn't healthy. Again I agree with  the idea of seeing what Holmes will bring, I was just explaining what could be going through many peoples minds who are up in arms about the draft

 

And if he doesn't work out, but you felt like your had a potential 10 year starter at C early in the draft... you wouldn't go after him? What if there was nobody you liked in next years draft at the position? Can you take the chance?

 

Drafting is for the long-term, not for the quick fixes.

[akcolt]

I don't know if Mewhort was better than every defensive player on the board?

 

But I said this before the draft...    if the Colts take an OL with their first pick,  (59) that it was a red flag that something is going on with our players.    It was revealed about two months ago that Thomas is actually recovering from two serious injuries, not one.  And that he's not medically cleared yet.   So, perhaps the doctors are telling Grigson they're not confident Thomas will be good to go when the season starts.

 

If that's the case,  then OL became more important than anyone here might expect.   And I think that pushed Mewhort way up the board.

 

That's what makes sense to me.

 

Then again,  I was wrong about most everything this weekend,  so you can take my view with a grain of salt.  Or a shaker of salt if you prefer!        

Costa retiring did not help but I have been saying for 2 months Grigs seems a little weird when he talks about Thomas like he isn't telling the whole story then they had him snapping the ball. All that said Luck was hit a lot last year there was not a lot of running room I personally have no trouble going O Line until it is fixed.

 

Outside of the back end I think the D is taking pretty good shape. Jones and Jackson should make us better the kid from Canada Muamba could help, Now Newsome to add pass rush and the president to bring some pop on running downs. Add all that too the improvement the younger guys and just the system being in place another year I think we are starting to take shape up front.

 

The back in scares me to death but I have to believe there is a plan. The fact `14 of our UDFA came off our draft board is encouraging as well. There seems to be some talent there for the PS.

[Gavin]

Can't agree with that strategy to be honest and I think most of the best talent evaluators would agree...

 

If the Colts had a C at the top of their board at 59 I have no doubt they would have pulled the trigger. Holmes may be good, but why not have two good Centers and hope that one of them pans out, rather than throwing all your eggs in Holmes' backet... who was only a 4th round pick afterall.

 

BPA is always that way to go... and I mean BPA as in the actual football definition... which includes weighing up positional value, scheme etc.

 

If they found a can't miss guy at C... draft him, and let him and Holmes fight it out in camp, because that would be a great problem to have.

 

I actually believe this was a major reason in Mewhort being drafted... he provides an insurance policy at the Center position.

I really dont think that there was a Center at 59 worth taking but I only liked 2-3 Centers in the whole draft class anyway, Stork, Richburg and Bodine, Richburg was gone at #43....Bodine at #111 round 4 (which I was hoping to trade down and get him in round 4) and Stork #105 round 4 would have been a steal in my opinion once he got healthy

[Superman]

I'm not exactly ignoring I just know that I can't know. So I'm reaching out for reasoning :-).

Uh... not sure why all of my comments were still grey... sorry

 

Right I understand this. That's why I brought the discussion on as to what everyone thought. Do people see the talent to make this guy the highest on the board at the time? I can't talk to Grigson but there a ton of knowledgeable fans so I would like to know what they think. 

 

I can see Mewhort being the best guy on the board. Assume that Nix and some of the other guys who dropped did so for health or character reasons, and yeah, I get it. As much as I wanted Brooks, he definitely has some limitations to his game that justify him not being ahead of Mewhort and some of the other offensive linemen. I don't personally have a big board, but I can see Mewhort being BPA there (coincidentally, CBSSports.com has Mewhort as their 59th player).

 

I think we agree on this. But I dont believe Mewhort is going to make this line outstanding year 1. It is going to take a couple and when this is your highest pick, I feel the value would be better placed at a defensive player with more immediate impact.

 

I think Mewhort can play this year, especially if Donald Thomas isn't ready to go. But I don't think a draft pick should be graded based on whether he is going to make his unit outstanding in Year 1. That's a pretty big burden for any draft pick, especially someone taken late in the second round. 

 

As far as a defensive player with more immediate impact, that would have been my preference. But a lot of them were gone. Kony Ealy doesn't really fit our defense, and he wouldn't have really played this year on our team, not without a lot of injuries. I'm not that big a fan of Southward, and I think he was overdrafted (great size, super athletic, but his coverage is subpar). Nix has major injury and health concerns, and would have been buried on the depth chart. You have to go to Brooks, and he went 20 picks later. We didn't have a shot at any other guys that I personally think would have made an immediate defensive impact.

 

2 things here. I would burden Luck with an average oline because I believe he can handle a sub par oline much much better than a defense who can't get off the field. Also Manning had a stellar oline for 9 years and great interior play for almost his whole tenure here... Imo of course I think a defensive heavy approach would be more of a risk I wish they would take.

 

Do you think we're one defensive rookie away from having a defense who can get off the field? And do you think that defensive player was available at #59? I happen to think our defense will be much better because we've improved up the middle, and I don't see anyone who was on the board as being so good, being THE GUY in 2014 that pushes our defense into elite territory. Yeah, we need a safety, and we could use more pass rushers (I really like Newsome, by the way), but that difference maker just wasn't there. I'd be right with you if Attaochu or Van Noy was still on the board there.

 

As for the Colts line with Manning, yeah he had good line play for several years. But I can think of three games off the top of my head that had heavy playoff implications where the line came up short. In 2003, at home against the Pats, when we couldn't score on two goal to go possessions (really good defense, but our line often struggled in power situations). In 2008, at home against the Chargers, when we couldn't get 4 yards in two plays to close the game out. In 2009, end of the first half against the Saints, we couldn't pick up a first down to finish the half out, and they scored a TD at the end of the half. So yeah, having a dominant line would have helped along the way, and you don't build a dominant line overnight. It takes growth and development, but you also have to invest in the right kind of players. Setting aside the draft value of Mewhort, I believe he is the right kind of player for building a dominant line.

 

Also I'm not saying it was a bad pick. I'm saying the value just doesn't seem to add up in comparison to his other picks. It's rather odd. Due to circumstances outside the draft I feel like the value would have been much better placed on a defensive piece that could influence the team more now. 

Would you rather have a (potentially of course) more disruptive defense (something I don't think we had all year) or a stable oline that was stable last year when the pieces were there (see SF game). 

 

No doubt, I would have preferred a game-wrecking defensive player at #59. I was an advocate of trading back if that kind of player wasn't there, as I thought there were plenty of linemen like Mewhort. It's definitely not what I would have done. But of the linemen available, I can see Mewhort being the best. A lot of Gabe Jackson fans on this forum, and I think it's kind of a preference. But I think Mewhort has more upside and versatility, and I think he's more refined than Billy Turner. So despite this not being my preferred strategy, I have no complaints about the player.

 

As you originally stated, the goal in a draft should be to raise the overall level of talent on your team, not to address every position of need. Identifying the positions where players can actually make your roster and improve your level of play is important -- we weren't going to draft a QB, of course -- but you don't reach to fill need. If your board's game-wreckers on defense aren't there, you don't draft someone who doesn't fit the bill just because he plays defense.

[Surge89]

I believe that with key players back from injury on offense, combined with the offensive picks and free agents we acquired (Or retained) this off-season, it will be beneficial to our defense. Also throw in the fact that our rookie OC will have that experience under his belt and now will have Chud to lean on for advice. All this should help to remedy one of our glaring problems last year, which was all the too-numerous-to-count 3 and outs we had in the first half of games this past season. Our defense was gassed in many of those games because of that and I don't care how great the talent is on the defensive side of the ball, if you are continually losing the time of possession battle, your defense is going to suffer from it.

That is why I'm fairly pleased with the first couple picks of this year's draft. I believe we have strengthened our offense's ability to stay on the field for longer spells and I hope that results in us winning the time of possession battle. Our defense was stout in those rare instances this past season. I point to the Niners game as an example of this.

I'm also pleased with the defensive picks to help strengthen our interior play. I'm extremely intrigued to see what Andrew Jackson can bring to the table.

I see Grigson being patient and still building this team with balance in mind.

I also do not believe that Grigson is done with addressing the Safety issue. There is still a lot of time left until the first game of the season and it wouldn't surprise me to see a solid safety get cut loose from another team and we end up nabbing him.

EDIT: And as I type this (Regarding my last thought on Safety), I see we just signed Purifoy. lol

This is an awesome view!

This puts things a bit more into perspective as G value would skyrocket as a potential team boost to both sides of the ball.

[Superman]

Agreed....Though a healthy Bryan Stork reallyyyyyyyyyy intrigued me in the 3rd-4th...But he wasn't healthy. Again I agree with  the idea of seeing what Holmes will bring, I was just explaining what could be going through many peoples minds who are up in arms about the draft

 

Yeah I understand what's going through people's minds. But I think people should accept the idea that Holmes scratches that itch, at least for the time being.

[Surge89]

I can see Mewhort being the best guy on the board. Assume that Nix and some of the other guys who dropped did so for health or character reasons, and yeah, I get it. As much as I wanted Brooks, he definitely has some limitations to his game that justify him not being ahead of Mewhort and some of the other offensive linemen. I don't personally have a big board, but I can see Mewhort being BPA there (coincidentally, CBSSports.com has Mewhort as their 59th player).

I think Mewhort can play this year, especially if Donald Thomas isn't ready to go. But I don't think a draft pick should be graded based on whether he is going to make his unit outstanding in Year 1. That's a pretty big burden for any draft pick, especially someone taken late in the second round.

As far as a defensive player with more immediate impact, that would have been my preference. But a lot of them were gone. Kony Ealy doesn't really fit our defense, and he wouldn't have really played this year on our team, not without a lot of injuries. I'm not that big a fan of Southward, and I think he was overdrafted (great size, super athletic, but his coverage is subpar). Nix has major injury and health concerns, and would have been buried on the depth chart. You have to go to Brooks, and he went 20 picks later. We didn't have a shot at any other guys that I personally think would have made an immediate defensive impact.

Do you think we're one defensive rookie away from having a defense who can get off the field? And do you think that defensive player was available at #59? I happen to think our defense will be much better because we've improved up the middle, and I don't see anyone who was on the board as being so good, being THE GUY in 2014 that pushes our defense into elite territory. Yeah, we need a safety, and we could use more pass rushers (I really like Newsome, by the way), but that difference maker just wasn't there. I'd be right with you if Attaochu or Van Noy was still on the board there.

As for the Colts line with Manning, yeah he had good line play for several years. But I can think of three games off the top of my head that had heavy playoff implications where the line came up short. In 2003, at home against the Pats, when we couldn't score on two goal to go possessions (really good defense, but our line often struggled in power situations). In 2008, at home against the Chargers, when we couldn't get 4 yards in two plays to close the game out. In 2009, end of the first half against the Saints, we couldn't pick up a first down to finish the half out, and they scored a TD at the end of the half. So yeah, having a dominant line would have helped along the way, and you don't build a dominant line overnight. It takes growth and development, but you also have to invest in the right kind of players. Setting aside the draft value of Mewhort, I believe he is the right kind of player for building a dominant line.

No doubt, I would have preferred a game-wrecking defensive player at #59. I was an advocate of trading back if that kind of player wasn't there, as I thought there were plenty of linemen like Mewhort. It's definitely not what I would have done. But of the linemen available, I can see Mewhort being the best. A lot of Gabe Jackson fans on this forum, and I think it's kind of a preference. But I think Mewhort has more upside and versatility, and I think he's more refined than Billy Turner. So despite this not being my preferred strategy, I have no complaints about the player.

As you originally stated, the goal in a draft should be to raise the overall level of talent on your team, not to address every position of need. Identifying the positions where players can actually make your roster and improve your level of play is important -- we weren't going to draft a QB, of course -- but you don't reach to fill need. If your board's game-wreckers on defense aren't there, you don't draft someone who doesn't fit the bill just because he plays defense.

Makes a ton of sense. I kind of wish we traded back, but I can see Mewhort reasoning. Quick question, before the draft did your value of Brooks and Nix sit higher than Mewhort or any G slotted in our reach?

[Superman]

Can't agree with that strategy to be honest and I think most of the best talent evaluators would agree...

 

If the Colts had a C at the top of their board at 59 I have no doubt they would have pulled the trigger. Holmes may be good, but why not have two good Centers and hope that one of them pans out, rather than throwing all your eggs in Holmes' backet... who was only a 4th round pick afterall.

 

BPA is always that way to go... and I mean BPA as in the actual football definition... which includes weighing up positional value, scheme etc.

 

If they found a can't miss guy at C... draft him, and let him and Holmes fight it out in camp, because that would be a great problem to have.

 

I actually believe this was a major reason in Mewhort being drafted... he provides an insurance policy at the Center position.

 

The only concern about Holmes should be his ability to stay healthy. His injuries are the only reason he was available in the 4th round last year. (Kind of like Brandon Thomas this year; he could have been the first guard off the board if not for his ACL injury a few weeks ago.) His pro prospects always looked good, and having the opportunity to redshirt last year makes him an even better prospect.

 

And in this year's draft, I don't think there were any center prospects that are "can't miss," and certainly none that I'd rather have than Holmes.

 

The other thing is that most teams don't carry two centers on the active roster. Someone who can play guard and center would have worked -- I am a fan of Russell Bodine, but he got drafted way higher than I expected -- but you have to consider the makeup of your roster when drafting.

 

And really, all of this is kind of auxiliary. The point is that center is not a position of need. Even if there were better center prospects, center wasn't a need, and still isn't a need. Depth at center might be a concern, but you don't use a top 100 pick on a backup center.

[akcolt]

It seems like a common thought... that a GM can get any UDFA they want. But it is far from accurate.

Grigs might actually have had a couple of the UDFAs the Colts signed higher on his draft board than Ulrich John... but they may have expressed a high level of interest in the Colts... where John may have indicated that he'd choose to go elsewhere if undrafted.

We just aren't privy to all the stuff that happens behind the scenes, so we just don't know.

It is kind of hard to believe he would not have been ours when no one else seemed to know who the heck he was not even his name which is Full name is Ulrick Tremayne John, Jr.. So John is his last name but you are right Grigs knows more about that than us.

 

Sounds like a real athelete played baseball and basketball too in high school again I am behind anything that opens up holes and protects Luck so welcome to Indy Mr John

[Superman]

Makes a ton of sense. I kind of wish we traded back, but I can see Mewhort reasoning. Quick question, before the draft did your value of Brooks and Nix sit higher than Mewhort or any G slotted in our reach?

 

I thought Nix would easily be a top 50 pick, so yeah. But something Grigson said in the presser rings true: I didn't work Nix out and evaluate his conditioning, I didn't see his X-rays or have medical professionals evaluate his health, etc. All I have are some Youtube clips and whatever is available online. The guys who did have all of his medical and conditioning information, who interviewed him, who talked to his coaches, etc. -- all 32 NFL teams -- passed on him. Twice. And all the so-called draft experts were befuddled, scratching their heads, while acknowledging that his health and conditioning were questionable. 

 

Brooks? I thought he'd be there in our range, and I thought he could start for us on Day 1. I probably would have taken Brooks, to be honest, but that would have been because of need. I think Jackson, Mewhort and Turner were all valued just as high as Brooks, if not higher, if I had a big board. I just would have been okay drafting a guy like Michael Schofield (who went 50-70 picks sooner than I expected), who is a slightly less impressive version of Mewhort. There were other swing linemen later in the draft that I would have been okay with. Even John Urschel later on.

 

In hindsight, a trade back would have been ideal. Could have had Brooks and still picked up Jackson or Turner, but wouldn't have had Moncrief. (I'm okay with that, as I wasn't a big fan of Moncrief. But he's a freakish talent, and I'm glad we have him.)

[AntonMcG]

I really dont think that there was a Center at 59 worth taking but I only liked 2-3 Centers in the whole draft class anyway, Stork, Richburg and Bodine, Richburg was gone at #43....Bodine at #111 round 4 (which I was hoping to trade down and get him in round 4) and Stork #105 round 4 would have been a steal in my opinion once he got healthy

 

I was talking hypothetically...

[Gavin]

I was talking hypothetically...

I know, I was just sayin...Just to say I guess

[AntonMcG]

The only concern about Holmes should be his ability to stay healthy. His injuries are the only reason he was available in the 4th round last year. (Kind of like Brandon Thomas this year; he could have been the first guard off the board if not for his ACL injury a few weeks ago.) His pro prospects always looked good, and having the opportunity to redshirt last year makes him an even better prospect.

 

And in this year's draft, I don't think there were any center prospects that are "can't miss," and certainly none that I'd rather have than Holmes.

 

The other thing is that most teams don't carry two centers on the active roster. Someone who can play guard and center would have worked -- I am a fan of Russell Bodine, but he got drafted way higher than I expected -- but you have to consider the makeup of your roster when drafting.

 

And really, all of this is kind of auxiliary. The point is that center is not a position of need. Even if there were better center prospects, center wasn't a need, and still isn't a need. Depth at center might be a concern, but you don't use a top 100 pick on a backup center.

 

That is arguably the single biggest red-flag to have for any player. And yes, most teams carry one designated Center, but Holes can play Guard as well, so can most college Centers these days.

 

As I said above, I was talking hypothetically... if there was a guy that Grigson thought could be your 10-year Center, draft him, regardless of Holmes. You can trade one of them afterall.

[Superman]

A couple of things here. We run a hybrid front. I'd say Ealy does well here.

Corner isn't necessarily what I'm talking here. Our board shouldn't be like anyone else's board so basing a pick off what others pick isn't a good measure.

The defensive talent though was supposed to be rich in rounds 2 - 4. Are you saying none of those defensive players left deserved a pick until late 3rd/4th? This would then lead to Grigs made a good choice but that's my issue. There were players such as Ealy, Southward, Brooks, Gaines, Nix (all in round 3 btw) that seemed like better value.

 

What position would Ealy have played in our front? He'd be a severely undersized DT. And who of our current DT/DEs would he have played in front of? I don't think Ealy would be a good fit in our front at all. And I don't think he has the talent to make him a "just get him on the field" kind of player, like Aaron Donald. 

[OffensivelyPC]

I think our first two picks are fine.  Not the direction I would have preferred, but they did address needs - even if I thought they were needs better reserved for later round picks for the purpose of depth.  But it's not like Grigs and Co were off their hinges with the selections.  We needed better interior OL play and at least one of those guys is not a certainty to start from a health standpoint.  With WR, we have a future potential HOFer that can't go much longer without declining in ability, especially coming off an ACL tear, the other has a significant injury history.  I could see him being BPA there as well. 

 

I'm not really sureh ow I feel on the later picks.  I never had an issue with Newsome, I just don't think I ever saw him as a 5th round prospect.  A tweener that never really stood out except his ability to just pin his ears back and go get the QB. Then throw in the character issues (which aren't the worst in teh world - some pot and academics - but still not to be overlooked).

 

Andrew Jackson, a popular guy on these boards, but nothing special to me.  John Ulrick was surprising to me.  No film, no scouting reports, nothing.  I feltl ike he was one of those guys that could have been a UDFA.

 

Oh, and was disappointed they didn't take Howard Jones or sign as a UDFA, but clearly he was passed on 256 times.  What do I know?  lol. 

 

On a side note: really enjoyed all the fun discussion on draft prospects, but man is there too long from the 1st wave of FA signing to the draft...and they want to move it back again?  Talk about a * move.

[Superman]

That is arguably the single biggest red-flag to have for any player. And yes, most teams carry one designated Center, but Holes can play Guard as well, so can most college Centers these days.

 

As I said above, I was talking hypothetically... if there was a guy that Grigson thought could be your 10-year Center, draft him, regardless of Holmes. You can trade one of them afterall.

 

Hypothetically, if there were a can't-miss center prospect, then maybe it's a different discussion. But I don't think anyone viewed the center prospects in this draft on that level. That's why I don't understand the desire for a new center from this draft class. Once we didn't add anyone noteworthy in free agency, it was pretty obvious that Holmes was the guy.

 

And yeah, I don't mean to downplay his injury history, although I think it's a little overblown. He had some nagging injuries in college, but played through them. Then he wasn't ready for pre-draft workouts because of surgery and rehab, which caused him to fall to the fourth round. And then he got hurt in camp. I don't view him as a red-flagged, chronically injured player, but others might.

 

Still, my point was just that I think center can be crossed off the needs list. Particularly if people think anyone in this year's draft would have served to cross off that need. 

[jameszeigler834]

Wow, that's some sentence. I only wish TRich could run on like that!

I think I agree with you if I got your point right.

Also, it's important to realize that when you have a young, good team, not every draft is going to be sexy. IMO, except for S and C we have a solid team. I can only assume we didn't address S because they weren't graded out very high by our scouts.

Ya maybe I would give it a year or two before I start questioning Grigson as the GM he is the main reason why this team is having the success they are having this soon remember this team was not supposed to go to the playoff in the first two years but did because he found the players the team needed to make that happen.

[throwing BBZ]

So in an attempt to discuss this draft and hypothetically talk I started this Topic.  Most people are extremists on this board so this topic most likely isn't for you.  But for the rest I would like to discuss.  

 

First my view on what a draft should entail.  (this is all imo btw)  First I believe that most draft BPA in the draft for the sole purpose of adding talent to the team whether it be need or not.  So in the end you result in having a better unit than what you had before in relation to the other parts of the team that make the whole.

 

Next I would like to address this draft.   (and no I'm not saying fire Grigson this draft sucks, or This is horrid we need a new owner, hc, gm)  This draft too me of course.  Didn't make sense.  Seemed reactionary and above most not by BPA.  Why do I see it this way?  Well...  I sat and watched for 14 years Peyton fight in shootouts to end up with one ring.  We did the same thing over and over and over.  And for some odd reason it seems like we are repeating the same mistakes as the old regime...  Our 2nd round pick went to a G.  Yes a good G one that I believe at the top of the litter that was left, but I see our QB having the talent to overcome an average oline.  And after the G pick I still feel like we have an average oline.  So why not go defense?  BPA on D whether it was line or DB seems much more logical to roll the dice on.  Have a shot at getting a playmaker or contributor on defense is much more valuable than a G that keeps our offense consistent.  Our O btw went through tons of adversity last year and did just fine.  Too me the pick was not invested properly in relation to the team.  The value there on other defensive players seems to me that it should have outweighed.  

 

The 3rd rounder and forward I'm happy with.  And with the 3rd I see the need and opportunity.  This could actually be a mind blowing pick that predict the future... It is just very had to argue the value in comparison to the future of the team.  But why not take the same mentality for the first one?

 

I'm critical of that first pick because of the choices our GM has made he has forced himself into a situation where he has to hit on that pick.  And I'm just not sure he did.  Whether it turns out or not I hope it does, but the consistency has me very confused.  This could have been in my eyes a perfect draft follow up to the mild disappointment in TR if we had just kept the mentality of the last picks instead of grabbing a safe pick.  Maybe I'm just thinking this over too much, but I would like to know what everyone else thinks.

 

  Mewhort is an NFL RT who will also be developed as the backup LT,  And be competing with others for the guard position.

 You LOVE Reitz as your backup LT, or Nixon as the backup RT/LT short AND long term! Hmmm! On the info you have???

   Gee wizz, the guys who work with them disagree on YOUR short & Long term plan it seems. ...  honestly, you can`t see/get the short OR long term planning and that confuses me... arm chair.

 

 I was hoping XNixon showed enough to be the backup RT/ LT so they would go with  C/G Martin (SF pick 70) or hoping they thought that highly of a Gabe Jackson (Oak pick 81) as a mauling G.

 Mewhort should be a solid player wherever they need to plug him in when he is up to speed.

 A real 4 position player with solid future starter potential. Gotta wonder if you thought Link was OK for that.

[zippyd]

Two things:

 

1) In order for Holmes to become that kind of player, he has to be given a chance to play, right? Why draft another guy before you've given him a shot? Especially at that position? It's not a need at this point, especially in the draft. 

 

2) In 2014, Holmes is as good, if not better, IMO than any of the centers in this year's draft. Again, that's my opinion, but the point is that even if center was a need, drafting one doesn't make it any less of a need. Holmes is the guy. Let him be the guy.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. We won't know what we have until we let the man play. With the past year in an NFL environment being coached by our staff he'll be far more combat ready than anyone we could have drafted. I read an article somewhere this offseason comparing last year's center class versus this year's and Holmes graded out better than all but one if I remember correctly. So I'm ready to see what we have. And if Holmes doesn't work out, some pundits claim center is Mewhort's strongest position. 

[OffensivelyPC]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. We won't know what we have until we let the man play. With the past year in an NFL environment being coached by our staff he'll be far more combat ready than anyone we could have drafted. I read an article somewhere this offseason comparing last year's center class versus this year's and Holmes graded out better than all but one if I remember correctly. So I'm ready to see what we have. And if Holmes doesn't work out, some pundits claim center is Mewhort's strongest position. 

I'd be really curious to see that article.  Have a link?  I've agreed with the general hypothesis that Holmes will have been better and more ready than anyone we would have drafted this year as well.  OL is one of those positions where you're constantly reading and adjusting, and you've got to know everyone else's assignment as well.  It's not something that you can generally pick up quickly.  A split second hesitation is too late, and for most OL rookies, even top picks, that's a pretty tall order to expect them to carry out.  They're seeing blitzes that they rarely if ever saw in college, so it just takes a bunch of reps before they can get comfortable and just react, instead of thinking then reacting.    Some do it well fairly quickly, but that's more the exception rather than the rule.

 

BTW: I don't know that I've welcomed you to the forums yet, so consider this my late warm welcome!

[NewColtsFan]

I agree with your assessment, but what irks me is that our OL should not be in such horrible shape that Thomas' injury forces our hand in the draft.  Grigson has had a draft and two opportunities at FA (I am excluding year one $$) to fix the OL; and outside of Cherilus and "potential" I am not overly impressed.  Our OL should have been in good enough shape by now that we could have taken a guard a couple rounds later. Some of Grigson's previous questionable decisions came to bite us in this draft.

 

Look at what Grigson did a year ago...

 

Signed Cherilus and Thomas as free agents

 

Drafted Thornton and Holmes....

 

He committed significant resources to the OL.    It just didn't work out as planned and now you have Thomas with a big question mark hanging over him.   I'm not sure Grigson had a choice but to make sure the OL wasn't going to be a problem anymore.

[NewColtsFan]

Costa retiring did not help but I have been saying for 2 months Grigs seems a little weird when he talks about Thomas like he isn't telling the whole story then they had him snapping the ball. All that said Luck was hit a lot last year there was not a lot of running room I personally have no trouble going O Line until it is fixed.

 

Outside of the back end I think the D is taking pretty good shape. Jones and Jackson should make us better the kid from Canada Muamba could help, Now Newsome to add pass rush and the president to bring some pop on running downs. Add all that too the improvement the younger guys and just the system being in place another year I think we are starting to take shape up front.

 

The back in scares me to death but I have to believe there is a plan. The fact `14 of our UDFA came off our draft board is encouraging as well. There seems to be some talent there for the PS.

 

Most of my predictions this past weekend were wrong, so you can this one with a large shaker of salt.....

 

I'll predict now that the 2015 Colts draft will be mostly.............................................          Defense.

[zippyd]

I'd be really curious to see that article.  Have a link?  I've agreed with the general hypothesis that Holmes will have been better and more ready than anyone we would have drafted this year as well.  OL is one of those positions where you're constantly reading and adjusting, and you've got to know everyone else's assignment as well.  It's not something that you can generally pick up quickly.  A split second hesitation is too late, and for most OL rookies, even top picks, that's a pretty tall order to expect them to carry out.  They're seeing blitzes that they rarely if ever saw in college, so it just takes a bunch of reps before they can get comfortable and just react, instead of thinking then reacting.    Some do it well fairly quickly, but that's more the exception rather than the rule.

 

BTW: I don't know that I've welcomed you to the forums yet, so consider this my late warm welcome!

Honestly I don't have a link. But I see that my train of thought derailed and caused me to omit a fragment of my sentence. He graded out better than all but one of this years. The writer of the article didn't seem to think very highly of this year's class of centers was my interpretation. Because though there were positives about Holmes there were plenty of negatives and yet the writer still placed him above almost all of this year's class.

[C0LT5]

So in an attempt to discuss this draft and hypothetically talk I started this Topic.  Most people are extremists on this board so this topic most likely isn't for you.  But for the rest I would like to discuss.  

 

First my view on what a draft should entail.  (this is all imo btw)  First I believe that most draft BPA in the draft for the sole purpose of adding talent to the team whether it be need or not.  So in the end you result in having a better unit than what you had before in relation to the other parts of the team that make the whole.

 

Next I would like to address this draft.   (and no I'm not saying fire Grigson this draft sucks, or This is horrid we need a new owner, hc, gm)  This draft too me of course.  Didn't make sense.  Seemed reactionary and above most not by BPA.  Why do I see it this way?  Well...  I sat and watched for 14 years Peyton fight in shootouts to end up with one ring.  We did the same thing over and over and over.  And for some odd reason it seems like we are repeating the same mistakes as the old regime...  Our 2nd round pick went to a G.  Yes a good G one that I believe at the top of the litter that was left, but I see our QB having the talent to overcome an average oline.  And after the G pick I still feel like we have an average oline.  So why not go defense?  BPA on D whether it was line or DB seems much more logical to roll the dice on.  Have a shot at getting a playmaker or contributor on defense is much more valuable than a G that keeps our offense consistent.  Our O btw went through tons of adversity last year and did just fine.  Too me the pick was not invested properly in relation to the team.  The value there on other defensive players seems to me that it should have outweighed.  

 

The 3rd rounder and forward I'm happy with.  And with the 3rd I see the need and opportunity.  This could actually be a mind blowing pick that predict the future... It is just very had to argue the value in comparison to the future of the team.  But why not take the same mentality for the first one?

 

I'm critical of that first pick because of the choices our GM has made he has forced himself into a situation where he has to hit on that pick.  And I'm just not sure he did.  Whether it turns out or not I hope it does, but the consistency has me very confused.  This could have been in my eyes a perfect draft follow up to the mild disappointment in TR if we had just kept the mentality of the last picks instead of grabbing a safe pick.  Maybe I'm just thinking this over too much, but I would like to know what everyone else thinks.

 

You have to consider that our second round pick will help Richardson as much as it does Luck if not more. I'm good with that.

[C0LT5]

There are a lot of so called "experts" saying we had a terrible draft. I believe at some point I have to start to believe what they are saying. They said similar things about last years draft class,and they had zero to very minimal impact last year. The only pick im okay with givne the round is ILB andrew jackson. He's very scary against the run, Takeo Spikes type.

 

They aren't really rating our draft though. They are rating the Richardson trade. I read one that had different sections with teams which he thought belonged there. We were under "Don't get it" and they liked the draft picks but didn't like the Richardson trade. I wish they'd just rate the draft.

[OffensivelyPC]

Honestly I don't have a link. But I see that my train of thought derailed and caused me to omit a fragment of my sentence. He graded out better than all but one of this years. The writer of the article didn't seem to think very highly of this year's class of centers was my interpretation. Because though there were positives about Holmes there were plenty of negatives and yet the writer still placed him above almost all of this year's class.

And that's sort of reassuring, I just wish it was a collective opinion between draft coverage pundits - not that their opinion really matters..but when there's a collective agreement between them, it at least provides some assurance.  Not enough of them compare film across draft classes with actual film.  And most of us don't have the time to watch film of the current pool of prospects.  A lot of times, what is missing is the exact opinion of this article you are recalling - basically, a 3rd round center in 2014 isn't as good as a 3rd round center in 2012.  Anyway, bottom line is, I'm fairly confident in Holmes.  Worst case, I'm no more confident in a 2014 center than I am in Holmes.  I'm glad we didn't draft a center.

[Surge89]

  Mewhort is an NFL RT who will also be developed as the backup LT,  And be competing with others for the guard position.

 You LOVE Reitz as your backup LT, or Nixon as the backup RT/LT short AND long term! Hmmm! On the info you have???

   Gee wizz, the guys who work with them disagree on YOUR short & Long term plan it seems. ...  honestly, you can`t see/get the short OR long term planning and that confuses me... arm chair.

 

 I was hoping XNixon showed enough to be the backup RT/ LT so they would go with  C/G Martin (SF pick 70) or hoping they thought that highly of a Gabe Jackson (Oak pick 81) as a mauling G.

 Mewhort should be a solid player wherever they need to plug him in when he is up to speed.

 A real 4 position player with solid future starter potential. Gotta wonder if you thought Link was OK for that.

 

Wow what a snippy response that had nothing to do with what I said... Bravo sir bravo...

 

For your info (if you read my, post and other responses) I actually acknowledged that it was a fit for a need, just seemed odd in comparison to the rest of the draft due to value.  Other posters on here have given their thoughts as to what added value to Mewhort (for Grigson) and it made sense.  At the very least if you aren't going to participate in the discussion then don't comment at all. 

[Surge89]

You have to consider that our second round pick will help Richardson as much as it does Luck if not more. I'm good with that.

 

Truth is hard to deny. lol

[theanarchist]

I'll go on record as saying that this draft will either make or break Ryan Grigson. Throw Richardson into that as well. This is Grigson's 3rd draft. He is now far removed from what I think is a gimme draft of his first year where he had the benefit of having the first pick and the best qb prospect to come out since Manning. He had a really good draft that first year in my opinion with selecting Allen, Fleener and Hilton. Any * would have picked Luck so he gets no credit for that pick.

 

Yes, we only had 5 picks but that was his own doing. I'm not going to criticize his picks. I like what I read about them after researching them even though I hadn't heard of any of them with the exception of Moncrief. Hope it works out because we need better offensive line play to get past one and done in the playoffs.

[akcolt]

Most of my predictions this past weekend were wrong, so you can this one with a large shaker of salt.....

 

I'll predict now that the 2015 Colts draft will be mostly.............................................          Defense.

You and everyone else

 

I hope so I think the team is really coming together get the back end of the D squared up and of course if the concentration on the O Line this year gets it done.

 

We grabbed some beef of UDFA too. I feel pretty optimistic. Freeman and Jackson/Jackson on the inside if Newman is anything. We will see but I think we are moving in the right direction. Our CB's scare me but other than that we are building.

 

I think Grigs probably tried to do more based on history just couldn't get the deals. We should have a full complement of picks next year.

[Bulldog Colt]

Instant reaction is understandable but you have to give it time.

 

A few things do stand out to me with Grigson.  It seems with some of the picks he has made that his sense of what the market value for certain players is off.  Its almost like he walks in the store and says I want that one and I don't care what the price is, I want it.  It seems like he could trade back and still get the guy he wants.  The same could be said in some cases with the FA contracts that were handed out for guys like Cherilus, Walden, and  Landry.

 

In three drafts he has yet to find a CB that he thought was worth drafting when they were on the clock.  The Colts look pretty thin on talent with all of the talk being a passing league now.

 

Finding O line talent should be Grigson's biggest strength.  If the line isn't much improved at the end of his 4 year contract then I would be really concerned.  If Luck is still getting hammered I don't think that is going to fly.

[funktacious2]

Yeah, I don't know why so many people make a big deal about us not hitting on late round picks, most teams don't. Grigson has given us plenty of good players. Not everything is perfect, but I feel we did pretty good with the picks we had, and so far everything is intact for next year.