Bjoern Werner: 'Since I've entered the league, I haven't been healthy one time'

[ColtsLegacy]

:: raises hand ::

Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick, and much better than Werner. I don't see why that's out of bounds to bring up.

So what? It's an exercise in futility that does not add to the conversation. Any numbskull can see Rhodes would have been the better choice now.

[Superman]

So what? It's an exercise in futility that does not add to the conversation. Any numbskull can see Rhodes would have been the better choice now.

 

This numbskull wanted Rhodes in the first place. And that wasn't an unpopular stance at the time. 

 

I'm one of the first to crusade against revisionist history and hindsight GMing -- like with Trent Richardson, for instance, who practically everyone missed on -- but this isn't that. I wasn't excited about Werner before the draft, and he hasn't lived up to his draft status since then.

 

Of course, there are two separate points there. Just because he doesn't rush the passer like a first rounder should doesn't mean he's a bad player. But it's not out of bounds to point out that we could easily have done better with that pick.

[ColtsLegacy]

This numbskull wanted Rhodes in the first place. And that wasn't an unpopular stance at the time.

I'm one of the first to crusade against revisionist history and hindsight GMing -- like with Trent Richardson, for instance, who practically everyone missed on -- but this isn't that. I wasn't excited about Werner before the draft, and he hasn't lived up to his draft status since then.

Of course, there are two separate points there. Just because he doesn't rush the passer like a first rounder should doesn't mean he's a bad player. But it's not out of bounds to point out that we could easily have done better with that pick.

I believe you. A lot of people liked Rhodes, I liked Rhodes (I also liked Werner, however). The Colts screwed up, but, it doesn't need to be brought up every time Werner is mentioned.

The guy I quoted even mentioned Travis Frederick for crying out loud. None of us wanted him or would have been happy with him at the time.

So, I have no problem with someone like you who I'm sure preferred Rhodes in the first place. It's the hindsight crowd who feel the need to remind us of what we already know every chance they can.

[Gavin]

I believe you. A lot of people liked Rhodes, I liked Rhodes (I also liked Werner, however). The Colts screwed up, but, it doesn't need to be brought up every time Werner is mentioned.

I mean the guy I quoted even mentioned Travis Frederick for crying out loud. None of us wanted him or would have been happy with him at the time.

Frederick was on my radar, Not in the 1st but the 2nd

[Jay Kirk]

I will give Werner the benefit of the doubt , but all honesty don't see him as a starter on this years team . Of course time will tell.

[ColtsLegacy]

Frederick was on my radar, Not in the 1st but the 2nd

I'm sure he was but the point revolves around him being a first rounder.

[Colts_Fan12]

:: raises hand ::

Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick, and much better than Werner. I don't see why that's out of bounds to bring up.

so if the O linemen or D players I wanted at 29 are way better then Dorsett i can still have a problem with picking a WR? Just askin

[ColtsLegacy]

so if the O linemen or D players I wanted at 29 are way better then Dorsett i can still have a problem with picking a WR? Just askin

"Way better"

[Colts_Fan12]

"Way better"

well as others have said here Rhodes like most of us wanted IS " way better" then Werner soo...

[ColtsLegacy]

well as others have said here Rhodes like most of us wanted IS " way better" then Werner soo...

. . . So . . . Those guys have played 2 years in the NFL.

[Blackhawk4]

:: raises hand ::

 

Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick, and much better than Werner. I don't see why that's out of bounds to bring up.

That has not a single thing to do with Werner's performance and health though. If we're going to bring up people we could have potentially selected (And not even knowing how they would have turned out with us for christ sake) then what's the point of even trying to discuss this? Not a single person here knows for a fact if Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick or better than Werner. You can speculate how he might have turned out if we drafted him, but nobody knows for sure. Xavier Rhodes or any other pick has nothing to do with how Werner has been playing or how his health has been his first couple of years in the league. It's missing the entire point of the article by bringing him up and trying to use him as an argument against Werner.

[Dustin]

 Not a single person here knows for a fact if Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick or better than Werner

 

I do.

[Blackhawk4]

I do.

And you didn't warn Irsay? Way to help us out 

[Jason_]

Not true at all. He played 919 snaps this season compared to 887 in 2013 and 1068 in 2012. 

 

Yes that was my bad, I'd forgotten he'd been in Cleveland 2 years.  He was not a full time starter in 2012 though if you simply go by games started. ;)

[Dustin]

Yes that was my bad, I'd forgotten he'd been in Cleveland 2 years.  He was not a full time starter in 2012 though if you simply go by games started. ;)

 

Why would I do that? 

[Jason_]

Why would I do that? 

 

because I said very specifically he was not a full time starter (yes a minor quibble but still, that is technically what I posted ) rather than saying anything about snap count

[Superman]

so if the O linemen or D players I wanted at 29 are way better then Dorsett i can still have a problem with picking a WR? Just askin

 

No. If, in two years, your objection continues to be "but why a receiver???" then no, it has zero merit. I have no problem believing that you'll spend the next two years whining about that pick, but time won't make that complaint any more legitimate.

[Dustin]

 "but why a receiver???" then no, it has zero merit.

 

Yet, I doubt you'd have a problem with this if was a RB correct?

[Superman]

That has not a single thing to do with Werner's performance and health though. If we're going to bring up people we could have potentially selected (And not even knowing how they would have turned out with us for christ sake) then what's the point of even trying to discuss this? Not a single person here knows for a fact if Xavier Rhodes would have been an excellent pick or better than Werner. You can speculate how he might have turned out if we drafted him, but nobody knows for sure. Xavier Rhodes or any other pick has nothing to do with how Werner has been playing or how his health has been his first couple of years in the league. It's missing the entire point of the article by bringing him up and trying to use him as an argument against Werner.

 

I didn't take the initial comment about Rhodes and Frederick as an argument against Werner. I took the point as it shouldn't take two years for you to prove you're a "baller." Injuries aside, of course.

 

But I definitely disagree with the idea that no one can know that Rhodes would have been a good pick. You'll have to present an argument for why this guy who was a highly ranked prospect and who has played very well in the pros would somehow have failed to play well for us. Pretty much every DB who comes to the Colts in the last three years plays better, not worse.

[Superman]

Yet, I doubt you'd have a problem with this if was a RB correct?

 

No, I wouldn't. That's because I object to drafting a RB in the first round pretty much across the board, without regard for need, and I don't feel that way about WRs. 

[Dustin]

No, I wouldn't. That's because I object to drafting a RB in the first round pretty much across the board, without regard for need, and I don't feel that way about WRs. 

 

I'm leaning towards the #NoFirstRoundWRs camp in addition to RBs, unless you get some incredible cant-miss guy in a shallow WR class. 

 

I think there were guys who were taken later who are just as good, if not better, than Dorsett is (namely Tyler Lockett). 

[12isthenew18]

Rhodes was my dream pick entering the draft and passing on him hurt so much.

 

But if we did take him do you think we would've extended vontae with butler and toler

[Superman]

Rhodes was my dream pick entering the draft and passing on him hurt so much.

 

But if we did take him do you think we would've extended vontae with butler and toler

 

Toler was signed before that year's draft. He's in his final year now. He's better in the slot, where he'd probably be full time if we had Rhodes. Butler was under contract through 2014, and probably wouldn't have been re-signed this offseason. I'm fine with that; Rhodes is better. I assume we'd still keep Davis.

[Superman]

I'm leaning towards the #NoFirstRoundWRs camp in addition to RBs, unless you get some incredible cant-miss guy in a shallow WR class. 

 

I think there were guys who were taken later who are just as good, if not better, than Dorsett is (namely Tyler Lockett). 

 

I don't really agree. The argument for not taking a back in the first is far more compelling, IMO, than that against WRs. Maybe the recent proven ability of receivers to produce right away, even outside the first round, devalues the position, but long term, a WR is still more valuable than a back.

 

I don't agree that Lockett is as good or better than Dorsett, even as a big Lockett fan. But setting that aside, yours is not a needs-based complaint, at least not right now. Colts_Fan12 has continually complained about passing on players at positions of greater perceived need for a receiver, and has even argued that no matter how good Dorsett eventually is, he'll always be a bad draft pick because he's not an OL or defensive player. 

[ColtStronger]

It's extremely hard to believe he has NEVER been healthy.  I mean not even the first couple games of the season?  To me that's an excuse for not living up to the hype of a first round pick!  He has had a couple good games, was he not as injured for a couple games in the middle of the season last year?  It makes no sense, if that's really what he's claiming.  I know he's been dinged up, but that's his own fault, IMO.  I realize accidents happen but to ALWAYS be injured  is either a lack of conditioning, toughness, or another personal reason.  Coaching and staff would have little to do with it.  BTW, when has a player ever gotten a pass that they weren't healthy?  Bradshaw just got the boot.  Surprisingly enough Thomas and Ballard is still on the team, but if they do it again this season, I don't think their job is that safe.

[21isSuperman]

It's extremely hard to believe he has NEVER been healthy.  I mean not even the first couple games of the season?  To me that's an excuse for not living up to the hype of a first round pick!  He has had a couple good games, was he not as injured for a couple games in the middle of the season last year?  It makes no sense, if that's really what he's claiming.  I know he's been dinged up, but that's his own fault, IMO.  I realize accidents happen but to ALWAYS be injured  is either a lack of conditioning, toughness, or another personal reason.  Coaching and staff would have little to do with it.  BTW, when has a player ever gotten a pass that they weren't healthy?  Bradshaw just got the boot.  Surprisingly enough Thomas and Ballard is still on the team, but if they do it again this season, I don't think their job is that safe.

I agree with the first part of what you said.  I find it hard to believe he's never been healthy.  Not only that, but this is football.  I would think that most guys are playing through some sort of injury.  I'm not going to comment on who is at fault for his injuries, but I think he's using it as an excuse.  Most players aren't completely healthy, I would think, but they still go out and perform well.

[Colts_Fan12]

Why would I do that?

delete

[Colts_Fan12]

No. If, in two years, your objection continues to be "but why a receiver???" then no, it has zero merit. I have no problem believing that you'll spend the next two years whining about that pick, but time won't make that complaint any more legitimate.

same as this case only instead of just rather wanting Rhodes over Werner I wanted like 4 damn players over Werner

[Colts_Fan12]

I don't really agree. The argument for not taking a back in the first is far more compelling, IMO, than that against WRs. Maybe the recent proven ability of receivers to produce right away, even outside the first round, devalues the position, but long term, a WR is still more valuable than a back.

I don't agree that Lockett is as good or better than Dorsett, even as a big Lockett fan. But setting that aside, yours is not a needs-based complaint, at least not right now. Colts_Fan12 has continually complained about passing on players at positions of greater perceived need for a receiver, and has even argued that no matter how good Dorsett eventually is, he'll always be a bad draft pick because he's not an OL or defensive player.

that's cause like Dustin said I wouldn't wanna take a WR in the first unless it's a can't miss prospect. Is Dorsett a can't miss prospect? No and WR are headed down the path RB have went Down with as much talent that is being found in rounds 2-5

[RockThatBlue]

“I don’t want to sound cocky, but personally, I feel like when I’m out there and healthy, I can be a baller,” Werner said, via the Indianapolis Star. “I can do it all. You always have to get that mojo going of course. But I’m telling you, I’m confident I can be an NFL player and a starter in this league.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/28/bjoern-werner-if-im-healthy-i-can-be-a-baller/

I hope he proves himself right. His play has been below average to put it nicely, injured or not.

[Superman]

same as this case only instead of just rather wanting Rhodes over Werner I wanted like 4 damn players over Werner

 

It's not the same. There was no needs-based objection to Werner, as pass rusher was probably the biggest team need at the time, and corner was well down the list.

[Superman]

that's cause like Dustin said I wouldn't wanna take a WR in the first unless it's a can't miss prospect. Is Dorsett a can't miss prospect? No and WR are headed down the path RB have went Down with as much talent that is being found in rounds 2-5

 

I disagree on several fronts, all of which have already been expressed several times in the last month.

[Colts_Fan12]

I disagree on several fronts, all of which have already been expressed several times in the last month.

well if a player like Calvin Johnson is there sure take him but if he is just a good to average talent just wait

[Superman]

well if a player like Calvin Johnson is there sure take him but if he is just a good to average talent just wait

 

Why would a player like Calvin Johnson be available at #29? What are you even talking about?

 

So if a WR isn't Calvin Johnson, don't take him in the first round, huh? Boy oh boy...

[Colts_Fan12]

Why would a player like Calvin Johnson be available at #29? What are you even talking about?

So if a WR isn't Calvin Johnson, don't take him in the first round, huh? Boy oh boy...

exactly don't take we late in round 1 cause the talent from there on is about the same like Dustin said Lockett was available later and he may not be as good as Dorsett to you but the drop off in talent isn't as big as some here think it is

[Superman]

exactly don't take we late in round 1 cause the talent from there on is about the same like Dustin said Lockett was available later and he may not be as good as Dorsett to you but the drop off in talent isn't as big as some here think it is

 

Who are these "some here" you keep talking about? They certainly aren't me, so: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

[Warhorse]

I believe it was Profootball or Lindy's had Werner at pick #4 projected in that draft. But obviously the brilliance here of saying he was a "project" is far more legit. 

[Colts_Fan12]

Who are these "some here" you keep talking about? They certainly aren't me, so: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

you just said above that Lockett isn't as good as Dorsett?? My point is the drop off isn't big enough to justify taking Dorsett in the first instead of Lockett later

[Superman]

you just said above that Lockett isn't as good as Dorsett?? My point is the drop off isn't big enough to justify taking Dorsett in the first instead of Lockett later

 

When did I say anything about a big dropoff in talent? 

[Colts_Fan12]

When did I say anything about a big dropoff in talent?

you said you don't agree that Lockett is as good as Dorsett all I said was that may be true but the difference in talent isn't that big between the two