ILB draft board

[DougDew]

Why not take the best player available? Why pass on a good player at #29? A bird in the hand, right?

I think a lot of this "trade back" popularity is about falling in love with a bunch of prospects and wanting as many of them as possible. But I can only get with that if you can defend the notion that there's little difference between the 29th player in the draft and the 43rd player. Of course, that's subjective, but the point is that the better player should trump the idea of adding two lesser players, unless the difference is practically insignificant.

 

Then there's the real world question about whether you can find a trade partner that will give you true value for #29, in this year's draft (don't want 2016 picks in exchange for 2015 picks).

 

I'd just make my team board (players my team wants, in order), and a value board (the order I think every player will be selected, whether I want them or not), and sit tight. If a bunch of players not on my team board go ahead of where I have them on my value board -- QBs, TEs, RBs, etc. -- then it might push my #29 down into the late 30s/early 40s range, and then I might understand a trade down. But that's something that has to be determined on draft day.

Yes.  There has to be a trading partner no doubt.  The guys I want aren't in round 1. If a very good player drops, then would stay at 29.  But I don't think there is much difference in talent between 29 and 43 for the positions that I don't think will be filled via free agency.

 

Drafting OL higher than round 4 is out, IMO.  As you know, I still think Mewhort winds up at RT at some point in his career, and the other youngsters of Holmes (LG?) Harrison, and Thornton show enough promise to not discard.  Including AC, that's all 5 OL positions set for the future.  I don't see the point in drafting yet another OLineman to develop. I see Grigs signing a vet or 2 to take us to the SB while the current rostered youngsters develop.

 

Same with the DL.  Chap, Hughes, Kerr, (and even Pendleton) Werner, and Newsome have shown enough to keep them as starters/rotational guys.  I think its best to spend money in the FA DL market (which I think is where the depth of the FA market is this year) rather than draft a young guy who would take another young guys position.

 

The ILBs and DBs are the positions needing a youth injection in terms of depth and development.

 

From what I've seen and heard about the combine, I like Anthony at ILB, Rowe at CB/S, and Tartt at S.  All three have size and speed; and you know I like WR Lockett.

 

All four guys should go somewhere between picks #43 and our #93.  If we trade back, we'd have 43, 61, 77, and 93.  Then draft RB, and BPAs beginning in round 4.

[Superman]

Yes.  There has to be a trading partner no doubt.  The guys I want aren't in round 1. If a very good player drops, then would stay at 29.  But I don't think there is much difference in talent between 29 and 43 for the positions that I don't think will be filled via free agency.

 

Drafting OL higher than round 4 is out, IMO.  As you know, I still think Mewhort winds up at RT at some point in his career, and the other youngsters of Holmes (LG?) Harrison, and Thornton show enough promise to not discard.  Including AC, that's all 5 OL positions set for the future.  I don't see the point in drafting yet another OLineman to develop. I see Grigs signing a vet or 2 to take us to the SB while the current rostered youngsters develop.

 

Same with the DL.  Chap, Hughes, Kerr, (and even Pendleton) Werner, and Newsome have shown enough to keep them as starters/rotational guys.  Spend money in the FA DL market (which I think is where the depth of the FA market is this year) rather than draft a young guy who would take another young guys position.

 

The ILBs and DBs are the positions needing a youth injection in terms of depth and development.

 

From what I've seen and heard about the combine, I like Anthony at ILB, Rowe at CB/S, and Tartt at S.  All three have size and speed; and you know I like WR Lockett.

 

All four guys should go somewhere between picks #43 and our #93.  If we trade back, we'd have 43, 61, 77, and 93.  Then draft RB, and BPAs beginning in round 4.

 

We have some fundamental differences, specifically about the OL and the DL. 

 

To me, it comes down to the bolded portions of your comments. If you don't really like the guys you think will be available before #43, then that's the justification for trying to trade down to that pick. However, it seems that you've kind of become enamored with a handful of guys -- which happens to all of us, every year -- and are looking at how we can adjust our draft standing in order to get those guys in the early/mid rounds that you really like. I get it, I just don't think that's how we should run the draft.

 

Reason being, I firmly believe that there will be better players at #29 than any of the four guys you mentioned, and I mostly like those four guys. But if there's a stud lineman on either side of the ball at #29, I think we should take him; whereas you'd rather not draft a lineman in the first four rounds, but that's not trusting your board and taking BPA.

[DougDew]

We have some fundamental differences, specifically about the OL and the DL. 

 

To me, it comes down to the bolded portions of your comments. If you don't really like the guys you think will be available before #43, then that's the justification for trying to trade down to that pick. However, it seems that you've kind of become enamored with a handful of guys -- which happens to all of us, every year -- and are looking at how we can adjust our draft standing in order to get those guys in the early/mid rounds that you really like. I get it, I just don't think that's how we should run the draft.

 

Reason being, I firmly believe that there will be better players at #29 than any of the four guys you mentioned, and I mostly like those four guys. But if there's a stud lineman on either side of the ball at #29, I think we should take him; whereas you'd rather not draft a lineman in the first four rounds, but that's not trusting your board and taking BPA.

I'm not sold on any of them.  I'm just looking at value.

 

The Colts are going to fill needs in the trenches with vet FAs, IMO.  Since a 1st round draft pick should probably start immediately, planning to draft an OL or a DL at 29 would be a redundant waste, IMO, as would drafting some other positions at 29.

 

Clearly , the Colts have two holes at ILB (Freeman isn't under contract and DQ will be gone after next year, IMO) and they have two holes at S, with their best option being an unsigned 34 year old Adams.  There also needs to be better CB options behind Toler (a #4 CB).

 

There doesn't appear to be a realistic option for either of those positions at 29, with the good ILBs and Ss expected to be gone by then, and you don't draft a #4 CB at 29.

 

The guys I mentioned all have the speed and size you want, and their value is between 43 and 93, IMO, so I would position my draft to get those guys.  As far as I can tell so far, they wouldn't be overdrafted between 43 and 93.  But if the draft is falling a certain way at the time, you could go a different direction at 93 thinking that Rowe/Tartt would be there in the 4th.

 

That's what Grigs did with TY.  He found a guy he liked, thought about his value, then made a move to get him based upon the way the draft was shaking out at the time.

 

Going into free agancy and the draft, those are my guys and those are the spots,.....for now.

[Superman]

I'm not sold on any of them.  I'm just looking at value.

 

The Colts are going to fill needs in the trenches with vet FAs, IMO.  Since a 1st round draft pick should probably start immediately, planning to draft an OL or a DL at 29 would be a redundant waste, IMO, as would drafting some other positions at 29.

 

Clearly , the Colts have two holes at ILB (Freeman isn't under contract and DQ will be gone after next year, IMO) and they have two holes at S, with their best option being an unsigned 34 year old Adams.  There also needs to be better CB options behind Toler (a #4 CB).

 

There doesn't appear to be a realistic option for either of those positions at 29, with the good ILBs and Ss expected to be gone by then, and you don't draft a #4 CB at 29.

 

The guys I mentioned all have the speed and size you want, and their value is between 43 and 93, IMO, so I would position my draft to get those guys.  As far as I can tell so far, they wouldn't be overdrafted between 43 and 93.  But if the draft is falling a certain way at the time, you could go a different direction at 93 thinking that Rowe/Tartt would be there in the 4th.

 

That's what Grigs did with TY.  He found a guy he liked, thought about his value, then made a move to get him based upon the way the draft was shaking out at the time.

 

Going into free agancy and the draft, those are my guys and those are the spots,.....for now.

 

That's actually the opposite of what Grigson did with TY. You're saying trade down, and he traded up. 

 

Here's what I think the overall strategy should be: Set up your boards (team board and value board, like I mentioned earlier), do a ton of information gathering, and run a bunch of mocks to get a feel for how you think the draft is going to play out. Then we'll have a good idea of what the BPA will look like for all of our picks, and have an idea of how many needs we'll actually be able to check off in the draft, and at what positions. (By the way, it won't be more than 2 or 3; the majority of players we draft will be reserves and role players in 2015; you'll get maybe 1 starter, and 2-3 other contributors.)

 

If you do that now, then you can look to FA to fill the specific needs that you won't be able to take care of in the draft. So, for instance, if you think you can get DL, ILB, WR, CB, S in the first five rounds, based on your research, then you can sign OL, pass rusher, retain Butler, Adams and Brown, maybe sign a vet WR in free agency.

 

And then you can draft BPA, according to the board you spent so much time setting up. But, to me, you have to take the best players you can in the draft, unless you're getting great value in a trade down. And if necessary, you fill a couple holes for depth with June signings.

 

I think some teams are going to reach for a couple of these raw, athletic pass rushers. I think a RB might go in the first round, maybe two. I think guys like Shaq Thompson and Jaelen Strong will get "overdrafted". And at least two QBs, of course. All said and done, I think it's possible that the 20th or 25th best player in this draft is still there at #29, and I think there will be enough difference between that player and whoever we all might love and think is a great value at #43 to justify staying at #29 and taking that player, and we'll probably get great value on him.

[Defjamz26]

I like Anthony as well. And we've already talked to him too. He's a work in progress but he's what you want. All the things we talk about with LBs he has: Size at 6'3", Speed with a. 4.56 40, and can cover. Also has solid tape and his flaws are fixable. I think he's a better prospect than McKinney.

Might have to get him 2nd-3rd round because we could be selling him short by saying he's a 4th round guy.

[DougDew]

That's actually the opposite of what Grigson did with TY. You're saying trade down, and he traded up. 

 

Here's what I think the overall strategy should be: Set up your boards (team board and value board, like I mentioned earlier), do a ton of information gathering, and run a bunch of mocks to get a feel for how you think the draft is going to play out. Then we'll have a good idea of what the BPA will look like for all of our picks, and have an idea of how many needs we'll actually be able to check off in the draft, and at what positions. (By the way, it won't be more than 2 or 3; the majority of players we draft will be reserves and role players in 2015; you'll get maybe 1 starter, and 2-3 other contributors.)

 

If you do that now, then you can look to FA to fill the specific needs that you won't be able to take care of in the draft. So, for instance, if you think you can get DL, ILB, WR, CB, S in the first five rounds, based on your research, then you can sign OL, pass rusher, retain Butler, Adams and Brown, maybe sign a vet WR in free agency.

 

And then you can draft BPA, according to the board you spent so much time setting up. But, to me, you have to take the best players you can in the draft, unless you're getting great value in a trade down. And if necessary, you fill a couple holes for depth with June signings.

 

I think some teams are going to reach for a couple of these raw, athletic pass rushers. I think a RB might go in the first round, maybe two. I think guys like Shaq Thompson and Jaelen Strong will get "overdrafted". And at least two QBs, of course. All said and done, I think it's possible that the 20th or 25th best player in this draft is still there at #29, and I think there will be enough difference between that player and whoever we all might love and think is a great value at #43 to justify staying at #29 and taking that player, and we'll probably get great value on him.

Trade up or down isn't really the point.  You move picks around in order to get the guy you like at the spot he has value.  If you can get two guys you want that can be upgrades to Adams and DQ in 2 years then that is better than getting one BPA at 29, who I don't think will be an impact guy anyway.  I wouldn't want a bunch of 4th and 5th round draft picks, but I think someone at 43 and 77 have a good chance to be solid starters at positions of need. 

 

I agree about someone falling.  If someone expected to go in the top 20 drops down, I'd seriously consider staying put because regardless of position, that BPA who fell may be able to start right away and make an impact.  The last two picks at that similar draft position were TR and Werner.  The player dropping has to be better than either of those to want me to stay at 29 however.

[Superman]

Trade up or down isn't really the point.  You move picks around in order to get the guy you like at the spot he has value.  If you can get two guys you want that can be upgrades to Adams and DQ in 2 years then that is better than getting one BPA at 29, who I don't think will be an impact guy anyway.  I wouldn't want a bunch of 4th and 5th round draft picks, but I think someone at 43 and 77 have a good chance to be solid starters at positions of need. 

 

The main difference is that your strategy involves passing on someone that the team likes (presumably), whereas trading up involves identifying someone you like and going to get him. IMO, it's the exact opposite.

 

Where we're talking past each other is that you evidently don't like the way you think the board will fall, and think that no one still there at #29 will be a good value pick for us. And I disagree. I think there will be a number of good prospects still there at #29, and projecting the reach picks ahead of us in the first round, I think there will be value for us. Not to put words in your mouth, but I think that's the main contention.

 

I agree about someone falling.  If someone expected to go in the top 20 drops down, I'd seriously consider staying put because regardless of position, that BPA who fell may be able to start right away and make an impact.  The last two picks at that similar draft position were TR and Werner.  The player dropping has to be better than either of those to want me to stay at 29 however.

 

 

Different draft class, different values. I wouldn't compare either of our last two first rounders to what's in this class. Plus, I think most of us agree that we blew those two picks.

 

Anyways, I definitely think we can get players with better potential than those two. I think our first three picks should be better than Werner, to be honest.

 

By the way, I'm not opposed to trading back. I just think I'd prefer to grab the top guy at #29, based on how a lot of boards look today. Some of them are OL/DL, which you apparently don't want early in this draft. That's the other contention.

[Pancake Block]

I don't care that Dawson didn't look great today. The kids a stud, and his tape backs it up. He's going to be a Lavonte David type star IMO. So I still want him. I've never been big on McKinney personally. I really like Anthony now though. I wouldn't mind him if we don't get Dawson. BTW, I think we need to pick up an ILB in the 6th or so too to be a backup since A. Jackson and McNary are both gone.  A guy like Hull would be nice if he's there.

Late round, I like Hull too.  I also like Jake Ryan from Michigan.  He could play inside or outside and this will be his 2nd year back from knee injury.  I know everybody now thinks knee surgery is now a one year return to form, but I still think it takes 2.(especially phychologically).  I think Hull is also coming off year-old surgery.

[DougDew]

 

The main difference is that your strategy involves passing on someone that the team likes (presumably), whereas trading up involves identifying someone you like and going to get him. IMO, it's the exact opposite.

 

Where we're talking past each other is that you evidently don't like the way you think the board will fall, and think that no one still there at #29 will be a good value pick for us. And I disagree. I think there will be a number of good prospects still there at #29, and projecting the reach picks ahead of us in the first round, I think there will be value for us. Not to put words in your mouth, but I think that's the main contention.

 

 

Different draft class, different values. I wouldn't compare either of our last two first rounders to what's in this class. Plus, I think most of us agree that we blew those two picks.

 

Anyways, I definitely think we can get players with better potential than those two. I think our first three picks should be better than Werner, to be honest.

 

By the way, I'm not opposed to trading back. I just think I'd prefer to grab the top guy at #29, based on how a lot of boards look today. Some of them are OL/DL, which you apparently don't want early in this draft. That's the other contention.

 

My philosophy is to devote 1st round draft picks to guys who can start right away in a productive capacity that also fits will the overall philosophy of the scheme.  In this draft, at 29, I don't see a player who will do that, but rather, I see a player who would simply be a solid starter in a year or two.  Those players can usually be found between pick 20 and 75, IMO   Therefore, I would move down to get two solid starters rather than one.  The end of round one is almost always a bad place to be for value, IMO.

 

So that's why I'm looking at guys who would have value in the mid second to top of the 4th.  I also think Anthony looks like a better long term fit for the D.  I think Perryman and Dawson may play better their rookie year, but I think Anthony is the guy I would want 2 or 3 years from now.  Jamie Collins was a bit raw and drafted at the end of the third and has turned out pretty well.  I could probably tender Freeman and get the same level of play, or better, from him next year than I would with Perryman or Dawson.

[Defjamz26]

My philosophy is to devote 1st round draft picks to guys who can start right away in a productive capacity that also fits will the overall philosophy of the scheme.  In this draft, at 29, I don't see a player who will do that, but rather, I see a player who would simply be a solid starter in a year or two.  Those players can usually be found between pick 20 and 75, IMO   Therefore, I would move down to get two solid starters rather than one.  The end of round one is almost always a bad place to be for value, IMO.

 

So that's why I'm looking at guys who would have value in the mid second to top of the 4th.  I also think Anthony looks like a better long term fit for the D.  I think Perryman and Dawson may play better their rookie year, but I think Anthony is the guy I would want 2 or 3 years from now.  Jamie Collins was a bit raw and drafted at the end of the third and has turned out pretty well.  I could probably tender Freeman and get the same level of play, or better, from him next year than I would with Perryman or Dawson.

 

A lot of what you're basing your argument off of depends on who is there at 29 though. And no one knows what you see. I agree though. It's a weak draft class overall and I wouldn't be opposed to trading down. Again, we have to know who is there though.

 

If you want, we could do a Big Board topic and later turn it into a 1st round mock for all 32 teams to get a clear picture of who goes where, so we can see who MIGHT be available at 29.

[DougDew]

A lot of what you're basing your argument off of depends on who is there at 29 though. And no one knows what you see. I agree though. It's a weak draft class overall and I wouldn't be opposed to trading down. Again, we have to know who is there though.

 

If you want, we could do a Big Board topic and later turn it into a 1st round mock for all 32 teams to get a clear picture of who goes where, so we can see who MIGHT be available at 29.

Yeah, the topic of the thread is the ILB board.  I must have gotten OT into the overall approach I would take to this year's draft as a means explaining why I favor Anthony over Perryman or Dawson, who I think are rated higher on the board.

[riftastic28]

What is wrong with you guys nothing under 245 lb where looking for thumpers ... McKinney ,Anthony I also like hull in the later rounds , David Harris is a FA. Harris an McKinney in the middle .. Sounds good to me

[Deathiltis]

Anybody have thoughts on Mike Hull? From the little tape I've seen I like him a lot in the 4th round. Besides his size the guy has good measurables.

[Colts_Fan12]

Having gone back and watched some more film (and some repeat film), I'm starting to feel better about Stephone Anthony and Eric Kendricks, I haven't moved much on Perryman, I question Dawson's coverage ability more than I did before (admittedly influenced by his completely unexplosive Combine), unmoved on Shaq Thompson, unmoved on McKinney, and now somewhat impressed by Ramik Wilson.

I personally wouldn't give any of them strong first round grades.

Thompson, first/second

Kendricks, first/second

Perryman, second

Dawson, second/third

Anthony, second/third

McKinney, second/third

Wilson, third/fourth

So if he is there at 29 would you take Kendricks?

[Superman]

So if he is there at 29 would you take Kendricks?

 

He'd be on my board. Along with Carl Davis and La'el Collins and Ereck Flowers and Jalen Collins and Marcus Peters and a bunch of other guys. And if those guys are gone, it might mean that higher rated guys like Vic Beasley or TJ Clemmings are still there. I don't know that Kendricks be at the top of my board.