Would you be opposed to trading Fleener?

[throwing BBZ]

If we trade Fleener we'll get pennies on the dollar back in terms of value.

 

All we have to do with Fleener is use him properly,  which we have yet to do this season......

 

You are dismissing Fleener as no good then, IMO.

Guarantee you there are many OC`s who could utilize his skills much better than we are, which denotes a higher trade value.

 He is a waste with Luck`s inability to throw accurately.

 Trading him for a pass rusher would be great.

[Jason_]

He's extremely unreliable in traffic and he's pretty much the last guy I want Luck to target in a crucial situation.

I think you know I used to defend him with you but he's just not improving.

 

I will say he has been unreliable so far this year (well, really just the Denver game because he was only targeted once I think against Philly).  Last year he did show improvement over his rookie year.  Thus far this year he hasn't shown that he's taking that next step, but then again we're only 2 games into the season.  I'm not by any means ready to give up on him yet.  I've seen several people say that he looked scared in the Denver game...I didn't think that at all.  I thought he looked exhausted, just like many other players did at times.  I really didn't like that @Denver was going to be in week 1.  Starters seem to be playing less in the preseason and there are always some conditioning issues in the first week or 2 of the season as players are finally able to get back into the flow of playing a full 60 minute game.  Add to that playing in Denver at that elevation and that's only going to exacerbate the conditioning issue. 

 

Conversely, against Philly I didn't think anything like that about Fleener or anyone else.  I thought Fleener played harder and stronger in the Philly game than he did the previous week, he just didn't get targeted much in the passing game.

 

My main complaint in that previous post was the allegation that he can't catch at all in traffic.  That is absolutely not true.  He did not do a good job of that in the Denver game, but aside from that I have definitely seen him make some great catches in traffic.  

[B~Town]

I'm all for if the value is in our favor . Say we can find a TE needy team with a good pass rusher buried on there depth chart I would be all for it .

[NewColtsFan]

You are dismissing Fleener as no good then, IMO.

Guarantee you there are many OC`s who could utilize his skills much better than we are, which denotes a higher trade value.

 He is a waste with Luck`s inability to throw accurately.

 Trading him for a pass rusher would be great.

 

I think you're misreading and misunderstanding me...

 

If we trade Fleener now,  we won't get much in return for him because the Colts haven't done a good enough job in establishing what he can be and what he can mean to a team.

 

So,  there is no reason for a team to trade a quality pass rusher for him.     Why should a team trade a quality pass rusher for him if the Colts are trying to move him because of under-performance?

 

Remember,  I'm the Stanford guy.   I know what Fleener can be.   I'm saying let's keep him and use him properly so he can help the Colts!   That's why I don't want to trade him.

[Hoosiernsavga]

I dont even think the Bills would trade J.Hughes back too us for Fleener. Thats the sad thing about it no way would we get a quality pass rusher at this point for Fleener. Not even Hughes... LOL

[cm43sports]

Well..who is number one and number two depends upon the roles they are playing.  TEs like Fleener are more valuable than TEs like Allen these days...that's the way the NFL sees it....which is why Fleener was drafted ahead of Allen. That's the basis for calling Fleener the first TE, however, Fleener is performing subpar in his role as the big chunk "number 1" TE.  In that sense, Allen wasn't drafted to be the "number 1" TE.   He runs a 4.8 when healthy. 

 

If Fleener is traded, the Colts would have to replace him with someone other than Allen..putting Allen again in the secondary role behind the new guy.....unless the Colts change the offense and have one traditional TE, which Allen fits very well, and Doyle could be the backup.

I don't believe that their playing style is reflective of their placement on the depth chart (at least I hope not). The superior talent should always be higher on the depth chart. Allen has proven to be a better NFL talent to this point so he should be higher on the depth chart which makes Fleener the number two regardless of his potential (which is overrated when you realize he is about the same age as Graham and older than Gronkowski). You should let your scheme be reflective of your players talent rather than the other way around.

[Reddog]

_{No, but for who??  The guys got no hands and he's playing with his college QB.  Maybe Freeney, that would work for me...}

[Douzer]

Jack Doyle > Coby Fleener

[DougDew]

Most of your post was wrong but here's the biggest moment, "Essentially, he (Jack Doyle) did the the things Allen does, just as well as Allen does them". Doyle had a solid game (blocking) but to imply that one solid game with 2 receptions makes him as good as Allen, making Allen expendable, is flat out dumb and erroneous.

Also, when has Fleener ever been a down the seam TE for us? We all want him to be that but he never has been that for us, thus far. The fact of the matter is that Allen is far better at pretty much every aspect of the TE position than Fleener. And Doyle had a solid blocking game but it's a joke to say he can do everything at Dwayne Allen's level.

Dwayne Allen would, however, be the only TE that would be worth anything on the trading block. Fleener isn't fetching us anything in a trade.

I said that Allen should be the possession TE and Doyle his backup.  IF Doyle develops further, the competition would be between he and Allen for that role. 

 

For some reason, people are suggesting trading Fleener.   Fleener was drafted to be sort of a Dallas Clark clone.  Allen is more like Ken Dilger...if you remember him..  Fleener is more like Marcus Pollard...if you remember him.  Two different roles.  If the colts traded Pollard, they would need to find another one, not put Dilger in that role.

 

Neither Allen or Fleener would fetch much on the market.  Fleener has not been a big threat, and UDFA Doyle has shown you don't need a third round pick to get almost as much production as what Allen has provided.

[pgt_rob]

Jack Doyle > Coby Fleener

 

No.

[Kyle]

He is like a Pierre Garcon at TE.  Will make a great catch here and there, but when it is 3rd and short and he MUST catch it, he drops the ball...

[cm43sports]

I said that Allen should be the possession TE and Doyle his backup.  IF Doyle develops further, the competition would be between he and Allen for that role. 

 

For some reason, people are suggesting trading Fleener.   Fleener was drafted to be sort of a Dallas Clark clone.  Allen is more like Ken Dilger...if you remember him..  Fleener is more like Marcus Pollard...if you remember him.  Two different roles.  If the colts traded Pollard, they would need to find another one, not put Dilger in that role.

 

Neither Allen or Fleener would fetch much on the market.  Fleener has not been a big threat, and UDFA Doyle has shown you don't need a third round pick to get almost as much production as what Allen has provided.

Or you can change the game plan. There are plenty of teams that don't necessarily have a big-play threat but have a good possession tight end. The Steelers with Heath Miller are a good example of this.

[DougDew]

I don't believe that their playing style is reflective of their placement on the depth chart (at least I hope not). The superior talent should always be higher on the depth chart. Allen has proven to be a better NFL talent to this point so he should be higher on the depth chart which makes Fleener the number two regardless of his potential (which is overrated when you realize he is about the same age as Graham and older than Gronkowski). You should let your scheme be reflective of your players talent rather than the other way around.

 

I don't think depth charts tell the whole story.  The Colts play 2 TE sets.  They are both number 1 for their respective roles.  I would say that Allen has definitely filled his role better than Fleener has filled his role so far.  But Fleener may have been asked to block more than normal or take shorter routes due to OL issues, so maybe we haven't seen him down the field as much out of neccessity. 

 

The whole discussion is in the contex of the OP, should Fleener be traded for a pass rusher?  The answer is NO, because the Colts would then have to find another tall fast TE to fill the Graham, Gronk, Dallas Clark and Pollard role.....unless you want to change the offense's philosophy.

[Dustin]

I don't think depth charts tell the whole story.  The Colts play 2 TE sets.  They are both number 1 for their respective roles.  I would say that Allen has definitely filled his role better than Fleener has filled his role so far.  But Fleener may have been asked to block more than normal or take shorter routes due to OL issues, so maybe we haven't seen him down the field as much out of neccessity. 

 

The whole discussion is in the contex of the OP, should Fleener be traded for a pass rusher?  The answer is NO, because the Colts would then have to find another tall fast TE to fill the Graham, Gronk, Dallas Clark and Pollard role.....unless you want to change the offense's philosophy.

 

We don't have O-line issues. 

[rockywoj]

If we were to get good value, ergo a quality player that can effectively contribute in a current area of weakness, then I would be fine with trading him.  

 

That being said, as disappointed as I have been with his butter fingers over the past two and a little years, he still offers up an intriguing physical mismatch if he is used effectively and if he steps up his game to become reliable.  I can recall Dallas Clark having his issues his first couple of years or so as well, so perhaps there is still hope.

[ColtsLegacy]

I said that Allen should be the possession TE and Doyle his backup.  IF Doyle develops further, the competition would be between he and Allen for that role. 

 

For some reason, people are suggesting trading Fleener.   Fleener was drafted to be sort of a Dallas Clark clone.  Allen is more like Ken Dilger...if you remember him..  Fleener is more like Marcus Pollard...if you remember him.  Two different roles.  If the colts traded Pollard, they would need to find another one, not put Dilger in that role.

 

Neither Allen or Fleener would fetch much on the market.  Fleener has not been a big threat, and UDFA Doyle has shown you don't need a third round pick to get almost as much production as what Allen has provided.

 

Fleener is nothing like Dallas Clark or Marcus Pollard thus far. The only similarity is his ability to be a terrible blocker like Dallas. Sure, we drafted Fleener to be that down the seam threat but he hasn't been that at all. If we were to play Dwayne Allen in Fleener's role, Allen would outperform him in his own role.

 

As for Doyle, he has 10 career receptions for 41 yards, to say he gives us "almost as much production" as a guy who was easily a top 5 all around TE in football his rookie season is asinine.

[John Waylon]

After his drops Sunday, good luck.

His blocking is noteworthy though.

[cm43sports]

I don't think depth charts tell the whole story.  The Colts play 2 TE sets.  They are both number 1 for their respective roles.  I would say that Allen has definitely filled his role better than Fleener has filled his role so far.  But Fleener may have been asked to block more than normal or take shorter routes due to OL issues, so maybe we haven't seen him down the field as much out of neccessity. 

 

The whole discussion is in the contex of the OP, should Fleener be traded for a pass rusher?  The answer is NO, because the Colts would then have to find another tall fast TE to fill the Graham, Gronk, Dallas Clark and Pollard role.....unless you want to change the offense's philosophy.

His shorter routes or the need to be in to block more often are not excuses for why he is standing alone in the endzone and dropped a pass that hit him directly in his hands. I understand that receivers can't be expected to make the catch every single time but that is a catch that you have got to pull in. Far too often, Fleener gets hit in the hands and somehow doesn't make the catch. If this continues then I think its best to either change his role or move him in a trade. If he ends up being traded then either the team needs to find someone to fill Fleener's role or slightly change the offense to fit two traditional tight ends and send the receivers a few more deep routes.

[Narcosys]

We would be able to trade him pretty easily i think.  Fleener in my opinion is the 3rd best at blocking...out of our 3 TE's.  if Doyle keeps up his production and blocks well, i could easily see getting a good return on investment of fleener.

[ColtsLegacy]

We would be able to trade him pretty easily i think.  Fleener in my opinion is the 3rd best at blocking...out of our 3 TE's.  if Doyle keeps up his production and blocks well, i could easily see getting a good return on investment of fleener.

 

What's a good return on investment to you? We wouldn't get anything even near a 2nd rounder for him. Maybe, maybe a 5th if some team thinks they can squeeze the potential out of him.

[Narcosys]

What's a good return on investment to you? We wouldn't get anything even near a 2nd rounder for him. Maybe, maybe a 5th if some team thinks they can squeeze the potential out of him.

I figured 3rd at best, 4th at worst.  I know we got him in the 2nd round, but i still think a 3rd or 4th would be good because we can use the double picks in that round to be able to trade up. But i also see the great value he has in staying as well.  Its really a 60/40 split to me on keeping him or trading him.

[ColtsLegacy]

I figured 3rd at best, 4th at worst.  I know we got him in the 2nd round, but i still think a 3rd or 4th would be good because we can use the double picks in that round to be able to trade up. But i also see the great value he has in staying as well.  Its really a 60/40 split to me on keeping him or trading him.

 

No chance. The way teams value their picks and with what Fleener has shown (or not shown), nobody would trade that for him.

 

So, he's much more valuable to us than what we would get out of him in a trade.

[Superman]

We don't have O-line issues. 

 

For now.

 

We've had to suffer through bad line play for so long, it's hard to accept that the line is playing well for a change. I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[Dustin]

For now.

We've had to suffer through bad line play for so long, it's hard to accept that the line is playing well for a change. I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Just wait until they bench Shipley for no reason.

[Superman]

Just wait until they bench Shipley for no reason.

 

I'm torn on that. I don't think Shipley has been great, but he's obviously playing well enough. I think Holmes is a better player and prospect, but the point is to have good line play, which we do at the moment.

[BProland85]

To me it depends on what kind of contract he wants once his rookie deal is up. If he isn't greedy, and he doesn't deserve top TE money anyhow, then I'd be fine keeping him if and only if we continue to throw to our TEs. If we start throwing to our WRs more, then I could see Fleener as expendable, and could probably get a 3rd back from a TE needy team.

[wesd2890]

Anyone who drops a wide open td pass has gotta go.. his effort is pathetic at times.. get rid of him for any defensive person. WE NEED MORE DWAYNE ALLEN

[slimebag]

Fleener has the physical tools of the elite tight ends, but not the game. He should dominate matchups, I haven't seen it yet...

Still think they should keep him, because I don't think his trade value is high.

[antipatriot]

Just NO this has been beat to death the guy has so much upside why give up a weapon for what will at best be a mediocre stop gap at pass rusher.

[Dustin]

Just NO this has been beat to death the guy has so much upside why give up a weapon for what will at best be a mediocre stop gap at pass rusher.

A mediocre pass rusher is more valuable than a mediocre TE.

[Coffeedrinker]

Last year Fleener was, among TEs, 14th in receptions, 13th in yards and 17th in TD.  I'm sure there are plenty of teams that would be willing to make a good trade for him. 

[krunk]

I still like Fleener and I think it's premature to be discussing getting rid of him.  I'm almost certain he'll get his stuff together as we move forward with the season.  However if Grigs did decide to pull the trigger I think Fleener holds enough value to pull a young pass rusher from somebodies team.  Someone that has real potential, but is not there just yet.  I wonder would the Eagles entertain giving us Marcus Smith for Coby Fleener?  They could team Fleener and Ertz together in some of those packages they run.  Might be intriguing possibly.  I'm just doing a bunch of thinking out loud, so forgive me if I don't make a whole lot of sense here.

[OLD FAN MAN]

yes, but only for jj watt.

[Superman]

I still like Fleener and I think it's premature to be discussing getting rid of him.  I'm almost certain he'll get his stuff together as we move forward with the season.  However if Grigs did decide to pull the trigger I think Fleener holds enough value to pull a young pass rusher from somebodies team.  Someone that has real potential, but is not there just yet.  I wonder would the Eagles entertain giving us Marcus Smith for Coby Fleener?  They could team Fleener and Ertz together in some of those packages they run.  Might be intriguing possibly.  I'm just doing a bunch of thinking out loud, so forgive me if I don't make a whole lot of sense here.

 

They already have Celek. I doubt they're itching for another TE.

[krunk]

They already have Celek. I doubt they're itching for another TE.

 

 

You're probably right.  I was just thinking up some stuff.  I don't want to get rid of Fleener any way.

[masterlock]

Stop it folks...He's going to have a big season...

we don't play a division champion every week

By now, Fleener is what he is. The drop in the end zone pretty much sums up his downside. It's not gong to change.

[snkdy]

He improved last season by a significant margin. He hasn't played well lately, but I still it's way too early to right him off.

[coltsfanatic24]

I think Fleener for Nick Perry would benefit both teams.

[Jason_]

You're probably right. I was just thinking up some stuff. I don't want to get rid of Fleener any way.

And I would probably have to do fleener for Marcus smith if they were willing but that's highly unlikely.

Wonder if we could talk our good buddy Tom telesco into fleener for attouchu.

Overall though I agree, krunk, I'm not in any way looking to go out of my way to get rid of him. I like fleener a lot and just think he's in a bit of a funk. But for the right price though, anything is possible

[SkyBane]

If you do get rid of Fleener, get some value out of him by getting some picks to package up and move up and get a pass rusher that way.

 

I wouldn't do it though.