Matt Miller: The love is real for Ryan Kelly in Indianapolis

[ColtsBTM12]

I would strongly support this. Many people think a center is not a good value in the first round but if it means we have a pro bowl caliber center for the next 8-10 years then it is worth it. Kelly is an extremely talented player, he could be that guy. That said, I don't think the Colts will pick him. 

[Track Guy]

10 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

it cant hurt, but RT is the lead run blocker.  reiz did ok in pass protection but didnt get much going on the ground

I hear ya. I'm fine with Reitz at RT, but if we added say Taylor Decker I think you'd be happy kicking him in at RG too. Something like that might upgrade 2 positions at once. 

[Colts_Fan12]

I just can't really see Kelly at 18 as good value I'd much rather grab a C later 

[Superman]

6 hours ago, Dustin said:

I dont see how Grigson spends a first round pick on a center after 2 years of saying how he doesn't value the position. Seems like a smokescreen, and I don't say that often. 

 

Yup. He's acted in harmony with that belief for at least two years. Yet, the center play has sucked.

 

However, I think Kelly is a top 30 player. At #18, it's a stretch, but I think he's a full round better than Martin.

 

Let's say the top 10 go like this, in whatever order: Goff, Wentz, Ramsey, Bosa, Elliott, Tunsil, Buckner, Jack, Stanley, Conklin. (After that, you have guys like Floyd, Rankins, Ragland, Lee, Treadwell, Decker, Lawson, Reed, Hargreaves, etc., but the picture is a lot cloudier on them. The other guys are consensus top 10, depending on Jack's knee.)

 

To me, it's Rankins, but he'd still have to get past 7 teams. I'd be good with Lee, Lawson and Reed. If not, then obviously trading back is the favored move, but Grigson's not gonna trade back. I believe him about BPA, but I don't think any of the WRs will be picked. I could make peace with Hargreaves at #18. The rest of the corners, and Bell, seem like reaches. 

 

Long story short, I could talk myself into Kelly at #18. I think it would be a reach, and I think it's unlikely, given Grigson's position on centers, but he's whiffed so much, and Kelly seems like a sure thing. This pick is kind of no man's land; no one that is likely to be there really stands out, unless you're looking at receivers.

 

All this talk, and the pick is gonna be Ragland...

[Superman]

40 minutes ago, Track Guy said:

I hear ya. I'm fine with Reitz at RT, but if we added say Taylor Decker I think you'd be happy kicking him in at RG too. Something like that might upgrade 2 positions at once. 

 

Reitz gets hurt every time he plays guard. I think they need to leave him at tackle, where he's better than serviceable. 

[krunk]

I don't necessarily like the move at 18, but if we did indeed go that route it's hard to really curse bringing on a really good football player.  And Kelly is that,  he would definitely improve the line I do believe.  I'd be kind of twitching because I would really like a top level DT like Billings or Austin Johnson but how long can you cry about acquiring Kelly?

[loudnproudcolt]

9 hours ago, krunk said:

 

Kelly can play it's just better and more impactful athletes will be available at that pick.  The team is not cursed if we draft Kelly, we just think there's a number of really good centers in this draft that can be acquired outside of Pick 18

 

I just don't get how a center is not impactful. He is the glue of the line. He makes the adjustments at the line of scrimmage when necessary. You put Kelly in the middle of that line, and you get an instant leader and huge

upgrade.

I know when you say impactful, you are talking about guys who are going to have a chance for a game changing play. To me, the game changing plays have been when Holmes or Harris lets a guy go buy him like it was a bull fight, and Luck is laying on the ground. You stop that, and I can not think of a more impactful play. The only thing about it is his play will not show up in the statistics, as long as he is doing his job. As far as I am concerned, that would be perfect. Castanzo, Mewhart, Kelly form a very good left side of the line, if Kelly is as good

as I think he will be. We still need a LG to step up, and Reitz can hold down RT until we see if Good can. If not, next year we look for a RT in FA or the draft, and the line hopefully will be fixed. Also with Philbin, I think we are going to see improvement. Kelly is much better than Martin, and has always been who I wanted, but if someone falls, and we take them, I would be fine with taking Martin in the 2nd.

[loudnproudcolt]

8 hours ago, BlueShoe said:

Everyone pretty much knows how I feel.

 

Back flips over the couch if we draft Kelly at #18!

 

BlueShoe would be one happy man. 

In absolute full agreement!

[Jackie Daytona]

8 hours ago, Dustin said:

I dont see how Grigson spends a first round pick on a center after 2 years of saying how he doesn't value the position. Seems like a smokescreen, and I don't say that often. 

Easy......Grigson was wrong.

[Jackie Daytona]

6 hours ago, BOTT said:

Playing center is the easiest position on the offensive line.

Really?  The guy responsible for all line calls, blocking assignments, recognizing and calling shifts, responses to shifts, blitzes, responses to blitzes......  Whatever you say my man, if it's that easy, the fact we couldn't find one for 4 years straight that should be a backup, let alone starter in the NFL is even more sad....

[Jackie Daytona]

22 minutes ago, loudnproudcolt said:

 

I just don't get how a center is not impactful. He is the glue of the line. He makes the adjustments at the line of scrimmage when necessary. You put Kelly in the middle of that line, and you get an instant leader and huge

upgrade.

I know when you say impactful, you are talking about guys who are going to have a chance for a game changing play. To me, the game changing plays have been when Holmes or Harris lets a guy go buy him like it was a bull fight, and Luck is laying on the ground. You stop that, and I can not think of a more impactful play. The only thing about it is his play will not show up in the statistics, as long as he is doing his job. As far as I am concerned, that would be perfect. Castanzo, Mewhart, Kelly form a very good left side of the line, if Kelly is as good

as I think he will be. We still need a LG to step up, and Reitz can hold down RT until we see if Good can. If not, next year we look for a RT in FA or the draft, and the line hopefully will be fixed. Also with Philbin, I think we are going to see improvement. Kelly is much better than Martin, and has always been who I wanted, but if someone falls, and we take them, I would be fine with taking Martin in the 2nd.

I am with you...... How about the biggest single improvement we could make to LET Andrew make game changing and huge plays......  might be a consideration...... if Kelly can coordinate the line, keep Luck healthy and off the turf..... then he's worth it.  Who cares if we get 10 more sacks next season, or 2 more picks.....  if Luck is eating turf all day long?

[RockThatBlue]

14 hours ago, 21isSuperman said:

Shows you how much all these analysts know, continually giving the Colts a tackle in the first round of their mocks.

So true.

[krunk]

4 hours ago, loudnproudcolt said:

 

I just don't get how a center is not impactful. He is the glue of the line. He makes the adjustments at the line of scrimmage when necessary. You put Kelly in the middle of that line, and you get an instant leader and huge

upgrade.

I know when you say impactful, you are talking about guys who are going to have a chance for a game changing play. To me, the game changing plays have been when Holmes or Harris lets a guy go buy him like it was a bull fight, and Luck is laying on the ground. You stop that, and I can not think of a more impactful play. The only thing about it is his play will not show up in the statistics, as long as he is doing his job. As far as I am concerned, that would be perfect. Castanzo, Mewhart, Kelly form a very good left side of the line, if Kelly is as good

as I think he will be. We still need a LG to step up, and Reitz can hold down RT until we see if Good can. If not, next year we look for a RT in FA or the draft, and the line hopefully will be fixed. Also with Philbin, I think we are going to see improvement. Kelly is much better than Martin, and has always been who I wanted, but if someone falls, and we take them, I would be fine with taking Martin in the 2nd.

It's already been proven historically that you don't need a real top notch athlete to play the center position. There's all kinds of teams that went to and won championships with small to mid round investments in the center position. If we miss out on Kelly in this draft there is a real good likelihood we could find someone else in this draft who can play the center position and be very effective. It's not like us missing out on drafting a Von Miller or not drafting a Vince Wilfork and thinking we will easily find another player like that in another round. You don't have to have a dominant player at center. You just need someone that does their job for the most part. And in our case someone that is healthy. With only 6 picks and a need to add talent to this roster all over the place its an issue for many of us to pass over elite talent at harder to obtain positions in the upper first round to obtain a center. There's all kinds of different places you can look to in the drat to fill that position and get a nice player. It wont kill the team if Kelly is drafted and we would get a really good player, but its just not the preferred pick at that spot in the draft. Me personally I think We would be just as good if we dont see the talent we want at 18 doing a trade back to 31, pick up Cody Whitehair while getting extra picks. Acquire Isaac Seumalo later on at center. Gives you two guys who could do well at center. Not only that but they both can play every other position on the offensive line if asked to.

[BOTT]

4 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

Really?  The guy responsible for all line calls, blocking assignments, recognizing and calling shifts, responses to shifts, blitzes, responses to blitzes......  Whatever you say my man, if it's that easy, the fact we couldn't find one for 4 years straight that should be a backup, let alone starter in the NFL is even more sad....

I didnt make it up.  I have listened to former interior lineman say it's the easiest...including Damian Woody.  It's only fans who think it's of great importance.

[NewColtsFan]

12 hours ago, Dustin said:

I dont see how Grigson spends a first round pick on a center after 2 years of saying how he doesn't value the position. Seems like a smokescreen, and I don't say that often. 

 

I think this could be a smoke screen too....    and I'm someone who would be fine with drafting Kelly at 18.

 

And I understand your concern about over-drafting the position.    I think not only Grigson believes that,  but most NFL teams believe that.

 

That said,  here are 9 teams that disagree...

 

1st Round Center:

-- Pouncy      Pitt

-- Pouncy      Mia

-- Mangold    NYJ

-- Mack         Atl

-- Frederick   Dal

-- Erving       Cle

 

2nd Round Center:

-- Kalil        Car

-- Unger     N.O.

-- Morse     K.C.

 

Now,   I may have missed a 1st/2nd rounder somewhere else...   but other than perhaps Erving who didn't even play center as a rookie,  that's 8 teams -- 1/4 of the NFL -- that's invested heavily invested in the position via the draft.     And I don't see a single team who has buyers remorse.

 

And here's the conversation in the Colts Front Office:

 

Grigson:  1st round we can focus on......  (names other guys) and we can grab a center in the 2nd or 3rd round.

 

Irsay:    Ryan, I basically agree,  but we've screwed up the position so badly and we're going into Luck's 5th year and we've yet to protect him well.    Let's bight the bullet this year and just draft the best center of the past few years and be done with it.    We'll go back to BPA and filling needs with the rest of the draft.    But we can't afford a mid-round pick on a center and then have that guy not work out the way Holmes hasn't worked out for us.     We can't hope anymore.    Let's fix it, and move on.

 

If we wind up with Kelly,  I think that's the conversation that was had in the front office....

 

[Archer]

If we take Kelly at #18, I'll have to trust the coaching staff on that one.  I love the idea of a center in Round 1, but I wasn't enthralled by Kelly from the games I watched him in.  But, I watched two, and our scouting staff watched all of his games (and they knew what they were doing, as opposed to me...).  For my money, I'd take Spence in the 1st and Nick Martin in the 2nd and get good value with those picks.  I liked Martin's playing style (very aggressive when run blocking).  I do like that they are supposedly thinking C and OLB in the first two rounds, as that's been my line of thinking most of this draft season...

[krunk]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think this could be a smoke screen too....    and I'm someone who would be fine with drafting Kelly at 18.

 

And I understand your concern about over-drafting the position.    I think not only Grigson believes that,  but most NFL teams believe that.

 

That said,  here are 9 teams that disagree...

 

1st Round Center:

-- Pouncy      Pitt

-- Pouncy      Mia

-- Mangold    NYJ

-- Mack         Atl

-- Frederick   Dal

-- Erving       Cle

 

2nd Round Center:

-- Kalil        Car

-- Unger     N.O.

-- Morse     K.C.

 

Now,   I may have missed a 1st/2nd rounder somewhere else...   but other than perhaps Erving who didn't even play center as a rookie,  that's 8 teams -- 1/4 of the NFL -- that's invested heavily invested in the position via the draft.     And I don't see a single team who has buyers remorse.

 

And here's the conversation in the Colts Front Office:

 

Grigson:  1st round we can focus on......  (names other guys) and we can grab a center in the 2nd or 3rd round.

 

Irsay:    Ryan, I basically agree,  but we've screwed up the position so badly and we're going into Luck's 5th year and we've yet to protect him well.    Let's bight the bullet this year and just draft the best center of the past few years and be done with it.    We'll go back to BPA and filling needs with the rest of the draft.    But we can't afford a mid-round pick on a center and then have that guy not work out the way Holmes hasn't worked out for us.     We can't hope anymore.    Let's fix it, and move on.

 

If we wind up with Kelly,  I think that's the conversation that was had in the front office....

 

And you hear Irsay saying that after years of undrafted Jeff Saturday? Irsay has always been an advocate of letting the board speak for itself. If they take a center that high it will be because they feel he is the clear BPA, or at least on par with everyone else on the board . I dont think the issue will be about Holmes and mid round picks.

[Dustin]

7 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

Easy......Grigson was wrong.

 

Well, he's not, but even if he is I don't see him as a guy to concede that. 

[Gavin]

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

 

Well, he's not, but even if he is I don't see him as a guy to concede that. 

He would definitely be wrong if he did not consider a Center as BPA on his board just because perceived value of a Center being so low in general.....Speaking in general terms not specific to this years draft. But if you grade a Center in your draft as the BPA and you don't take him just because he is a Center if he is there then that's a problem and it will at some point catch up to you most likely. I mean if you have a Travis Frederic on your board staring you in the face and he is your BPA ya take him. I mean in a way Grigson has been seemingly taking the perceived value approach for 4 years now in FA to with O Line filling it with bums expecting them to gel and the interior of the O Line to right itself (Louis, Mcglynn, Satele, an old and washed up Herremans)......No when you put them next to each other you have a QB that has to fear for his life rather than play QB....All ya did was stick three bad O Linemen next to each other

 

Now of course there is the obvious exception. Your not going to take a QB if he is the BPA on your board but we have that for hopefully the next 10 years or so but its different for other positions because other positions even if they are filled with great players are not as likely to stick around for the next 10-15 years like a great QB would. I mean you probably have 2-3-4 core players you try to keep for the long hau and the rest you replace

 

But anyway I went on longer then I intended as thoughts came to me

[Jackie Daytona]

5 hours ago, BOTT said:

I didnt make it up.  I have listened to former interior lineman say it's the easiest...including Damian Woody.  It's only fans who think it's of great importance.

hmm...ok

[Dustin]

55 minutes ago, Gavin said:

He would definitely be wrong if he did not consider a Center as BPA on his board just because perceived value of a Center being so low in general.....Speaking in general terms not specific to this years draft. But if you grade a Center in your draft as the BPA and you don't take him just because he is a Center if he is there then that's a problem and it will at some point catch up to you most likely. I mean if you have a Travis Frederic on your board staring you in the face and he is your BPA ya take him. I mean in a way Grigson has been seemingly taking the perceived value approach for 4 years now in FA to with O Line filling it with bums expecting them to gel and the interior of the O Line to right itself (Louis, Mcglynn, Satele, an old and washed up Herremans)......No when you put them next to each other you have a QB that has to fear for his life rather than play QB....All ya did was stick three bad O Linemen next to each other

 

Now of course there is the obvious exception. Your not going to take a QB if he is the BPA on your board but we have that for hopefully the next 10 years or so but its different for other positions because other positions even if they are filled with great players are not as likely to stick around for the next 10-15 years like a great QB would. I mean you probably have 2-3-4 core players you try to keep for the long hau and the rest you replace

 

But anyway I went on longer then I intended as thoughts came to me

 

If you have a center ranked #1 on your board and an edge rusher at #2 you taking the center?

 

Straight BPA works well on paper, but positional value is a real thing.

[DougDew]

There are some other issues the Colts have to deal with that maybe are unique to this draft.

 

1: They HAVE to improve the interior OL this offseason.

2. An edge player will still likely start behind Cole and Mathis.

3.  After the TR and BW blown picks, they need a sure thing player from the 1st round this year.

 

18 is too high for Kelly, but I think he will be a solid NFL Player from day 1, and will contribute from day 1, so I wouldn't be upset if he was the pick.

[Gavin]

19 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

If you have a center ranked #1 on your board and an edge rusher at #2 you taking the center?

 

Straight BPA works well on paper, but positional value is a real thing.

Depends how wide the margin of grade is. If I have a 8.0 grade on the Center and a 7.0 on the pass rusher then Im taking the Center though trading down is possible. If not possible then again...Center

 

If I had a 7.76 on the C and a 7.70 on the pass rusher and a need at pass rusher then Im going pass rusher and not looking back

 

But I didn't consider positional value when making that decision. I considered grades and need

 

You risk missing out on some great players not considering a certain position because of thinking way to much about perceived value

 

 

[Dustin]

3 minutes ago, Gavin said:

If I had a 7.76 on the C and a 7.70 on the pass rusher and a need at pass rusher then Im going pass rusher and not looking back

 

But I didn't consider positional value when making that decision.

 

 

But you just did? 

[Gavin]

3 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

But you just did? 

No I didn't though it may look that way. I took the need

[Dustin]

Just now, Gavin said:

No I didn't

 

I didn't think i would have to spell this out for you and assumed you would be giving me the benefit of the doubt that in my example it's a random team with a need at center and edge rusher and the two players grades are close to the same (hence why i said 1 and 2 instead of 1 and like 40) with the center being graded a little higher. 

 

Now let me rephrase it so it's more clearly so you can understand since apparently my example needs to have every backdoor covered lest you get pedantic about it.:

 

A random team has two players (a center and an edge rusher) who are bad and equal in skill relative to their positions (meaning that both players are at exactly the same skill-level) and have the first pick in the draft. They obviously want to replace these two players and want to do so with their 1st draft pick. On their hypothetical billboard they have a Center ranked as the #1 player in the draft with a 8.8 grade. They also have an edge rusher #2 on their board with an 8.7 grade. Now, they can only chose one of these players. If you were the GM of this hypothetical team, which player would you chose? 

 

[jvan1973]

6 hours ago, BOTT said:

I didnt make it up.  I have listened to former interior lineman say it's the easiest...including Damian Woody.  It's only fans who think it's of great importance.

I think it's funny that Woody would say that considering his struggles at center in his pro career

[NewColtsFan]

3 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

I didn't think i would have to spell this out for you and assumed you would be giving me the benefit of the doubt that in my example it's a random team with a need at center and edge rusher and the two players grades are close to the same (hence why i said 1 and 2 instead of 1 and like 40) with the center being graded a little higher. 

 

Now let me rephrase it so it's more clearly so you can understand since apparently my example needs to have every backdoor covered lest you get pedantic about it.:

 

A random team has two players (a center and an edge rusher) who are bad and equal in skill relative to their positions (meaning that both players are at exactly the same skill-level) and have the first pick in the draft. They obviously want to replace these two players and want to do so with their 1st draft pick. On their hypothetical billboard they have a Center ranked as the #1 player in the draft with a 8.8 grade. They also have an edge rusher #2 on their board with an 8.7 grade. Now, they can only chose one of these players. If you were the GM of this hypothetical team, which player would you chose? 

 

 

I don't mean to complicate matters any,  but part of the equation for the final decision may also include the remaining available talent at each position.

 

Does OLB become an even greater position of need because maybe the Colts either don't like the remaining options that will be available or they like some of the options but think there's a good chance that they won't be able to draft them because other teams will beat them to the punch.

 

I think there are way too many moving parts to this discussion easy and obvious.

 

 

[Gavin]

7 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

I didn't think i would have to spell this out for you and assumed you would be giving me the benefit of the doubt that in my example it's a random team with a need at center and edge rusher and the two players grades are close to the same (hence why i said 1 and 2 instead of 1 and like 40) with the center being graded a little higher. 

 

Now let me rephrase it so it's more clearly so you can understand since apparently my example needs to have every backdoor covered lest you get pedantic about it.:

 

A random team has two players (a center and an edge rusher) who are bad and equal in skill relative to their positions (meaning that both players are at exactly the same skill-level) and have the first pick in the draft. They obviously want to replace these two players and want to do so with their 1st draft pick. On their hypothetical billboard they have a Center ranked as the #1 player in the draft with a 8.8 grade. They also have an edge rusher #2 on their board with an 8.7 grade. Now, they can only chose one of these players. If you were the GM of this hypothetical team, which player would you chose? 

 

Well now this is more like it. I'd have to take that Center because that's what my board says

[ScissorMeTimbers]

I was quite opposed to Kelly for awhile but with more thought, I would be pretty happy with Kelly in the 1st or Martin in the 2nd. Everyone gave the Dallas Cowboys crap for drafting Travis Frederick with pick #31. Obviously #18 is far more valuable than #31 but I think if the FO could go back and swap Werner for Fredericks, they would do it in a heartbeat.

[Dustin]

29 minutes ago, Gavin said:

Well now this is more like it. I'd have to take that Center because that's what my board says

 

Congrats. You have Alex Mack instead of Von Miller.

[Colts_Fan12]

2 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

Congrats. You have Alex Mack instead of Von Miller.

And Grigson would have to be fired if such a scenario happened lol

[Gavin]

13 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

Congrats. You have Alex Mack instead of Von Miller.

Well its more like Alex Mack instead of Clay Matthews considering Mack went in 2009 right before Matthews who went 5 picks later. But I think you have to live that. You cant worry about some other player doing well if you have a player that you had graded slightly higher doing just as well at another position

[krunk]

How are Alex Mack and Von Miller getting graded in the same ball park?  1 point slightly ahead of the other?  On who's draft board?

[PeterBowman]

6 minutes ago, krunk said:

How are Alex Mack and Von Miller getting graded in the same ball park?  1 point slightly ahead of the other?  On who's draft board?

Plus there are no Von Miller level pass rush prospects in this draft..... And if there was they'd be long gone by 18. So I'd be more than comfy with an Alex Mack

[Gavin]

18 minutes ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

And Grigson would have to be fired if such a scenario happened lol

Its a moot point...They did not go in the same draft class. Miller-2011. Mack-2009

[Dustin]

2 minutes ago, PeterBowman said:

Plus there are no Von Miller level pass rush prospects in this draft..... And if there was they'd be long gone by 18. So I'd be more than comfy with an Alex Mack

 

Way to miss the entire point of the conversation. 

[Dustin]

Just now, Gavin said:

Its a moot point...They did not go in the same draft class. Miller-2011. Mack-2009

 

You also somehow missed the entire point. 

[Dustin]

10 minutes ago, krunk said:

How are Alex Mack and Von Miller getting graded in the same ball park?  1 point slightly ahead of the other?  On who's draft board?

 

Goodness gracious

[Gavin]

7 minutes ago, Dustin said:

 

You also somehow missed the entire point. 

No I didn't. your point is that rush linebacker is a premium position and more impact, especially compared to Center.....Of course it is but the draft is not as black and white as that.  Your not drafting premium positions or a pass rusher just because the position is more impactful.