With DB signing…

[SuperJoe33]

With the Colts signing Patrick Robinson (3 years $12 million) in my mind this almost cinches the fact that the Colts are going to go offensive line. Read an article earlier today where Grigson and Irsay talked about how good Denzil looked at either RT or RG. I think this just makes that pick of OT (Taylor Decker) the most likely pick depending on how the run on tackles are in the draft. In a perfect world maybe they get pushed down and the Colts can trade back and pick up a 2nd rounder. Then they are able to get the kid to play OLB out of Boise State, Correa and add depth to the defensive front (specifically the DL the deepest position in this draft). Possibly pick up Nick Martin in the 3rd round. Derian Thompson, Jordan Howard, Or Scooby Wright, CJ ProSise, or KJ Dylan. The only way I don't see the Colts taking an OT is if they go BPA and the player there is just head and shoulders above the OT. But if they trade back then problem is solved on BPA.

[BProland85]

I see them making more of a point to solidify the interior OL rather than OT. They seem to be high on Denzelle Good, and Joe Reitz can play RT as well. What needs to be answered is who is playing C and RG. I like Isaac Seumalo from Oregon State in round 5. He could play both positions but is best suited at C.

 

I think round 1 they should draft a dominant DT if Billings or A'Shawn Robinson is there. OLBs I see more value in rounds 2-4.

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, SuperJoe33 said:

With the Colts signing Patrick Robinson (3 years $12 million) in my mind this almost cinches the fact that the Colts are going to go offensive line. Read an article earlier today where Grigson and Irsay talked about how good Denzil looked at either RT or RG. I think this just makes that pick of OT (Taylor Decker) the most likely pick depending on how the run on tackles are in the draft. In a perfect world maybe they get pushed down and the Colts can trade back and pick up a 2nd rounder. Then they are able to get the kid to play OLB out of Boise State, Correa and add depth to the defensive front (specifically the DL the deepest position in this draft). Possibly pick up Nick Martin in the 3rd round. Derian Thompson, Jordan Howard, Or Scooby Wright, CJ ProSise, or KJ Dylan. The only way I don't see the Colts taking an OT is if they go BPA and the player there is just head and shoulders above the OT. But if they trade back then problem is solved on BPA.

 

Just so you have the latest info...

 

The contract terms have now been updated....    it's 3/14 with 6 Mill guaranteed...

 

Here is the story from NFL.com and the info is at the top....

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000647179/article/patrick-robinson-signs-threeyear-deal-with-colts

[Superman]

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/04/30/colts-surprise-pick-receiver-phillip-dorsett/26682941/

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk." 

[Archer]

We can strike CB off as a primary first round need.  I still think that OLB is a bigger need that OT by far.  I think I like Shaq Lawson to fall to us now, and that would be my man (shoulder injury and everything).

[BleedBlu8792]

Considering what Supe quoted:

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk."

 

I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that their board will have an OL ranked as their highest prospect for the 1st round. If they were picking top-5, maybe, but at 18? Neither Conklin or Decker are THAT good to be rated higher than the defensive talent we will get to pick from at that time.

[MPStack]

The only realistic offensive player I`d see the Colts taking at 18 would be R. Kelly. Yes, I know it wouldn`t be a popular choice and Zeke will be long gone. So with that being said, I think it all boils down to the BPA on defense. DT, NT, ILB or Edge. Take your pick. 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

Considering what Supe quoted:

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk."

 

I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that their board will have an OL ranked as their highest prospect for the 1st round. If they were picking top-5, maybe, but at 18? Neither Conklin or Decker are THAT good to be rated higher than the defensive talent we will get to pick from at that time.

 

Based on what? Most people feel Conklin and Decker are both top 20 guys. Everybody's scouting is different, but what is it about either of those guys that would preclude them from being near the top of the Colts' board on draft day?

 

I could see one of the Colts' top ten guys dropping, especially if more than one QB goes near the top, maybe a RB, maybe somebody really likes Doctson/Fuller/Coleman... and then maybe Shaq Lawson falls to #18, and the Colts have him higher than Conklin/Decker. But I don't have any problem believing that those two guys are top 20 on anyone's board.

[crazycolt1]

5 minutes ago, MPStack said:

The only realistic offensive player I`d see the Colts taking at 18 would be R. Kelly. Yes, I know it wouldn`t be a popular choice and Zeke will be long gone. So with that being said, I think it all boils down to the BPA on defense. DT, NT, ILB or Edge. Take your pick. 

I agree with that. I don't think they pull the trigger on an offensive player at #18.

[MPStack]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

I agree whit that. I don't think they pull the trigger on an offensive player at #18.

The defense has been neglected far too long and needs playmakers no doubt!

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, MPStack said:

The defense has been neglected far too long and needs playmakers no doubt!

It wouldn't surprise me if the draft is dominated by defensive players taken.

[Valpo2004]

They could certainly go LB.  They seemed to have a lot of interest in Ragland.

 

But I would say since I can't think of any safeties that are worth a first round pick and we just got our CB2 and our DL is fairly solid, it would most likely be LB or OL.  

 

Of course you never know.  We could draft another wide receiver.  William Fuller sounds like a Grigson guy.  He loves fast WR's.  

[BleedBlu8792]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Based on what? Most people feel Conklin and Decker are both top 20 guys. Everybody's scouting is different, but what is it about either of those guys that would preclude them from being near the top of the Colts' board on draft day?

 

I could see one of the Colts' top ten guys dropping, especially if more than one QB goes near the top, maybe a RB, maybe somebody really likes Doctson/Fuller/Coleman... and then maybe Shaq Lawson falls to #18, and the Colts have him higher than Conklin/Decker. But I don't have any problem believing that those two guys are top 20 on anyone's board.

You answered the bold part with your second paragraph in regards to what I was saying. Are Conklin and Decker good? Of course, but I don't think they are at the absolute top of the Colts board. I believe there will be better picks there than picking Conklin/Decker. Could we upgrade the right side of the line? Sure! Would I be upset if either were picked at 18? Nope! I just think there will be a better value player there at 18 than either of those two.

 

[throwing BBZ]

18 hours ago, SuperJoe33 said:

With the Colts signing Patrick Robinson (3 years $12 million) in my mind this almost cinches the fact that the Colts are going to go offensive line. Read an article earlier today where Grigson and Irsay talked about how good Denzil looked at either RT or RG. I think this just makes that pick of OT (Taylor Decker) the most likely pick depending on how the run on tackles are in the draft. In a perfect world maybe they get pushed down and the Colts can trade back and pick up a 2nd rounder. Then they are able to get the kid to play OLB out of Boise State, Correa and add depth to the defensive front (specifically the DL the deepest position in this draft). Possibly pick up Nick Martin in the 3rd round. Derian Thompson, Jordan Howard, Or Scooby Wright, CJ ProSise, or KJ Dylan. The only way I don't see the Colts taking an OT is if they go BPA and the player there is just head and shoulders above the OT. But if they trade back then problem is solved on BPA.

 

  Decker, Another Tall stiff O-Lineman like Costancio and Moohort, is a Grigson guy, probably in the top 10 on our draft board. About where they had Weener!! please NOOOOO!

[jim scheurich]

8 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Decker, Another Tall stiff O-Lineman like Costancio and Moohort, is a Grigson guy, probably in the top 10 on our draft board. About where they had Weener!! please NOOOOO!

I know your about D, but Really need to make sure Luck doesn't end up like last year. Really I'm about more D too. I have a Pat Angerer jersey in my closet collecting dust.  Loved to watch him when he was healthy!!

[COLTS449]

Tayloe Decker would be a terrible pick. I'm just not a fan. I would be good with Conklin. He's way better than Decker IMO. We could stick Conklin at RG, and draft a Center like Martin, Boehm, Seumalo, Blythe, Allen, or Westerman maybe? I could definitely see us drafting Tuerk with us going to a ZBS. But IMO, Ideally we could get a gem in the 4th or so in Blythe or Boehm to come in and beat out Holmes and be our Center for the next 10 years.

 

Castanzo-Mewhort-Boehm-Conklin-Good......That should be a really good OL IMO. Conklin would give us a star RG who should be equally good in pass protection and run blocking. I think Conklin can/will be a very good RT, but I also think he can be a pro bowl type guard. Also. Lets hope Denzel is the answer at RT.

[SuperJoe33]

16 hours ago, Superman said:

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/04/30/colts-surprise-pick-receiver-phillip-dorsett/26682941/

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk." 

Yeah and we were NOT able to keep Andrew upright and healthy. To me sometimes there are glaring needs that need to be addressed and not necessarily always taken the BPA… Because without Andrew we've all seen where the Colts will finish in the division and the league. You've got to keep that guy healthy

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, SuperJoe33 said:

Yeah and we were able to keep Andrew upright and healthy. To me sometimes there are glaring needs that need to be addressed and not necessarily always taken the BPA… Because without Andrew we've all seen where the Colts will finish in the division and the league. You've got to keep that guy healthy

 

Grigson's comments are pretty clear. They aren't going to reach for perceived need.

[SuperJoe33]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Grigson's comments are pretty clear. They aren't going to reach for perceived need.

Well I guess if they feel it's just a perceived need then he's not going to be said in the same sentence with Bill Polian again anytime soon. I don't think anybody could disagree that when Bill was the GM he at least surrounded Payton with weapons and protection. And I'll agree they probably needed to address the defense more often but if you don't learn from history you're doomed to repeat it. Protect luck with the the 1st round pick and go defense from their. Or at least some assimilation of that

[Superman]

20 minutes ago, SuperJoe33 said:

Well I guess if they feel it's just a perceived need then he's not going to be said in the same sentence with Bill Polian again anytime soon. I don't think anybody could disagree that when Bill was the GM he at least surrounded Payton with weapons and protection. And I'll agree they probably needed to address the defense more often but if you don't learn from history you're doomed to repeat it. Protect luck with the the 1st round pick and go defense from their. Or at least some assimilation of that

 

In 14 years, Polian took an OL in the first round once, and that was Castonzo, who never played with Manning. He used a second on an OL three times (Ugoh, Pollak, Ijalana), and all three of them were disappointments. Meanwhile, Ryan Diem (4th), Jake Scott (5th) and Jeff Saturday (UDFA) all started for the Super Bowl team in 2006.

 

You can disagree with Grigson's assessment of the team's needs and you can disagree with his draft strategy, but it makes no sense to just ignore it. 

 

It also makes no sense to act like the only draft pick that can address perceived needs is the first round pick. 

[gacker65]

I can still see us taking a CB in the 1st round.  Would like to get an Edge rusher in 1st.

 

I do not see us taking an O-lineman in the 1st.  We could wait and get a Center in the 3rd.

[jim scheurich]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

In 14 years, Polian took an OL in the first round once, and that was Castonzo, who never played with Manning. He used a second on an OL three times, and all three of them were disappointments. Meanwhile, Ryan Diem (4th), Jake Scott (5th) and Jeff Saturday (UDFA) all started for the Super Bowl team in 2006.

 

You can disagree with Grigson's assessment of the team's needs and you can disagree with his draft strategy, but it makes no sense to just ignore it. 

 

It also makes no sense to act like the only draft pick that can address perceived needs is the first round pick. 

I don't have all the stats that u do, Obviously your an insider, You cant deny that the oline was % last year. And you cant deny the oline needs help. Why not get the BPA to improve this situation???

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, jim scheurich said:

I don't have all the stats that u do, Obviously your an insider, You cant deny that the oline was % last year. And you cant deny the oline needs help. Why not get the BPA to improve this situation???

 

I'm not an insider. The Colts draft history isn't hard to find: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/draft.htm

 

The OL was bad, and has been bad. We can talk about why and certain positions that have improved or been mismanaged or whatever, but bottom line, the OL has been bad since 2008. It needs to get better, by hook or by crook.

 

The answer to your question, though, is complex. The truth is that the draft is for adding talent, not targeting needs. Targeting needs is how you wind up passing on talented players for less talented players, which results in a less talented roster overall. You reach for OL in 2016, and that guy winds up not being worthy of the draft spot, while a more talented guy that you passed on winds up being a ten year starter. Two years later, you still need OL, and you don't have the more talented guy. 

 

I think the Colts should add a veteran who can play center and guard, and another veteran who can play tackle. Then they should stick to their board in the draft, don't reach for need, take the best players, and maximize value by trading when opportunities present themselves. If that means they take an OL at #18, I'm fine with that. Then all those players can duke it out in camp and the cream will rise to the top. I don't think they should pass on a higher rated corner (based on their scouting, not anyone else's) in order to address a need at any other position, including OL. I'm fine with them trading back in any situation, although I think staying at #18 is probably going to yield the best talent this year. I'm also fine with them trading up for a guy that they really like at a position of need. Just don't reach for need.

[jim scheurich]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not an insider. The Colts draft history isn't hard to find: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/clt/draft.htm

 

The OL was bad, and has been bad. We can talk about why and certain positions that have improved or been mismanaged or whatever, but bottom line, the OL has been bad since 2008. It needs to get better, by hook or by crook.

 

The answer to your question, though, is complex. The truth is that the draft is for adding talent, not targeting needs. Targeting needs is how you wind up passing on talented players for less talented players, which results in a less talented roster overall. You reach for OL in 2016, and that guy winds up not being worthy of the draft spot, while a more talented guy that you passed on winds up being a ten year starter. Two years later, you still need OL, and you don't have the more talented guy. 

 

I think the Colts should add a veteran who can play center and guard, and another veteran who can play tackle. Then they should stick to their board in the draft, don't reach for need, take the best players, and maximize value by trading when opportunities present themselves. If that means they take an OL at #18, I'm fine with that. Then all those players can duke it out in camp and the cream will rise to the top. I don't think they should pass on a higher rated corner (based on their scouting, not anyone else's) in order to address a need at any other position, including OL. I'm fine with them trading back in any situation, although I think staying at #18 is probably going to yield the best talent this year. I'm also fine with them trading up for a guy that they really like at a position of need. Just don't reach for need.

I usually don't read all of that. (thought u were inside) My  thought is In the real world if U don't fix the current problem it will never fix its self. In my opinion, Seeing Luck on the sidelines is the most detrimental scenario for the colts. Let me know if I'm thinking wrong!!

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 hours ago, jim scheurich said:

I know your about D, but Really need to make sure Luck doesn't end up like last year. Really I'm about more D too. I have a Pat Angerer jersey in my closet collecting dust.  Loved to watch him when he was healthy!!

I am about the Defense at this point as well but if we take an O.Lineman at 18 I will be ok with it. Andrew needs more protection. Cant have what happened last season. We can still use the 2nd - 4th Rounds regarding Good/possibly Great Defensive help.

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, jim scheurich said:

I usually don't read all of that. (thought u were inside) My  thought is In the real world if U don't fix the current problem it will never fix its self. In my opinion, Seeing Luck on the sidelines is the most detrimental scenario for the colts. Let me know if I'm thinking wrong!!

 

Would you agree that the Colts should add at least one veteran lineman?

[jim scheurich]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Would you agree that the Colts should add at least one veteran lineman?

I never said line needed to be fixed from the draft. I just said its going to be a lot less expensive than signing proven talent. really I don't think much is left out there. Question... Can they find a solid veteran lineman??

[IndyD4U]

With Irsay ideally wanting to add two OL positions in the draft we go C earlier than later. I say 3rd. 

 

[NewColtsFan]

18 hours ago, Superman said:

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/04/30/colts-surprise-pick-receiver-phillip-dorsett/26682941/

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk." 

 

I suspect if we're all on this website we're always going to have this on-going debate about BPA vs. Need.

 

Grigson also said -- multiple times -- that Dorsett was clearly the best player available,  no one was close to him. One story at the time cited sources inside the Colts front office saying Dorsett was ranked in the Teens on our board.     Grigson said that when there are multiple players with roughly the same grade that he'll take the player of highest need.      It's only when one player is clearly and obviously better than everyone else that he'll go BPA.

 

This is not as black and white,  or cut and dried as BPA always wins.

 

[BOTT]

I have given up guessing at what Grigson will do.  I just hope I don't have my head in my hands after the colts pick is announced.....again.

[Superman]

16 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I suspect if we're all on this website we're always going to have this on-going debate about BPA vs. Need.

 

Grigson also said -- multiple times -- that Dorsett was clearly the best player available,  no one was close to him. One story at the time cited sources inside the Colts front office saying Dorsett was ranked in the Teens on our board.     Grigson said that when there are multiple players with roughly the same grade that he'll take the player of highest need.      It's only when one player is clearly and obviously better than everyone else that he'll go BPA.

 

This is not as black and white,  or cut and dried as BPA always wins.

 

 

"BPA" is an oversimplification, which is why I try not to use it anymore. The point is that he's not going to reach for positions of need in any round. He's going to stick to his board, based on their scouting.

 

And it's fine to go back and forth about the merits of the team's draft strategy, but if anyone doesn't believe that Grigson is going to stick to his board, especially after the Dorsett pick, then I don't know what to say. 

[jim scheurich]

18 hours ago, IndyD4U said:

18 hours ago, IndyD4U said:

31 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

"BPA" is an oversimplification, which is why I try not to use it anymore. The point is that he's not going to reach for positions of need in any round. He's going to stick to his board, based on their scouting.

 

And it's fine to go back and forth about the merits of the team's draft strategy, but if anyone doesn't believe that Grigson is going to stick to his board, especially after the Dorsett pick, then I don't know what to say. 

Lets hope BPA isn't another receiver

 

 

[Bluefire4]

I think we're going defense early. We seem not to be working out the top offensive line prospecrs expect Cocklin and he'll probably be gone. I do think we'll take a guard and center in the draft.. but not in the first round.

[NewColtsFan]

On March 24, 2016 at 9:59 AM, BleedBlu8792 said:

Considering what Supe quoted:

 

"This just shows that we stick to our guns when it comes to taking our best player on our board," Grigson said. "It's not just party talk."

 

I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that their board will have an OL ranked as their highest prospect for the 1st round. If they were picking top-5, maybe, but at 18? Neither Conklin or Decker are THAT good to be rated higher than the defensive talent we will get to pick from at that time.

 

Huh?

 

Decker, I grant you.    But Conklin?     I think he's one of the fastest risers in this draft.    He's been getting mocked pretty much everywhere in the early to mid-teens for about a month now.     It's not clear at all that he'll even reach 18.

 

 

[dgambill]

On ‎3‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 6:45 PM, Superman said:

 

In 14 years, Polian took an OL in the first round once, and that was Castonzo, who never played with Manning. He used a second on an OL three times (Ugoh, Pollak, Ijalana), and all three of them were disappointments. Meanwhile, Ryan Diem (4th), Jake Scott (5th) and Jeff Saturday (UDFA) all started for the Super Bowl team in 2006.

 

You can disagree with Grigson's assessment of the team's needs and you can disagree with his draft strategy, but it makes no sense to just ignore it. 

 

It also makes no sense to act like the only draft pick that can address perceived needs is the first round pick. 

Exactly....and I also don't understand why people don't realize we need upgrades at nearly EVERY position. If you have a need say at DT and the best DT is projected to be of only a 2nd or 3rd rd grade why you reach for them just because you have need at that position. By doing so you might pass up on a first rd talented LB perhaps. Even more basic...say you need a starting OT and the guy you project is likely to be serviceable but you have a guy sitting there that you believe has the ability and likelihood to be a pro bowl caliber LB for many years. Do you pass on the LB because you've already have a serviceable starter and give up on a future star possibly or do you just draft the guy that you project to be mediocre. Basically if your standard is to have a team full of mediocre talent you just draft need...but if you want to build a team full of stars hopefully you take the best player available no matter the position. When you have a potential star there you don't pass him up for an avg player at another position. That's the way I see it in the first or second rd. Outside that I think if all things are equal in rating or if its close you take a position of need because you need as many shots at filling that position as you can get...so you stock up talent and hope one hits. That would be my guess as to how to do it...but then again I haven't stayed at a Holiday Inn lately so my opinion might not be worth much.

[BleedBlu8792]

On 3/26/2016 at 2:54 AM, NewColtsFan said:

 

Huh?

 

Decker, I grant you.    But Conklin?     I think he's one of the fastest risers in this draft.    He's been getting mocked pretty much everywhere in the early to mid-teens for about a month now.     It's not clear at all that he'll even reach 18.

 

 

 

As I stated in my prior post, I think the Colts will have a "better" player to choose from than Conklin. Again, I wouldn't be upset if he's picked by the Colts, but I just don't see it happening. I think there will be better value players, especially defensively, sitting there for the Colts to choose from.

[akcolt]

On March 25, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Superman said:

 

Would you agree that the Colts should add at least one veteran lineman?

I would agree with this and preferably at C. I believe it would pay huge dividends in the development of Thorton and Mewhort.  They are both 24 years old. They need stability at C. Look at Thorton he's had a mess at C on his left and RT on his right side it hasn't been much better. 

 

Every interior OL on the team is under 26 with Holmes being the oldest. He's not a leader he can't stay on the field. We cant go into the season with Holmes again. It assures us a revolving door at C. Interestingly every offseason depth chart I've seen shows Harrison as the starting C.  

 

I think a solid veteran C would stabalize our OL. I'm not sure a rookie is what we need at C. We need something that's for sure. 

 

I hope Thorton puts it together this year. He has the tools. He's a guy I could see turning it around sonewhere else. A team with some veteran leadership  

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

As I stated in my prior post, I think the Colts will have a "better" player to choose from than Conklin. Again, I wouldn't be upset if he's picked by the Colts, but I just don't see it happening. I think there will be better value players, especially defensively, sitting there for the Colts to choose from.

 

I hope you're right.....   

 

[BleedBlu8792]

13 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I hope you're right.....   

 

 

Conklin is a safe pick and again one I won't have any problem with, but "I" don't value non-LT's that highly. With the way Grigson picked last year I don't see him valuing Conklin "that" high. If the Colts were picking 25-32 and Conklin had a chance to fall that far, I could see Grigson having him high. 

 

This draft is Grigson's to lose in my opinion...

[wig]

Conklin is the only offensive player I'd be happy with in the first. That has as much to do with not seeing value at RB, WR or TE at 18 than anything.  Overall, I think this draft sets up nicely for our needs.