Traines Mock (w/ alternates)

[Traines]

Round 1 (29)

Eric Kendricks, LB

Top coverage LB in the draft, allowing him to fill a void on the Colts defense.  Very productive college career and has tape to back it up.  If Freeman is not back after this season he will be able to step into his role without issue; I like the idea of him and Irving this year and next.  Also, I am not worried about his size as some are.

Alternates: T.J. Clemmings (OT), Ronald Darby (CB), Byron Jones (CB), Eddie Goldman (DT) Landon Collins (S)

 

Round 2 (61)

Henry Anderson, DL

Excellent tape, high motor, can get after the QB from the D Line .  Likely a 3-tech pass rushing specialist in nickel package to begin with (which we run frequent enough to justify a 2nd rounder on him).  Currently lacks strength and definitely not going to be a run-stuffer to start, but that is fine right now as we have the depth to rotate.  Can't have too many passh rushers, and someone dangerous on the D-Line would be an upgrade.

Alternates: Grady Jarrett, DL, Stephone Anthony (LB)

 

Round 3 (~65 to 75)

Tyler Lockett, WR+KR/PR (Trade 2016 2nd Rounder to move into early 3rd)

Quite a few people want to take a RB in Round 2 or 3 (even trade up for Tevin Coleman in Round 2...I think that is crazy talk...and I like him...but we have Frank Gore, a deep RB class, and a draft next year), but none of them are going to give you more value than Lockett in either of those rounds in my opinion.  I understand that some believe we are a bit crowded in the WR department, but then again, we're hoping Duron can be our WR4 this year...Griff our 5th spot on the roster, or maybe one of the PS guys?  Like I said, I am hoping for the best and think Carter can possibly develop into a decent ball player, but he is an unknown with a pretty weak resume' and a somewhat unfavorable (for lack of a better term right now) past...and he is dirt cheap so it's not like we're overly invested in him should he get surpassed by others on the roster.  If one of TY or Andre miss any significant time we're going to be relying on Moncrief (2nd year) and the unknown Carter to step up and play a decent-sized role.  And don't get me wrong, I really, really like Moncrief and think he will be a good player (really liked what he did this past season as a rookie and loved that we got him in the 3rd last year) for us this coming year and into the future, but Lockett in my opinion is more talented, more polished, and has much more upside.  He can fill multiple roles in the passing game, roles we currently do not have anyone on the roster to play IMO (I like the Edelman comparison), and has an excellent resume' and game film...really good at the very least...hands and route running are very, very nice.  Also, if Moncrief were to go down, we're depending on Carter and Whalen to step into that 3rd WR role...I don't dislike either one, but not sure how confident I would feel about it. 

 

Admittedly, there may be defensive guys available at these spots that you just cannot pass up, and I am all about improving our D, but to say we shouldn't take a very talented WR early because we have Moncrief, Carter and Whalen seems like some are over-valuing them.  I also understand the argument that we can get a good WR later, and I agree, but I feel that none of them are going to be as polished or talented as Lockett.  He can have an immediate impact for this team, if not in the receiving game, the return game (where he has proven to be dangerous in college).  Plus, Carter and the PS guys are projects, we do not need another at this point in my opinion.
 
Overall, I believe our team only gets better with Lockett on it, which is what the draft is for, improving talent; he can open up the field for TY and Andre, or vise versa, as well as provide special teams contributions as a returner immediately.  I understand that he does not play defense, but he plays a premium position and would provide us cheap talent for at least 4 years.
 
Couple of notes; when I mention WR3, WR4, WR5 above, I'm referring to their position on the depth chart, not X,Y, or Z on the field. 

 

Some of you I know just want defense no matter what, so...I'm sorry.

 

Round 3 (93)

James Sample, S

He only has one year of starting experience so I think that will help in his dropping to this spot.  Most of his flaws appear to be fixable with more coaching and experience.  He is well-built for the position, I really like his size.  He is more of an ITB type with good tackling ability, but he also had 4 picks last year.  He can go sideline-to-sideline and make tackles in the open field and has coverage ability.

Alternates: Jaquiski Tartt (S), Rob Crisp (OT), D'Joun Smith (CB)

 

Round 4 (128)

Rob Havenstein, OT

Eventual replacement for Cherilus, either this season at some point or next.  If Cherilus is healthy then Havenstein can compete for the RG spot.  Assuming he is able to handle the RT position he would give us a solid succession plan, allowing us to; a.) Cut Cherilus after this season, saving money for our other FAs coming up, b.) allow us to have a cheap RT (a fairly expensive position to fill via FA, or to keep our current player) for the next few years, and c.) prevent us from trying to draft someone next season that we hope can start right away - I realize that Cherilus would still be under contract and we could just keep him and avoid this, however, I think we will be looking to shed his contract and use that money for our own guys...just my opinion.  I am also in the camp that thinks the left side of the line should be left alone.  I feel as if Mewhort and Castonzo have very good chemistry and should remain on that side together until proven otherwise.

Alternate: Derrick Lott (DT), Jeremy Langford (RB), Adran Amos (S)
 

Round 5 (165)

Josh Robinson, RB

I like his tape for the most part, has a pretty well-rounded game, but like most college RBs he is going to need to work on his pass blocking.  I think this is something he can definitely learn and be good at, especially having Frank Gore as a mentor for a couple of seasons.  He can catch out of the backfield, has pretty decent hands, definitely not a liability and can be depended upon in this area.  However, my favorite part about his game is that he can absolutely run over people and break tackles like nobody's business.  These were not all scrubs either, some of these were guys who are going to be drafted and likely be successful at the next level.  He is not going to break off many 50-yard runs probably, but we don't need that when we would have a guy that can wear defenses down with his punishing style.  I think he is going to be a handful for a lot of NFL defenders who are trying to tackle him.  He has a great story and I think he would be a great addition to the team, absolutely worth a look at pick 165,  I also think he is the perfect guy to play behind, and learn from Gore.

Alternates: Bobby McCain (CB)

 

Round 6 (204)

Alani Fua, OLB

Decent size, speed, and agility, however, not really sure where exactly he would play.  With his size and attributes could move him around and see if you can find a place for him.

 

Round 6 (206)

Darryl Roberts, CB

Long corner with good recovery speed and ability to play press coverage.  Needs quite a bit of refinement but has all of the skills necessary according to his NFL.com profile.  Haven't watched him, but looked him up after his visit here.

 

Round 7 (244)

Terry Williams, NT

Good NT to bring in and compete with the others, has the size we like as well.  He appears to have the potential to be a "knucklehead" as he has a drug-related arrest and was suspended again later that season.  I think pick 244 is an alright place to take a chance on this guy, although he could go much higher.  He appears to have the talent and ability, but maybe not the discipline to make it at the next level.

 

Round 7 (255)

Marus Rush, OLB

Good size and speed, appears to be very durable.  Worth a late-round flyer.

[12isthenew18]

lockett is reached there

[Superman]

I hate how much I like this mock.

[Superman]

lockett is reached there

 

Who cares. You want him, go get him. 

[Defjamz26]

Not sure why you would trade a 2016 second rounder for Lockette. That'd be a waste for the Colts.

[Traines]

Who cares. You want him, go get him. 

 

Exactly...he's probably my overall favorite player in the draft and he can play day 1 and makes this team immediately better in my opinion.

 

Not sure why you would trade a 2016 second rounder for Lockette. That'd be a waste for the Colts.

 

Please elaborate.  I gave you a lengthy explanation why I would do it, it would be nice to hear more on why you think we shouldn't.  If you feel he will still be there at the end of the third, that is fine, however, I do not feel he will fall that far.  Do you have a problem with his game, his abilities, our perceived depth at WR, or?

[SaturdayAllDay]

Not a bad mock all around. I think the pick for Lockette is more a luxury we cannot afford at this point. We have so many holes and question marks In other spots so if we were to trade future picks I would prefer addressing a spot of need rather then a depth player. With Allen and fleener at TE it leaves us not using more then three wrs very often. Yes you can argue depth for injuries, but then you can argue that we desperately need to draft a qb in case luck gets hurt.

[Superman]

Not a bad mock all around. I think the pick for Lockette is more a luxury we cannot afford at this point. We have so many holes and question marks In other spots so if we were to trade future picks I would prefer addressing a spot of need rather then a depth player. With Allen and fleener at TE it leaves us not using more then three wrs very often. Yes you can argue depth for injuries, but then you can argue that we desperately need to draft a qb in case luck gets hurt.

 

We have 3 receivers, before you count Carter, Whalen, and V. Brown. So we have 3 receivers. Receiver is a need -- maybe not a pressing need, but still a need -- this year and beyond.

[SaturdayAllDay]

We have 3 receivers, before you count Carter, Whalen, and V. Brown. So we have 3 receivers. Receiver is a need -- maybe not a pressing need, but still a need -- this year and beyond.

Agreed that we only have three wrs right now. But in all reality, do we need more then that more then we need help on defense? The way I see it we picked up players this off-season who help enhance our running game. We run more, that means less 4 wr sets. Add in the fact that Lockette would not only be fighting wrs for playing time, but our two TEs. I think what we pay vs how many snaps he would actually get is not worth the cost right now.

[Superman]

Agreed that we only have three wrs right now. But in all reality, do we need more then that more then we need help on defense? The way I see it we picked up players this off-season who help enhance our running game. We run more, that means less 4 wr sets. Add in the fact that Lockette would not only be fighting wrs for playing time, but our two TEs. I think what we pay vs how many snaps he would actually get is not worth the cost right now.

 

To the bolded, yes. We've been held back by a lack of WR depth since the middle of 2013. Allen needs to stay healthy. He and Fleener are coming up on free agency. We have plenty of receiving options now, but that usually changes by October, at the latest. 

 

The need for defense is separate from that. And if you're using a future pick to move up, then you're not sacrificing anything on the defensive side of the ball this season. Just pretend we're drafting a WR in the second round in 2016, but via the magic of Doc Brown's DeLorean, we get to play him in 2015.

[backshoulderfade]

I love Lockett. He does everything well. Even at under 6 foot.

[SaturdayAllDay]

To the bolded, yes. We've been held back by a lack of WR depth since the middle of 2013. Allen needs to stay healthy. He and Fleener are coming up on free agency. We have plenty of receiving options now, but that usually changes by October, at the latest.

The need for defense is separate from that. And if you're using a future pick to move up, then you're not sacrificing anything on the defensive side of the ball this season. Just pretend we're drafting a WR in the second round in 2016, but via the magic of Doc Brown's DeLorean, we get to play him in 2015.

If we traded to move up for a defensive player instead then it would be a better use of the pick imo. I mean look at how our offense played last year with a terrible run game, and how little moncrief saw the field as a wr4. I would say that we upgraded our run game this off-season, so that means our 2016 second round pick is playing less snaps then moncrief did this year. I think our resources are better spent on our d line rotation tbh. Just like wr we were looking thin on the line last yr by November, and our defense was the issue last year. I think we fix what isn't working before we worry about fixing what has been working for us. We had a top offense last year, and upgraded it quite a bit in free agency this year. I think we did enough to succeed again. Also we have a few young options that we try out, not to mention a chance at some decent udfas this year.

[Superman]

If we traded to move up for a defensive player instead then it would be a better use of the pick imo. I mean look at how our offense played last year with a terrible run game, and how little moncrief saw the field as a wr4. I would say that we upgraded our run game this off-season, so that means our 2016 second round pick is playing less snaps then moncrief did this year. I think our resources are better spent on our d line rotation tbh. Just like wr we were looking thin on the line last yr by November, and our defense was the issue last year. I think we fix what isn't working before we worry about fixing what has been working for us. We had a top offense last year, and upgraded it quite a bit in free agency this year. I think we did enough to succeed again. Also we have a few young options that we try out, not to mention a chance at some decent udfas this year.

 

So how about this: Trade up to the middle of the third for a defensive player -- not sure who you might have in mind, but okay -- and take Tyler Lockett at #93. Same result.

 

I think we should fix everything we can, and we do that by drafting the best players we can, not with a position specific draft approach. Let's not bring up QBs or first round RBs or probably even TEs, but every other position on our roster can use talent upgrades. The OP drafts multiple DL prospects, including one of my favorites in Henry Anderson.

 

Also, while everyone is fixated on the defensive line, to me, the real issue is how we handle the passing game up the middle of the field. The run defense isn't as bad as everyone is convinced it is. Like everything else, the DL needs more talent, but not just for the sake of saying "great, now we can stop the run." It doesn't work like that, especially if you can't cover the middle of the field and pressure the QB without blitzing ILBs. 

[Traines]

If we traded to move up for a defensive player instead then it would be a better use of the pick imo. I mean look at how our offense played last year with a terrible run game, and how little moncrief saw the field as a wr4. I would say that we upgraded our run game this off-season, so that means our 2016 second round pick is playing less snaps then moncrief did this year. I think our resources are better spent on our d line rotation tbh. Just like wr we were looking thin on the line last yr by November, and our defense was the issue last year. I think we fix what isn't working before we worry about fixing what has been working for us. We had a top offense last year, and upgraded it quite a bit in free agency this year. I think we did enough to succeed again. Also we have a few young options that we try out, not to mention a chance at some decent udfas this year.

 

In my mock I have 3 defensive players in the first 4 picks; an ILB with coverage ability, DLineman with pass rushing ability, and a Safety with a nice skillset that could come in and compete for a starting role (all 3 levels of the defense)...not to mention an NT, 2 OLBs, and a CB late.  I believe that your thoughts on the amount of open starting positions on the defense is unrealistic.  You do not want to draft Lockett because he is perceived to be just depth and will not see the field, and that is how I see most of our defensive positions, so unless you're trading up for a starter we're in the same boat.  Lockett has better hands and is a better route runner than Moncrief, and he is also more versatile.  The fact that Moncrief didn't see the field much last year likely has more to do with his coming into the league as an unpolished product...not because we only want/can play so many WRs.

 

We currently have players on our roster to fill every single position, so I am looking at how we can improve upon the foundation we already have; for the present and the future.  This is in contrast to most here who think that we need to draft only defense (unless we trade up in the 2nd for Tevin Coleman) and that every player should be designed to stop the patriots run game (not saying that you are one of those, just saying I believe we do not have tons of "needs", just lots of room for improvement).  Also, I do not believe we really need the following:  QB, TE (early at least), or a RB (in the first 2 rounds)...if Gurley is there at 61 I'm in...but other than that it is fair game.  I believe Lockett will be the third most talented WR on this team immediately, behind only TY and Andre.  I love Moncrief, but I feel he is inferior to Lockett as a player, which is why I am moving up to get him.  This also fits right in with the "win now" mantra.

 

By the way, I truly appreciate the back and forth SaturdayAllDay...I'm new so it is nice to have some interaction.

 

Supe, you and I are pretty much in complete agreement, your responses are spot on with my thoughts...thanks!

[Superman]

...

 

This is in contrast to most here who think that we need to draft only defense (unless we trade up in the 2nd for Tevin Coleman) and that every player should be designed to stop the patriots run game (not saying that you are one of those, just saying I believe we do not have tons of "needs", just lots of room for improvement). 

 

...

 

Supe, you and I are pretty much in complete agreement, your responses are spot on with my thoughts...thanks!

 

Yup.

[SaturdayAllDay]

In my mock I have 3 defensive players in the first 4 picks; an ILB with coverage ability, DLineman with pass rushing ability, and a Safety with a nice skillset that could come in and compete for a starting role (all 3 levels of the defense)...not to mention an NT, 2 OLBs, and a CB late. I believe that your thoughts on the amount of open starting positions on the defense is unrealistic. You do not want to draft Lockett because he is perceived to be just depth and will not see the field, and that is how I see most of our defensive positions, so unless you're trading up for a starter we're in the same boat. Lockett has better hands and is a better route runner than Moncrief, and he is also more versatile. The fact that Moncrief didn't see the field much last year likely has more to do with his coming into the league as an unpolished product...not because we only want/can play so many WRs.

We currently have players on our roster to fill every single position, so I am looking at how we can improve upon the foundation we already have; for the present and the future. This is in contrast to most here who think that we need to draft only defense (unless we trade up in the 2nd for Tevin Coleman) and that every player should be designed to stop the patriots run game (not saying that you are one of those, just saying I believe we do not have tons of "needs", just lots of room for improvement). Also, I do not believe we really need the following: QB, TE (early at least), or a RB (in the first 2 rounds)...if Gurley is there at 61 I'm in...but other than that it is fair game. I believe Lockett will be the third most talented WR on this team immediately, behind only TY and Andre. I love Moncrief, but I feel he is inferior to Lockett as a player, which is why I am moving up to get him. This also fits right in with the "win now" mantra.

By the way, I truly appreciate the back and forth SaturdayAllDay...I'm new so it is nice to have some interaction.

Supe, you and I are pretty much in complete agreement, your responses are spot on with my thoughts...thanks!

I used the d line as an example of how an injury can effect almost any position. I would be down to use the pick upgrading lbs, cb or even to possibly have a shot at a safety like Prewitt in the early third. I just feel like if we are essentially using a second round pick on a player, they should see the field a bit more. I personally have nothing against Lockette but I don't see WR being as big a need as several positions on our defense (safety, Ilb and de).

Also I would like to take the chance to say welcome to the forums. I have been here awhile but don't often speak up, but when I do I always appreciate having a logical back and forth.

Superman as always I respect your opinion, as you are one of the most credible people on here, but for once I guess we don't agree on this one.