Colts should trade 18th pick....

[needanoline63]

colts have to many needs to just settle on 6 picks. Hopefully we can pick up a few more picks by trading the 18th pick

[21isSuperman]

It's not that simple.  It's easy to say we should trade down and acquire more picks, but you need to get good value for those picks, and you need to find a team who wants to trade up.  If no one wants to trade up to #18, you're kinda stuck.  And if the best offer you get is, for example, 2 third round picks, you're better off staying at #18.

[jskinnz]

6 minutes ago, needanoline63 said:

colts have to many needs to just settle on 6 picks. Hopefully we can pick up a few more picks by trading the 18th pick

 

Have you texted this idea to Grigson?

[BullsColtsFan1]

6 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Have you texted this idea to Grigson?

I emailed him that the Colts should draft a punter in the first round.  He hasn't responded though.

[BProland85]

Being saying they should try and find good offers for trading down for a long while now. Rounds 2-4 is where the meat of this draft is. 

[Colts_Fan12]

39 minutes ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

I emailed him that the Colts should draft a punter in the first round.  He hasn't responded though.

He's prolly wondering how you seen his board cause that's prolly his highest rated player 

[OffensivelyPC]

You need to get off this idea that we can fix all our needs in one draft. Even with a trade down, this roster will have needs. By trading down, you necessarily draft less talented players and it only makes sense when the highest rated player on your draftboard doesnt justify the pick or if a guy's grade justifies the pick but you have concerns for things other than talent/skill (red flags, scheme issue, etc.). And you will never know that until you know who is available at 18.  There may be other reasons, but trading down just to have more picks is not a good one. All that does is build a larger roster with less talent. 

[Valpo2004]

Depends on what's offered.  But I honestly don't see a situation where there is a big market for the #18 pick.  

[CanuckColt]

We just keep the 18th pick and USE it on the best player available.

It is easy to trade down, but taken to the ridiculous extreme you can end up with a ton of 6th and 7th rounders who are no better than UDFAs....no thanks.

 

[krunk]

I'm down with trading down if there's good value.

[DougDew]

For the positions the Colts are looking to upgrade, I think trading down is a very good idea.  If there is a great BPA at 18, you stay there.  But the way the talent is aligned this year, I like the idea of trading down twice into the late twenties, if possible, and pick up a 3rd and a 4th rnd pick.  I think the late twenties is a good place to draft Correa, Austin Johnson, Ryan Kelly, the S (Joseph?) or maybe a CB. 

[corgi]

Brought the idea up to Grigson on Facebook, he then unfriended me...then again it may have just been a dude named Ryan. Oh well.

[ReMeDy]

7 hours ago, BullsColtsFan1 said:

I emailed him that the Colts should draft a punter in the first round.  He hasn't responded though.

 

I asked what our first overall pick is and he gave me this smilie emoji and said, "wide receiver." Or maybe that was a nightmare I had last night.

[JPFolks]

11 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You need to get off this idea that we can fix all our needs in one draft. Even with a trade down, this roster will have needs. By trading down, you necessarily draft less talented players and it only makes sense when the highest rated player on your draftboard doesnt justify the pick or if a guy's grade justifies the pick but you have concerns for things other than talent/skill (red flags, scheme issue, etc.). And you will never know that until you know who is available at 18.  There may be other reasons, but trading down just to have more picks is not a good one. All that does is build a larger roster with less talent. 

Yeah, there's endless variables.. in a perfect scenario you'd get a lower 1 and higher 2 to do it, but few if any teams even have that to offer.  I'd rather they pick the absolute best player for our team even if it's a reach.  W need to plug 3 holes long term this draft, no easy task with 6 picks.  

[Chucklez]

10 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

Depends on what's offered.  But I honestly don't see a situation where there is a big market for the #18 pick.  

I think the only chance is if Lynch falls to 18th and the Broncos are willing.

 

Very small chance of that imo. 

[OffensivelyPC]

5 hours ago, JPFolks said:

Yeah, there's endless variables.. in a perfect scenario you'd get a lower 1 and higher 2 to do it, but few if any teams even have that to offer.  I'd rather they pick the absolute best player for our team even if it's a reach.  W need to plug 3 holes long term this draft, no easy task with 6 picks.  

Not to mention variables out of your control, i.e. guys may have career threatening injuries, arrests, get older and talent diminishes, etc.

[theanarchist]

I don't mind the idea of trading back. Obviously the scenarios are endless and these types of deals don't take shape until the clock is ticking but I think with the 18th pick if the guy you really really want is still on the board  you have to take him. In the Colts case, especially if its a Rush LB or the stud OL you seek. If you  think a guy you like will be there 8 spots back then I'd trade the pick and collect more draft picks.

[UKColt13]

Trading down ahead of time is just stupid.

 

You never know who might fall into our laps.

 

Just to be clear I'm not against trading down whatsoever. I'm against doing it before we are either on the clock or a pick or 2 before.

[Lawrence Owen]

14 minutes ago, UKColt13 said:

Trading down ahead of time is just stupid.

 

You never know who might fall into our laps.

 

Just to be clear I'm not against trading down whatsoever. I'm against doing it before we are either on the clock or a pick or 2 before.

Exactly.  Be aware of whom needs what behind your picks as well.  If someone doesn't fall into the 18th pick for us whom is needed, aka O-line, LB/pass rusher, Corner, ect, that is on Grigs big board at or above your pick, then you need to know whom those guys at 19th-31st picks needs/wants.  if a particular player is there someone else may want, then make the offer.  But trading before hand is dumb. (unless you have a top 5 pick.)

[Lawrence Owen]

13 hours ago, CanuckColt said:

We just keep the 18th pick and USE it on the best player available.

It is easy to trade down, but taken to the ridiculous extreme you can end up with a ton of 6th and 7th rounders who are no better than UDFAs....no thanks.

 

yeah, because the 2nd to last pick of last years draft wasn't worth it. (enter sarcasm).

There are good players to be hand in later rounds, you just have to do alot of homework on small schools. but i am all for BPA IF it is also anywhere near usefull.  doesn't even have to be a drastic need, but an impact player who'll actually play on the team and make contributions.  i mean, a tackle is not needed (unless he's ridiculously good and/or can play equally well as a guard.) neither is QB,..punter, ect.  Grabbing a 1st round BPA guard, center, OLB, ILB, heck, even RB or NT (if it's Elliot or Billings) if usefull. (though you may be able to trade back to get Kelly if there is someone another team wants picking behind us, still on the board).

[superrep1967]

20 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

It's not that simple.  It's easy to say we should trade down and acquire more picks, but you need to get good value for those picks, and you need to find a team who wants to trade up.  If no one wants to trade up to #18, you're kinda stuck.  And if the best offer you get is, for example, 2 third round picks, you're better off staying at #18.

Trade up and get Shaw Lawson

[GoColts8818]

3 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

Trading down ahead of time is just stupid.

 

You never know who might fall into our laps.

 

Just to be clear I'm not against trading down whatsoever. I'm against doing it before we are either on the clock or a pick or 2 before.

I don't think you have to worry about them trading before the draft.  The 18th pick isn't going to coveted until the draft its self if things fall right.  Pretty much a guy is either going to have be sliding or a team is going to have to want to move up because they want a guy and fear he will be gone by the time they pick.  Even then it would also have to be someone the Colts weren't interested in.  So like you said, odds are if the Colts trade the pick in all likelyhood it wouldn't happen until the Colts were on the clock.

[GoColts8818]

20 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You need to get off this idea that we can fix all our needs in one draft. Even with a trade down, this roster will have needs. By trading down, you necessarily draft less talented players and it only makes sense when the highest rated player on your draftboard doesnt justify the pick or if a guy's grade justifies the pick but you have concerns for things other than talent/skill (red flags, scheme issue, etc.). And you will never know that until you know who is available at 18.  There may be other reasons, but trading down just to have more picks is not a good one. All that does is build a larger roster with less talent. 

Ding ding.  I've been saying since the end of the season with the number of holes the Colts have they might not fill everyone of them this off-season.  It might take a year or two before this team is ready to contend again.  What Grigson does look to be doing is trying to secure the base of the franchise for prolonged success and since this is a young team that's not a bad thing.

[Mameluc]

everyyear is the same, "trade down".

 

 

there needs to be good value for a trade to happen

[OffensivelyPC]

36 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Ding ding.  I've been saying since the end of the season with the number of holes the Colts have they might not fill everyone of them this off-season.  It might take a year or two before this team is ready to contend again.  What Grigson does look to be doing is trying to secure the base of the franchise for prolonged success and since this is a young team that's not a bad thing.

Well, and in a year or two, we'll have new and/or different needs.  Guys get old, banged up, test free agency, etc.  This team, or any team for that matter, will ALWAYS have needs.  You lock your playmakers up - which to me, to stand any chance at being superbowl bound, has to be at bare minimum, LT, at least one CB, QB, and Edge Rusher.  At other sports, fill in with good talent.  Not every spot has to be above average, but you don't want serious liabilities in there either.  

[Two_pound]

I don't think we will trade down, but the only 2 players who may be there at 18 that I would pick are Conklin and Darron Lee.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

22 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You need to get off this idea that we can fix all our needs in one draft. Even with a trade down, this roster will have needs. By trading down, you necessarily draft less talented players and it only makes sense when the highest rated player on your draftboard doesnt justify the pick or if a guy's grade justifies the pick but you have concerns for things other than talent/skill (red flags, scheme issue, etc.). And you will never know that until you know who is available at 18.  There may be other reasons, but trading down just to have more picks is not a good one. All that does is build a larger roster with less talent. 

^^^^THIS!!

 

No team is perfect and they will always have needs.. This draft will be a success if you can come out having taken care of the two main needs.. Pass Rush and Offensive line. I just posted in another thread that It makes sense to trade back if you can swap picks with someone towards the end of the first and pick up their second rounder.  Someone like Arizona or Denver to jump past the Jets for Lynch.

[2006Coltsbestever]

23 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

It's not that simple.  It's easy to say we should trade down and acquire more picks, but you need to get good value for those picks, and you need to find a team who wants to trade up.  If no one wants to trade up to #18, you're kinda stuck.  And if the best offer you get is, for example, 2 third round picks, you're better off staying at #18.

Yeah I agree. If we could somehow trade our 18 for like a 23-27 and get another 2nd Round pick I would do it but that probably isn't happening.

[OffensivelyPC]

37 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

^^^^THIS!!

 

No team is perfect and they will always have needs.. This draft will be a success if you can come out having taken care of the two main needs.. Pass Rush and Offensive line. I just posted in another thread that It makes sense to trade back if you can swap picks with someone towards the end of the first and pick up their second rounder.  Someone like Arizona or Denver to jump past the Jets for Lynch.

It just depends on who is there, really.  If we made a list of guys that we would take at 18 and none of those guys are there, then we need to see who the next guy available is that we'd take and gauge at what position we think we could get him at (and if he happens to be taken before then, have a list of guys we'd be good with taking at that position).  Then, if you get to 18, and none of the guys on your first list is there, trade down to the range where you think you can get your next guy.  

 

I really wouldn't go down any further than 6 or 8 picks, which means we probably wouldn't be getting a 2nd round pick (if we did, we'd probably have to cough up a 3rd or something).  It's hard to put into numbers, because this isn't a mechanical formula.  Sometimes the guy you would have taken at 18 proves to be a bust.  Sometimes you hit on the pick you gained when you trade down and end up with two very good starters instead of one.  Sometimes the guy you passed up on when you trade down ends up being an elite player, which I would say is better than 2 very good starters.  Who knows?

[Dark Superman]

Stick at 18 and take a pass rusher or offensive lineman.

[Dark Superman]

The Colts select Peyton Manning with their 18th pick.

 

#18 returns to Indianapolis.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

14 minutes ago, SupermanLuck12 said:

Stick at 18 and take a pass rusher or offensive lineman.

Which pass rushers and which Oline would you consider worth taking at 18?  Personally there are very few pass rushers I'd take there and all the ones I would are probably off the board by that point.  Lineman wise I'm in the minority and think that you don't need to draft a tackle and there's no interior lineman worth taking at 18.

 

Guys I'd watch with this pick or if they trade back are Darian Thompsan, Ole Miss DE, and Reggie Ragland.

 

Guys I'd take in a heartbeat with this pick but doubt they are there:

Bosa

Lawson

Dodd

Conklin

Dekker

Lee

Jack

Elliot

 

On a side note: Where would you guys draft Jaylon Smith the linebacker from Notre Dame?

[GoColts8818]

2 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Well, and in a year or two, we'll have new and/or different needs.  Guys get old, banged up, test free agency, etc.  This team, or any team for that matter, will ALWAYS have needs.  You lock your playmakers up - which to me, to stand any chance at being superbowl bound, has to be at bare minimum, LT, at least one CB, QB, and Edge Rusher.  At other sports, fill in with good talent.  Not every spot has to be above average, but you don't want serious liabilities in there either.  

Correct they are always going to have needs but as we saw in the Manning years you can minimize those needs to plan for them if you have a good core.  The Colts have a good young core which is what Grigson really spent this off-season's money locking down if you count the AC and Hilton extensions from camp along with Allen and the impending Luck deal.  

 

They added a pretty good number two corner along with Davis.  That leaves edge rusher.  They have Mathis for atleast one more year which is why I wouldn't be shocked if they draft Smith if he's there thinking Mathis can be the rusher for one more year while Smith is hurt and then try to find away to land Ryan Kelly later in the draft even if it means moving up in round 2.  

[Coltsfanforlife12]

4 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Correct they are always going to have needs but as we saw in the Manning years you can minimize those needs to plan for them if you have a good core.  The Colts have a good young core which is what Grigson really spent this off-season's money locking down if you count the AC and Hilton extensions from camp along with Allen and the impending Luck deal.  

 

They added a pretty good number two corner along with Davis.  That leaves edge rusher.  They have Mathis for atleast one more year which is why I wouldn't be shocked if they draft Smith if he's there thinking Mathis can be the rusher for one more year while Smith is hurt and then try to find away to land Ryan Kelly later in the draft even if it means moving up in round 2.  

No team is touching Smith in the first round with the potential that he never plays.  He'll go somewhere in the fourth round or later.  Personally I'd draft him in the third if you get either two lineman or a lineman and a pass rusher in the first two rounds.

[GoColts8818]

4 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

No team is touching Smith in the first round with the potential that he never plays.  He'll go somewhere in the fourth round or later.  Personally I'd draft him in the third if you get either two lineman or a lineman and a pass rusher in the first two rounds.

Yeah I was thinking about that more after I wrote that.  I think they might try to get Kelly first as they really need a center.  Still I would take a flyer on Smith if the time was right in the draft.  Another option in the first round that I wouldn't rule out is the Colts drafting a MLBer if one is there at 18.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

Yeah I was thinking about that more after I wrote that.  I think they might try to get Kelly first as they really need a center.  Still I would take a flyer on Smith if the time was right in the draft.  Another option in the first round that I wouldn't rule out is the Colts drafting a MLBer if one is there at 18.

If Smith is there in Round 4 I might do it. I like Ryan Kelly a lot but some think 18 is too high for him. We need a Center and he could be someone that Andrew gets great chemistry with much like Peyton did with Saturday. A Center anchors the O.Line. Being solid at Tackle is important as well because these Pass Rushers now days have blazing speed. Conklin would be a solid pick as well.

[Restored]

25 minutes ago, SupermanLuck12 said:

The Colts select Peyton Manning with their 18th pick.

 

#18 returns to Indianapolis.

 

Manning signs his contract on the 18th day of the month. The Colts then release 18 players to be able to afford his new contract. The world explodes 18 days later into 18 perfectly shaped pieces. #18

[OffensivelyPC]

36 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Correct they are always going to have needs but as we saw in the Manning years you can minimize those needs to plan for them if you have a good core.  The Colts have a good young core which is what Grigson really spent this off-season's money locking down if you count the AC and Hilton extensions from camp along with Allen and the impending Luck deal.  

 

They added a pretty good number two corner along with Davis.  That leaves edge rusher.  They have Mathis for atleast one more year which is why I wouldn't be shocked if they draft Smith if he's there thinking Mathis can be the rusher for one more year while Smith is hurt and then try to find away to land Ryan Kelly later in the draft even if it means moving up in round 2.  

Really, we're not taht far off.  I doubt it happens for us this year, but if we come away with a few needs plugged with good players, there's no reason to think that we aren't int he discussion next year.  We're close now, despite the fact that people seem to think our roster is pitiful.  It's got some good pieces, just need a couple in a few other places.