Blowing the chance to get a good draft pick

[Superman]

6 hours ago, CptHooligan said:

 

I heard a disturbing stat the other day... In the past 4 years of Grigson drafting there are only 15 draft picks on this team right now from the Grigson era... 15.  In 4 years.  That includes Werner, Holmes, Harrison...

 

So let's not pretend that Grigson would have hit it out of the park with a good draft pick anyways.

 

2 hours ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Without some context (such as the average number of draft picks per draft year that are still on roster x years later) we have no idea of whether this is a good or bad amount. Also Harrison wasn't drafted.

For a quick comparison John Schneider from his last 4 years of drafting has only retained 16 players on the current roster. Green Bay (who I'd imagine would be among the highest retainers of drafted players) still only have 19 in the same period.

TLDR - I don't think that number is as bad as you'd think but I'd imagine the CBA is playing into this somewhat. It's so cheap to keep some guys they have to be really bad to get cut. 

 

What SCC said. 

 

We traded away high picks for Davis and Richardson (for better or worse). Three picks aren't on the team anymore primarily because they got into trouble (Brazill, Boyett and Jackson); no telling whether they'd still be on the team or contributing otherwise. 

 

By the way, the real number is 18 out of 30, 60%. You can check it yourself: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/draft.htm and http://www.rosterresource.com/nfl-indianapolis-colts-how-assembled-chart/ (second link hasn't been updated this season, but you can see what the previous four years looks like for most teams in the league)

 

That percentage is about the average among good teams in the last five years that haven't changed front offices -- Steelers, Ravens, Broncos, Patriots, Niners, Seahawks, etc. And of those 30 draft picks, 12 of them were in the 6th or 7th round. We've had the very last pick in the draft twice. And then there are guys like Freeman, Bray, Doyle, and others, UDFAs who have stuck and made contributions.

 

Long and short, that stat isn't disturbing at all. It's not even accurate.

[Narcosys]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

You make it all cut and dried when it is not. There was still a slim chance the Colts could have made the playoffs and they played to win. Like I stated before. Under no circumstances do I want any Colt player quitting or tanking. That is a loser mentality that is not acceptable.

There is still a chance yes, but it is out of our control even if we win.  The chances of all the teams losing that we need to lose are very slim.  Patriots losing to the Dolphins is one. Making the playoffs automatically puts us no better than 27th position.  Do you honestly believe that we could win the SuperBowl if we made the playoffs?  If yes, good for you.  If not though, then what is the point of penalizing ourselves in the draft.  Making the playoffs is pointless if your team most likely will not make it past the first round. Yey! we made the playoffs, we got to play one more week. 

Now were sitting at 27th in the draft and watch all of our potential draft picks that we are hoping and praying will drop to us, go away.  Where as if we did lose the last two games, we wouldn't have to.  I think this team was better than its record, so I would be happy with drafting high and keeping our core players and making a better run next year.  Because I prefer to think long term and what will help us in the future, rather than thinking short term and getting instant gratification that only penalizes us in the end.

 

I am not saying that we should quit or tank.  But it would have benefited us more in the long run if we had lost.  You accused someone of not being a true fan because they did not think in a narrowed short term point of view like you.  Whereas others realize the benefit of drafting low and are ok with losing a few games to help us achieve the ultimate goal in the long run.

[Narcosys]

6 hours ago, CptHooligan said:

 

I heard a disturbing stat the other day... In the past 4 years of Grigson drafting there are only 15 draft picks on this team right now from the Grigson era... 15.  In 4 years.  That includes Werner, Holmes, Harrison...

 

So let's not pretend that Grigson would have hit it out of the park with a good draft pick anyways.

4 years, 7 rounds, 4x7=28.  15/28 = 53.5%.  I would say that he is successful in his draft picks then wouldn't you?  How does that compare to other GM's and their past 4 years?  I doubt they have all 28 on their team.  Put it into context.

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, Narcosys said:

There is still a chance yes, but it is out of our control even if we win.  The chances of all the teams losing that we need to lose are very slim.  Patriots losing to the Dolphins is one. Making the playoffs automatically puts us no better than 27th position.  Do you honestly believe that we could win the SuperBowl if we made the playoffs?  If yes, good for you.  If not though, then what is the point of penalizing ourselves in the draft.  Making the playoffs is pointless if your team most likely will not make it past the first round. Yey! we made the playoffs, we got to play one more week. 

Now were sitting at 27th in the draft and watch all of our potential draft picks that we are hoping and praying will drop to us, go away.  Where as if we did lose the last two games, we wouldn't have to.  I think this team was better than its record, so I would be happy with drafting high and keeping our core players and making a better run next year.  Because I prefer to think long term and what will help us in the future, rather than thinking short term and getting instant gratification that only penalizes us in the end.

 

I am not saying that we should quit or tank.  But it would have benefited us more in the long run if we had lost.  You accused someone of not being a true fan because they did not think in a narrowed short term point of view like you.  Whereas others realize the benefit of drafting low and are ok with losing a few games to help us achieve the ultimate goal in the long run.

Wishing the Colts to lose by not playing to the best of their ability is wishing them to be quitters. You cant have it both ways. Wining is never a penalty no matter how many paragraphs you care to write.

[Narcosys]

5 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Wishing the Colts to lose by not playing to the best of their ability is wishing them to be quitters. You cant have it both ways. Wining is never a penalty no matter how many paragraphs you care to write.

Ok, lets play Russian roulette and I'll let you win.  Is it a penalty now?  Again you are the more black and white point of view than I am in this. Of course, we are going to view the rules of even that differently.

[rockywoj]

5 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Ok, lets play Russian roulette and I'll let you win.  Is it a penalty now?  Again you are the more black and white point of view than I am in this.

Huh?

 

To win at Russian Roulette is to not get shot in the head.  If you are playing and you "let" the other player win, that means you shot yourself in the head.  Ergo, your not playing to win is indeed a penalty, for you shot yourself.

[Narcosys]

Just now, rockywoj said:

Huh?

 

To win at Russian Roulette is to not get shot in the head.  If you are playing and you "let" the other player win, that means you shot yourself in the head.  Ergo, your not playing to win is indeed a penalty, for you shot yourself.

I see it opposite. If you are playing the game, you are playing to die.  You die, you win.

[OffensivelyPC]

13 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

You make it all cut and dried when it is not. There was still a slim chance the Colts could have made the playoffs and they played to win. Like I stated before. Under no circumstances do I want any Colt player quitting or tanking. That is a loser mentality that is not acceptable. If you are comfortable with quitters on the team that's on you,

I think it's perfectly reasonable for people who, acknowledging the team's unlikelihood of making the playoffs, want this team to have the highest draft pick possible to better help this team in the long term.  I don't really have it in me to want the Colts to lose, but I don't think it's a a loser mentality.  No one is saying that the coaches and players should go out and intentionally lose as far as I can tell.  But you can rest injured guys and give some younger guys some playing time or anyone in a contract year. It's only going to make a handful of draft spots difference, but it's not like people want hte Colts to lose because they like losing.  Sometimes in a forest fire, you've got to sacrifice a few to save more - that's all this is about.

[rockywoj]

4 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

I see it opposite. If you are playing the game, you are playing to die.  You die, you win.

You are one messed up dude if you think "winning" at Russian Roulette means you die.  Utter lunacy, this failed analogy of yours.

[Narcosys]

Just now, rockywoj said:

You are one messed up dude if you think "winning" at Russian Roulette means you die.  Utter lunacy, this failed analogy of yours.

lol fair enough.  It takes some messed up people to play that game though.  I could easily come up with other things, like lets see who can collect the most STD's.  Treat it like Pokémon, "Gotta Catch Em ALL!"

[OffensivelyPC]

15 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

There is still a chance yes, but it is out of our control even if we win.  The chances of all the teams losing that we need to lose are very slim.  Patriots losing to the Dolphins is one. Making the playoffs automatically puts us no better than 27th position.  [Snipped to save room]

To the bolded, the draft order is determined by when you are put out of the playoffs separated by win% and then strength of schedule being the first tie breaker.  There are 12 playoff teams - so the Colts could conceivably draft 21st if they lost in the first round.  In fact, they only team that could have a worse record than them in the playoffs is Washington, which is possible since they may rest their starters.  Win or lose, they're the 4 seed.

[Narcosys]

Just now, OffensivelyPC said:

To the bolded, the draft order is determined by when you are put out of the playoffs separated by win% and then strength of schedule being the first tie breaker.  There are 12 playoff teams - so the Colts could conceivably draft 21st if they lost in the first round.  In fact, they only team that could have a worse record than them in the playoffs is Washington, which is possible since they may rest their starters.  Win or lose, they're the 4 seed.

Ya idk why I came up with that.  I was thinking each side had six teams and then only counted down 6 instead of 12.  Good catch. Brain fart on my part.

[crazycolt1]

21 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Ok, lets play Russian roulette and I'll let you win.  Is it a penalty now?  Again you are the more black and white point of view than I am in this. Of course, we are going to view the rules of even that differently.

What? That is a total line of crap.

[Narcosys]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

What? That is a total line of crap.

Discussed already, please read above few posts.

[SteelCityColt]

55 minutes ago, Superman said:

Long and short, that stat isn't disturbing at all. It's not even accurate.

 

Ha, those sites make things a little easier to work it out, manually went through those two teams and did finger counting for who was still on the roster.

 

I also forgot the first rule of forum club, never believe a stat quoted without source.

[SteelCityColt]

I do get what people are saying, it is the correct "game theory" that if you aren't going to be in the playoffs you want to be as bad as humanly possible to maximise a down year for the best draft pick. But as supporter I just can't enjoy rooting for my team to lose. The downside to trying force parity through the draft. 

 

I'd be in favor of maybe some form of tiered lottery for draft picks to take away some of the temptation to tank. 

[Myles]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

You make it all cut and dried when it is not. There was still a slim chance the Colts could have made the playoffs and they played to win. Like I stated before. Under no circumstances do I want any Colt player quitting or tanking. That is a loser mentality that is not acceptable. If you are comfortable with quitters on the team that's on you,

Hoping the team loses and wanting them to tank is 2 different things.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

I do get what people are saying, it is the correct "game theory" that if you aren't going to be in the playoffs you want to be as bad as humanly possible to maximise a down year for the best draft pick. But as supporter I just can't enjoy rooting for my team to lose. The downside to trying force parity through the draft. 

 

I'd be in favor of maybe some form of tiered lottery for draft picks to take away some of the temptation to tank. 

 

The truth is that, unless you're trying to draft a hot QB, draft position isn't as important as people are making it out to be. You have a 53 man roster. There will be 256 players drafted. The difference between the 8th player and the 18th player isn't going to mean that much to your franchise, especially once you adjust for the players that aren't on your board to begin with (QBs, first round RBs, players with injury or character concerns). Sure, all things equal, you want the best player, but it's not a foundational moment for your team. That happened for the Colts in 2012.

 

Don't get me started on the fact that five of the top fifteen will bust anyways. So if you're picking in the mid teens, you can still get what winds up being a top ten talent in the draft. You're also within range to trade up if you really like someone. 

[DougDew]

This year I think it matters.  The 34 defense requires a stud at the Rush/OLB position.  A guy who is quick enough to rush, strong enough to set the edge and shed blocks, and athletic enough to laterally shift to chase/cover the flat or screen.  Those type of players don't fall past 15, IMO.

 

But at this point, one game isn't going to matter.  Too bad we didn't lose last week.  I can't believe that the Miami OL couldn't get the snap count right...

[crazycolt1]

58 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

The truth is that, unless you're trying to draft a hot QB, draft position isn't as important as people are making it out to be. You have a 53 man roster. There will be 256 players drafted. The difference between the 8th player and the 18th player isn't going to mean that much to your franchise, especially once you adjust for the players that aren't on your board to begin with (QBs, first round RBs, players with injury or character concerns). Sure, all things equal, you want the best player, but it's not a foundational moment for your team. That happened for the Colts in 2012.

 

Don't get me started on the fact that five of the top fifteen will bust anyways. So if you're picking in the mid teens, you can still get what winds up being a top ten talent in the draft. You're also within range to trade up if you really like someone. 

You always have a way of expressing what I was trying to say without drawing flack.

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

You always have a way of expressing what I was trying to say without drawing flack.

 

I draw plenty of flak, though...

 

But thanks.

[ricker182]

On 12/27/2015 at 4:33 PM, Cynjin said:

You would prefer that the Colts just forfeited the last two games?

Fake fans do. 

 

I'll always root for the Colts. 

 

Hell, I'm even going to the game this weekend. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, ricker182 said:

Fake fans do. 

 

I'll always root for the Colts. 

 

Hell, I'm even going to the game this weekend. 

The only time I have ever rooted against us was in 2011 = the last game of the season against Jacks because I knew that loss would give us Andrew. Other than that I have rooted for us 99.9% of the time and will this Sunday too. Have fun at the game!

[Cynjin]

37 minutes ago, ricker182 said:

Fake fans do. 

 

I'll always root for the Colts. 

 

Hell, I'm even going to the game this weekend. 

 

I get the logic behind wanting a better draft pick, but as a fan of the Colts I cannot root for them to lose.  Also, to expect the players and coaches to do less than there best is not realistic.

[Malakai432]

6 hours ago, Narcosys said:

lol fair enough.  It takes some messed up people to play that game though.  I could easily come up with other things, like lets see who can collect the most STD's.  Treat it like Pokémon, "Gotta Catch Em ALL!"

 

Hmmm......Sick but creative, I'll give you an e for effort along with participation trophy and a gift card to......Radio Shack.

[King Colt]

I would like to see a list of how the #1 picks faired versus those in the rest of the rounds. We have all seen many first rounders disappoint and look at Tom Brady round six and Peyton manning a first round pick.

[Narcosys]

51 minutes ago, Malakai432 said:

 

Hmmm......Sick but creative, I'll give you an e for effort along with participation trophy and a gift card to......Radio Shack.

But you are penalized for winning when it comes to the draft.  And rightfully so.  Therefore,  winning is a penalization.

[2006Coltsbestever]

7 minutes ago, King Colt said:

I would like to see a list of how the #1 picks faired versus those in the rest of the rounds. We have all seen many first rounders disappoint and look at Tom Brady round six and Peyton manning a first round pick.

I think picking between 15-20 is good enough considering our needs. Of Course if Peyton or Andrew was coming out of the Draft we would the #1 pick but other than that Draft position doesnt mean much in reality.  A Good, possibly Great Pass rusher will be there for us and so will an O.Lineman if we choose to go that route. There have been many late 1st Round picks turn out it to be Great. 2nd and 3rd Round picks too.

[Myles]

14 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

There have been many late 1st Round picks turn out it to be Great. 2nd and 3rd Round picks too.

Yes, but many more the closer to the 1st pick you go.

 

The greatest benefit is that the player you really have #1 on your board may still be there.  A good example is the 2011 draft.  

Colts took Anthony Castonzo at 22.  Not a bad pick.   But would they have chosen him if JJ Watt, Julio Jones, Aldon Smith, Mike Pouncey or Tyron Smith were still available.   Probably not.  

Like I said, I'm torn because I like to see the Colts win, but to lose the last 2 games of the year is what would be best for them.  

 

[SteelCityColt]

34 minutes ago, Myles said:

Yes, but many more the closer to the 1st pick you go.

 

The greatest benefit is that the player you really have #1 on your board may still be there.  A good example is the 2011 draft.  

Colts took Anthony Castonzo at 22.  Not a bad pick.   But would they have chosen him if JJ Watt, Julio Jones, Aldon Smith, Mike Pouncey or Tyron Smith were still available.   Probably not.  

Like I said, I'm torn because I like to see the Colts win, but to lose the last 2 games of the year is what would be best for them.  

 

 

Some people panned the Texans for taking Watt at the time... 

 

Kind cherry picked a draft there too seeing as they on the "busts" high up were Locker and Gabbert! The converse argument is by picking lower you could be saved a Trent Richardson and get a Chandler Jones instead. Glad we dodged that bullet... oh wait. 

 

Point being draft position is very beneficial obviously, but everything is hugely, and I mean hugely underpinned by good scouting and evaluation. Why I will always applaud the team for sticking to their board and not getting silly on draft day. 

[Corndog]

18 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Some people panned the Texans for taking Watt at the time... 

 

Kind cherry picked a draft there too seeing as they on the "busts" high up were Locker and Gabbert! The converse argument is by picking lower you could be saved a Trent Richardson and get a Chandler Jones instead. Glad we dodged that bullet... oh wait. 

 

Point being draft position is very beneficial obviously, but everything is hugely, and I mean hugely underpinned by good scouting and evaluation. Why I will always applaud the team for sticking to their board and not getting silly on draft day. 

Couldn't agree more, which is why this team needs a better GM to make the pick.  Considering our current GM has whiffed on 2, possibly 3 picks.  And yes, draft position is important.  Of course, there are still good players later in the first round, just as there are good players late in the draft.  But the odds of getting a very high quality NFL player is much higher at the beginning of the first round than the end, especially in certain valuable positions.  

[Myles]

16 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Some people panned the Texans for taking Watt at the time... 

 

Kind cherry picked a draft there too seeing as they on the "busts" high up were Locker and Gabbert! The converse argument is by picking lower you could be saved a Trent Richardson and get a Chandler Jones instead. Glad we dodged that bullet... oh wait. 

 

Point being draft position is very beneficial obviously, but everything is hugely, and I mean hugely underpinned by good scouting and evaluation. Why I will always applaud the team for sticking to their board and not getting silly on draft day. 

I didn't include Locker and Gabbert because I'm sure QB's were not high on the Colts board.   I bet Castonzo wasn't higher than the other picks I listed either. 

I don't understand how people think a better draft position isn't a huge benefit.  There are exception of course, but every list will show that the better position is relevant to how good a player you get.  

[Myles]

25 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Some people panned the Texans for taking Watt at the time... 

 

That may be so, but he was high on their list and available for them.   You can always make bad choices.  If that is a fear, it is harder to make a bad choice the better your pick.  

 

[ColtStronger]

20 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

You always have a way of expressing what I was trying to say without drawing flack.

 

20 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I draw plenty of flak, though...

 

But thanks.

AFLAC (Gilbert Gottfried voice) lol

[Narcosys]

On Wednesday, December 30, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Corndog said:

Couldn't agree more, which is why this team needs a better GM to make the pick.  Considering our current GM has whiffed on 2, possibly 3 picks.  And yes, draft position is important.  Of course, there are still good players later in the first round, just as there are good players late in the draft.  But the odds of getting a very high quality NFL player is much higher at the beginning of the first round than the end, especially in certain valuable positions.  

You must have missed the post earlier where it shows grigson is right there with the rest of the league at 60% of goods picks are still on the roster.  

[James]

Could have had the 12th pick and maybe better, but of course we had to win these games to save our pride whatever. I wish this teams would have thought about that earlier when we got blown out. Whatever, now it'll cost too much to trade up for a playmaker like Ramsey, Hargreaves III, Jack, Stanley etc. And Jaylon wont drop to out pick. Too much talent. Look what happened with Gurley, who went 10th overall. Pretty bad how it all turned out.

[ColtsUrUs]

I'll bump this thread when draft time comes around for the people that wanted to win those last two games.

[Solon]

1 minute ago, ColtsUrUs said:

I'll bump this thread when draft time comes around for the people that wanted to win those last two games.

Please do. We're going to be mediocre next year because we didn't get the 12th pick.   

[ColtsUrUs]

4 minutes ago, Solon said:

Please do. We're going to be mediocre next year because we didn't get the 12th pick.   

LOL it's going to be funny seeing you and other people typing about who we missed on and wanting to draft up to get.

[coltsva]

Well, since who I root for doesn't influence the outcome of the game, I'm pretty comfortable with my decision to root for the Colts the past 2 weeks.