Looking back on the Jerry Hughes trade

[Superman]

Better?  Sure.  But if he had showed any promise at all, why would they have felt the need to draft Werner.

 

That's a really thin argument. You add players that you think can help you, and in the draft, you do so in the order that you've ranked those players. That doesn't mean the guys you already have can't help you.

 

In hindsight, that must be exactly how Grigson and Pagano felt about Hughes. They didn't think he was an asset to the team, so they moved him and got a player they felt would be an asset to the team. That's already risky, because pass rushers are more valuable than ILBs.

 

Also in hindsight, I think they were wrong. I think Hughes would have been more of an asset than Sheppard in 2013 (and that's even if he had just done what he did for us in 2012, not projecting 10 sacks for us). I think that's even more true now that Sheppard is on the bubble for us, and Mathis is suspended for the first four games in 2014. There's absolutely no way the team could have anticipated Mathis' suspension, but the saying goes "you can never have enough pass rushers," and there's a reason for that.

[Valpo2004]

How about the Shipley trade?

 

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2013/5/9/4315926/yes-the-a-q-shipley-trade-was-a-dumb-move-mr-grigson

 

Shipley was designated as the starting left guard on the Ravens depth chart before TC and backup center. We got  a 7th rough pick for him?

 

At least trading a first round draft pick for Trent was a good trade.

 

Thank you!

 

I've always thought that the Shipley trade knowing what was known at the time was a terrible terrible move.  Probably the dumbest Grigson has made thus far.

 

Again this is going off of what was known at the time.  Given what was known at the time with Hughes it's not a bad move.  With the Richardson trade given what was known at the time it was reaching or giving up a little bit too much . . . but it wasn't a terrible move, In the same situation I would have easily given up a 2nd for T-Rich.  

 

But Shipley you could plainly see he played at least as well if not better then Satele at one tenth the cost.  Shipley wasn't a world beater but he was a solid player who was cheap salary cap wise.  

[jskinnz]

That's a really thin argument. You add players that you think can help you, and in the draft, you do so in the order that you've ranked those players. That doesn't mean the guys you already have can't help you.

 

In hindsight, that must be exactly how Grigson and Pagano felt about Hughes. They didn't think he was an asset to the team, so they moved him and got a player they felt would be an asset to the team. That's already risky, because pass rushers are more valuable than ILBs.

 

Also in hindsight, I think they were wrong. I think Hughes would have been more of an asset than Sheppard in 2013 (and that's even if he had just done what he did for us in 2012, not projecting 10 sacks for us). I think that's even more true now that Sheppard is on the bubble for us, and Mathis is suspended for the first four games in 2014. There's absolutely no way the team could have anticipated Mathis' suspension, but the saying goes "you can never have enough pass rushers," and there's a reason for that.

 

Understand the thinking about never having enough pass rushers and have argued the BPA theory for years.  Maybe they do take Werner is Hughes had proven himself.  But to me he had enough chances to do something and never did enough.  I honestly thought we may have been cut last year if he was in camp so getting something for him in June was OK with me, even if it was a guy who was nothing more than serviceable.

[Superman]

Thank you!

 

I've always thought that the Shipley trade knowing what was known at the time was a terrible terrible move.  Probably the dumbest Grigson has made thus far.

 

Again this is going off of what was known at the time.  Given what was known at the time with Hughes it's not a bad move.  With the Richardson trade given what was known at the time it was reaching or giving up a little bit too much . . . but it wasn't a terrible move, In the same situation I would have easily given up a 2nd for T-Rich.  

 

But Shipley you could plainly see he played at least as well if not better then Satele at one tenth the cost.  Shipley wasn't a world beater but he was a solid player who was cheap salary cap wise.  

 

Difference is that Shipley went to Baltimore and sucked. In a way, that validates Grigson trading him.

 

Hughes went to Buffalo and played well.

[Gavin]

Better?  Sure.  But if he had showed any promise at all, why would they have felt the need to draft Werner.

This post assumes in an unintentional (in my opinion)way that the Colts brass don't make mistakes of which the Colts brass has made there fair share of, Im just glad that none have been catastrophic to the point where the moves have cost us to lose a lot of games, In the end the Jerry Hughes trade was not a huge flub up but anyone without some sort of agenda (I don't believe your one of those agenda people)could see he had raw talent and that to realize that talent he needed time on the defense during a game to realize that  talent, He had 603 snaps according to sporting charts.com (Im not claiming they are accurate, I'd have to go back and count the snaps myself...not happening right now) but its safe to say he had nowhere near those number of snaps on defense as a Colt in any one season, A player needs time to adjust in an actual game, There are players right now who have the physical talents of Hughes and some maybe even better that are riding the pine because of some established vet in front of them and other reasons as well

[braveheartcolt]

So you need to have an agenda if you don't like a player. What crap. Donald Brown got crucified for years on here, yet he produced a million percent more for our club than Hughes. Stop trying to stuff this guy down my throat please. He spent more time jawin' at opposition players than trying to tackle them.

[YOUR GM]

Difference is that Shipley went to Baltimore and sucked. In a way, that validates Grigson trading him.

Hughes went to Buffalo and played well.

But he played better than Satele when he was with us and cost less than him. Ultimately Satele ended up gone anyways so we basically wasted money by keeping Satele on good faith when Shipley was at least as good as him, for a fraction of the price. The trade was still poor in hindsight

[Superman]

But he played better than Satele when he was with us and cost less than him. Ultimately Satele ended up gone anyways so we basically wasted money by keeping Satele on good faith when Shipley was at least as good as him, for a fraction of the price. The trade was still poor in hindsight

Not really. Shipley wasn't considerably better than Satele, IMO, despite popular opinion. And Satele was hurt in 2012, so the expectation was that he would play better in 2013. And the money difference was negligible.

Also, either we're going to judge these deals in hindsight or we're not. Can't just pick and choose based on what's convenient. In hindsight, Shipley sucks about as much as Satele does.

[YOUR GM]

Not really. Shipley wasn't considerably better than Satele, IMO, despite popular opinion. And Satele was hurt in 2012, so the expectation was that he would play better in 2013. And the money difference was negligible.

Also, either we're going to judge these deals in hindsight or we're not. Can't just pick and choose based on what's convenient. In hindsight, Shipley sucks about as much as Satele does.

Who's picking and choosing? I was against both trades then and i still am now. And I feel like your opinions on Shipley are just your hang up. He obviously played better than Satele in 2012 and the numbers even support that sentiment. The protection, in particular was noticeably better when Shipley was in the game. Whether Satele was injured or not is irrelevant. He wasn't showing anything even when he was healthy that year. You can argue Shipley wasn't that much of an upgrade, as long as you acknowledge he WAS an upgrade over Satele. Based strictly off that, even if for just monetary purposes, the smart move would've been to part with Satele. His best days were clearly behind him by the time we signed him.

Also, Shipley was horrible for Baltimore as a guard, in much the same way McGlynn was for us when he was here. They both were obvious options as upgrades over Satele at center

[BOTT]

How about the Shipley trade?

 

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2013/5/9/4315926/yes-the-a-q-shipley-trade-was-a-dumb-move-mr-grigson

 

Shipley was designated as the starting left guard on the Ravens depth chart before TC and backup center. We got  a 7th rough pick for him?

 

At least trading a first round draft pick for Trent was a good trade.

Shipley is not the starting guard

[Superman]

Who's picking and choosing? I was against both trades then and i still am now. And I feel like your opinions on Shipley are just your hang up. He obviously played better than Satele in 2012 and the numbers even support that sentiment. The protection, in particular was noticeably better when Shipley was in the game. Whether Satele was injured or not is irrelevant. He wasn't showing anything even when he was healthy that year. You can argue Shipley wasn't that much of an upgrade, as long as you acknowledge he WAS an upgrade over Satele. Based strictly off that, even if for just monetary purposes, the smart move would've been to part with Satele. His best days were clearly behind him by the time we signed him.

Also, Shipley was horrible for Baltimore as a guard, in much the same way McGlynn was for us when he was here. They both were obvious options as upgrades over Satele at center

 

You're choosing to ignore the fact that Shipley isn't good. Which is pretty evident at this point.

 

And on the other end of the spectrum, you're using Hughes' performance as proof that we shouldn't have traded him (which I agree with). 

 

On the whole, I don't have a problem with the Shipley trade. I don't think he was that good for us, and he hasn't been good for Baltimore. I have a problem with keeping Satele in the lineup last year, but I don't think Shipley would have solved our issues (because, again, I don't think he was that good to begin with). I have no hang-up on Shipley; I'm not the one complaining about it a year later.

[YOUR GM]

You're choosing to ignore the fact that Shipley isn't good. Which is pretty evident at this point.

And on the other end of the spectrum, you're using Hughes' performance as proof that we shouldn't have traded him (which I agree with).

On the whole, I don't have a problem with the Shipley trade. I don't think he was that good for us, and he hasn't been good for Baltimore. I have a problem with keeping Satele in the lineup last year, but I don't think Shipley would have solved our issues (because, again, I don't think he was that good to begin with). I have no hang-up on Shipley; I'm not the one complaining about it a

year later.

I said Shipley isn't good. I just fail to see how that now validates Grigson trading him? He was better than Satele then, just as Hughes was our only other capable pass rusher outside of Mathis at the time we traded him. Both trades didn't make sense to me. That's not me ignoring anything, that's just my opinion. I think you're the one ignoring his effectiveness when he was here.

Not anything to get worked up over, but just because he wasn't a top shelf center doesn't negate the fact that it was a pointless trade that didn't make us any better, and arguably made us worse by virtue that Satele was handed the job for the '13 season without much comp, and is gone now anyways. Should've just started Holmes last year, if that were the case. He couldn't have been much worse than what Satele was

[Superman]

I said Shipley isn't good. I just fail to see how that now validates Grigson trading him? He was better than Satele then, just as Hughes was our only other capable pass rusher outside of Mathis at the time we traded him. Both trades didn't make sense to me. That's not me ignoring anything, that's just my opinion. I think you're the one ignoring his effectiveness when he was here.

Not anything to get worked up over, but just because he wasn't a top shelf center doesn't negate the fact that it was a pointless trade that didn't make us any better, and arguably made us worse by virtue that Satele was handed the job for the '13 season without much comp, and is gone now anyways. Should've just started Holmes last year, if that were the case. He couldn't have been much worse than what Satele was

 

We disagree. And I've said my piece on this at least a thousand times, so, moving on...

 

At least we agree about Hughes, so you get to be right about something today. ;)

[YOUR GM]

We disagree. And I've said my piece on this at least a thousand times, so, moving on...

At least we agree about Hughes, so you get to be right about something today. ;)

Or you're just "wrong" with me. All just opinions ;)