Food for thought~am I the only one wondering?

[Crunked]

As we have watched the free agency period unfold. LB'er after LB'er being signed. I thought to myself this Ballard dude is serious about building a strong top to bottom roster. Look at all of the "competition" he is bringing in to compete with the LB'ers he is going to draft. Then as I read these forums day after day, many thought that the bulk of these guys would be plugged in as starters. It then made me consider what if they are, this would change the focus of our draft tremendously. Our highest focus would be on secondary and eventually D-Line, and maybe some could say D-Line should come first, but the talent isn't there in this draft for strong 1st round consideration anyway. So now I think we have an opportunity to learn about Ballard as a team builder. What if I am right, and all those FA's are here as competition/depth in that we will still focus the first part of the draft hot and heavy on LB'ers and create may the best man win scenario of that aspect of the team. Or will he draft secondary, D-Line heavy to try and get us as good as we can be after 1 offseason under his reign. To me that will be the fascinating thing to watch unfold. The slow pragmatic build an area, or the improve the overall deal with depth over time approach. I would be interested to know which way you think he will go.

 

[UKColt13]

I would be shocked if our first rounder wasn't either an ILB or DB of some sort, preferably a CB#2.

 

Right now our CB#2 is Rashaan Melvin and he's shown a few flashes but he's by no means starter material right now. We haven't got a nickel back on the roster either. 

 

As it stands our starting ILBs are two of Sean Spence, Antonio Morrison and Edwin Jackson. Not a particularly fun thought.

 

Whilst neither of the guys CB signed as OLBs are top grade pass rushers, they are at least serviceable. 

 

I fully expect at least 1 CB and an ILB in the first 3 rounds.

 

 

[Smonroe]

I think the only position we won't see drafted in the first round is QB.  I used to think TE too, but I'm not so sure anymore.  

 

You guys are thinking positions of need.  This really could be a BPA draft since Ballard has already strengthened the roster to respectability.  

[Crunked]

Smonroe: I don't discount that line of thinking either as, lets be honest, we have a lot of needs on all sides of the ball......and my thoughts continue below (didn't know if I could quote you both or not lol)

UKColt13: I guess what I was wondering out loud is "overall approach" will it be BPA/ Positions we haven't signed in free agency, OR will it be try to build 3 strings of greatness in the LB'er core as a year 1 approach and focus on another area next year and so on.....ultimately it could be a reflection of Coach/GM relationship as well if you really analyze it deeply. Chuck is the DB whisperer, so do we plug in some UDFA's for chuck to coach up ala building 3 strings of greatness at LB'er theory.....or do we start filling holes of need all over the roster with the draft, ala, BPA/ raise the level overall one year at a time......

 

Ultimately if it is the BPA/Raise the overall level, I wonder out loud what "competition" is there at DB if we draft guys to fill the holes, there is no one on the roster that are starter level to compete with......

 

I do not have a preference one way or another, I am of the opinion we needed more than we could feasibly acquire in one off season, so generally speaking I like the approach to date. I am just curious to his style (as it will be revealed one way or the other, and to the revealing nature of the new GM/Coach relationship) as long as we don't get "crazy with the cheese whiz" and start drafting punters in the first round and 6 back up QB's I will generally be alright with what we do.

[crazycolt1]

I have absolutely no clue as to who Ballard will pick in any round.

Let's be honest, no one else does either.

I would imagine it depends on who picks ahead of us in just about every round. Once Ballard has his big board does he stay with that? If a player falls to us does he vary the pick?

GM's generally could care less about what the fans want or say. They have information at their disposal we as fans really don't have because they have a whole staff investigating that can go all the way back to high school. They also are fully aware of the gamble vs the talent.

 

[Crunked]

crazycolt1: You are absolutely correct. I guess the intention of this thread was to get away from the "WHO" are we drafting and ask the "HOW" are we drafting question. Or to at least speculate as to what Ballard's approach might be, mocking his management and evaluation process as it were......

 

For me, I think it will tell us his "big picture" approach as his tenure unfolds. A peek ahead if you will.....

[crazycolt1]

13 minutes ago, crunked said:

crazycolt1: You are absolutely correct. I guess the intention of this thread was to get away from the "WHO" are we drafting and ask the "HOW" are we drafting question. Or to at least speculate as to what Ballard's approach might be, mocking his management and evaluation process as it were......

 

For me, I think it will tell us his "big picture" approach as his tenure unfolds. A peek ahead if you will.....

I understand the thread but we can all speculate and have an opinion on who Ballard will take but the bottom line we have no clue. We have no history of Ballard and he doesn't even have a history of drafting himself. He does have a good back ground in scouting and that is about all we know at this point.

His job is to evaluate what his scouts and staff puts on the table for him to choose. He will have his hits and misses just like every GM does.

I know it's a slow time for things to happen and that just adds to the drama so to say. We are all fully aware of the needs and the only thing left is to wait and see. No matter how we go about anticipating who or why a player is taken makes no difference in who he actually takes. It is what it is.

[richard pallo]

To me what has happened so far was an attempt to improve the roster through FA as best he could.  He didn't shy away from some of the big name FA's ; Poe and Jeffreys.  He just couldn't get them for what ever reason.  He then turned to the 2nd. tier group and signed quite a few.  But, with only a few exceptions, they are one year prove it deals.  Younger players who just might turn out to be some real keepers.  We will see.  He has been pretty upfront about building through the draft and he also has made a trade no one saw coming.  So that leaves us with the draft and maybe more trades.  I think he is likely to make more trades in an effort to acquire more picks but I wouldn't rule out acquiring a player or two as well.  I think if he can acquire more picks with our 1st. rounder he will do it.  And when we do start picking it will be BPA in a position of need so I wouldn't rule out RB or OL or any other position.  Don't forget we tried to sign a WR.  I think he is keeping all his options open so it is going to be an interesting time leading up to FA.  Just my 2 cents.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

I dont think cb is drafting LB except maybe foster. Secondary picks w I'm guessing will be his focus as long as their ratings are near bpa

[Gigc]

I think the biggest thing all of his signings have done is give him the flexibility of being able to pick almost ANY position --- offense or defense (except QB) --- to get the best player. A potential star, wherever they play.

Games are won by stars. We still are woefully short at CB and he loves to pick CBs (look at KCs recent drafts) but I think it could mean the best WR or RB, CB, DL, even OL. 

[rock8591]

If OJ Howard falls, pick him. Jimmy Graham in his prime.

[throwing BBZ]

Great athletes for the front 7 plus a CB.

[Coltfreak]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

I have absolutely no clue as to who Ballard will pick in any round.

Let's be honest, no one else does either.

I would imagine it depends on who picks ahead of us in just about every round. Once Ballard has his big board does he stay with that? If a player falls to us does he vary the pick?

GM's generally could care less about what the fans want or say. They have information at their disposal we as fans really don't have because they have a whole staff investigating that can go all the way back to high school. They also are fully aware of the gamble vs the talent.

 

I don't get what you are saying here at all.   When Ballard sets his big board how would he vary his pick if a player were to "fall" to us?   If a player falls wont they already be ranked high on the big board?

[Crunked]

 

 

Gigc: You make a good point on his love of DB's and more over the FA signings giving some lateral flexibility. It is a wrinkle I didn't touch on above, but should be considered when the draft arrives and we are seeing the picks being made.

[crazycolt1]

18 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

I don't get what you are saying here at all.   When Ballard sets his big board how would he vary his pick if a player were to "fall" to us?   If a player falls wont they already be ranked high on the big board?

Does that need to be explained to you? Seriously?

[Coltfreak]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Does that need to be explained to you? Seriously?

Give me one example of a player that would be ranked in the top 20 that Ballard wouldn't already have on his big board. 

 

Us this the rankings from ESPN as an example and tell me how that is possible

 

 

Player	*.	School	Grade
1. Myles Garrett*	DE	Texas A&M	95
2. Jonathan Allen	DT	Alabama	94
3. Jamal Adams*	S	LSU	93
4. Solomon Thomas*	DE	Stanford	93
5. Reuben Foster	ILB	Alabama	92
6. L. Fournette*	RB	LSU	92
7. Malik Hooker*	S	Ohio State	92
8. O.J. Howard	TE	Alabama	92
9. M. Lattimore*	CB	Ohio State	92
10. Dalvin Cook*	RB	Florida St	91
11. Corey Davis	WR	W Michigan	91
12. David Njoku*	TE	Miami (FL)	91
13. Forrest Lamp	OG	W Kentucky	91
14. Mike Williams*	WR	Clemson	90
15. Garett Bolles*	OT	Utah	90
16. John Ross*	WR	Washington	90
17. Taco Charlton	DE	Michigan	90
18. Derek Barnett*	DE	Tennessee	89
19. C. Mccaffrey*	RB	Stanford	89
20. Malik McDowell*	DT	Michigan St

 

Unless you dont think that Ballard would rank these player.  And if that is the case why not?

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

Give me one example of a player that would be ranked in the top 20 that Ballard wouldn't already have on his big board. 

 

Us this the rankings from ESPN as an example and tell me how that is possible

 

 

Player	*.	School	Grade
1. Myles Garrett*	DE	Texas A&M	95
2. Jonathan Allen	DT	Alabama	94
3. Jamal Adams*	S	LSU	93
4. Solomon Thomas*	DE	Stanford	93
5. Reuben Foster	ILB	Alabama	92
6. L. Fournette*	RB	LSU	92
7. Malik Hooker*	S	Ohio State	92
8. O.J. Howard	TE	Alabama	92
9. M. Lattimore*	CB	Ohio State	92
10. Dalvin Cook*	RB	Florida St	91
11. Corey Davis	WR	W Michigan	91
12. David Njoku*	TE	Miami (FL)	91
13. Forrest Lamp	OG	W Kentucky	91
14. Mike Williams*	WR	Clemson	90
15. Garett Bolles*	OT	Utah	90
16. John Ross*	WR	Washington	90
17. Taco Charlton	DE	Michigan	90
18. Derek Barnett*	DE	Tennessee	89
19. C. Mccaffrey*	RB	Stanford	89
20. Malik McDowell*	DT	Michigan St

 

Unless you dont think that Ballard would rank these player.  And if that is the case why not?

Every GMs board is different. You cant take what the so called expert say as actuality.

[chad72]

Ballard loves to bring in competition, so he'll draft a QB in round 1 to keep Luck honest. #kidding

[Coltfreak]

19 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Every GMs board is different. You cant take what the so called expert say as actuality.

My point is.    How can a player drop like you suggested and Ballard would have to "vary" his pick if he has the player ranked at the top of the board?   

[akcolt]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

Give me one example of a player that would be ranked in the top 20 that Ballard wouldn't already have on his big board. 

 

Us this the rankings from ESPN as an example and tell me how that is possible

 

 

Player	*.	School	Grade
1. Myles Garrett*	DE	Texas A&M	95
2. Jonathan Allen	DT	Alabama	94
3. Jamal Adams*	S	LSU	93
4. Solomon Thomas*	DE	Stanford	93
5. Reuben Foster	ILB	Alabama	92
6. L. Fournette*	RB	LSU	92
7. Malik Hooker*	S	Ohio State	92
8. O.J. Howard	TE	Alabama	92
9. M. Lattimore*	CB	Ohio State	92
10. Dalvin Cook*	RB	Florida St	91
11. Corey Davis	WR	W Michigan	91
12. David Njoku*	TE	Miami (FL)	91
13. Forrest Lamp	OG	W Kentucky	91
14. Mike Williams*	WR	Clemson	90
15. Garett Bolles*	OT	Utah	90
16. John Ross*	WR	Washington	90
17. Taco Charlton	DE	Michigan	90
18. Derek Barnett*	DE	Tennessee	89
19. C. Mccaffrey*	RB	Stanford	89
20. Malik McDowell*	DT	Michigan St

 

Unless you dont think that Ballard would rank these player.  And if that is the case why not?

Yeah you can drop Lamp and Bolles right off the bat. Top 20 no Where are Peppers and Reddick? Humphrey 

[Coltfreak]

9 minutes ago, akcolt said:

Yeah you can drop Lamp and Bolles right off the bat. Top 20 no Where are Peppers and Reddick? Humphrey 

This was just an example.....   I am saying that they rank all the players and will wait until they see who is left to make their pick.  They have each player graded and cannot say definitively that they will pick player X with their 1st pick.  They may estimate who they think each team will take, but if Myles Garrett fell to us (he wont) they wouldn't have to rethink things. He would be the pick

 

Another example. 

 

If the above is how Ballard has the top of the draft graded, and let's say Jamal Adams Corey Davis David Njoku are all available when we pick then he would take Adams.   So there is no varying on who he has to pick.

 

 

 

BTW. I would not at all rule out Oline with the 1st pick

 

 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

My point is.    How can a player drop like you suggested and Ballard would have to "vary" his pick if he has the player ranked at the top of the board?   

Maybe he is not on Ballards board? Maybe another GMs board is completely different? It's sad I have to explain something that is obvious.

[Coltfreak]

10 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Maybe he is not on Ballards board? Maybe another GMs board is completely different? It's sad I have to explain something that is obvious.

No what is sad is that someone asks you a question about a statement you made and you cant ever answer it.

 

If the player is not on Ballard board why on earth would he "vary" his pick?    Do you think he regrades players in the draft room?

 

 

[akcolt]

1 hour ago, Coltfreak said:

This was just an example.....   I am saying that they rank all the players and will wait until they see who is left to make their pick.  They have each player graded and cannot say definitively that they will pick player X with their 1st pick.  They may estimate who they think each team will take, but if Myles Garrett fell to us (he wont) they wouldn't have to rethink things. He would be the pick

 

Another example. 

 

If the above is how Ballard has the top of the draft graded, and let's say Jamal Adams Corey Davis David Njoku are all available when we pick then he would take Adams.   So there is no varying on who he has to pick.

 

 

 

BTW. I would not at all rule out Oline with the 1st pick

 

 

I'm not ruling anything out. I don't see an OL in the top 15 players. We aren't desperate at OT so I'd be surprised with OL at 15. I'm sure 2-4 O lineman will come off in the first round. I think we are more likely to go Dawkins or Moton maybe Robinson day 2. If Ballard feels we need immediate OL help. 

 

I guess I am not following what you are trying to say. If Adams Davis and Njoku are all available at 15. I think you are mistaken to think Adams is the pick for sure. We could just as easily go with Reddick Conley Humphrey or even Harris among others. Tankersley 40 could push him up boards.

 

Garrett is easy. When you get 14 players into the draft it's much more likely that there are 20 different opinions who should go at 15 then everyone agreeing it's Adams. The boards aren't going to be the same from team to team not even close. 

[crazycolt1]

36 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

No what is sad is that someone asks you a question about a statement you made and you cant ever answer it.

 

If the player is not on Ballard board why on earth would he "vary" his pick?    Do you think he regrades players in the draft room?

 

 

My god I am done with you. All you want to do is argue and you make it impossible to reason with. Don't bother to response because you will not get a response.

[funktacious2]

I don't think anything Ballard has done in FA is indicative of what we are going to do in the draft. We can speculate all we want, but I think what he's done so far can spell a few different things. Maybe he's leaving CB weak because he knows it's a good draft for CBs, or maybe he just got rid of Robinson because he played bad and wasn't worth the contract? Maybe the signings are just a way to try and get as much depth and competiton all around? Maybe we plan to just go truly BPA? Maybe it's a mix of all these things? There are so many theories we can talk about. I just don't think we can truly know how this man drafts until... well, you know... he drafts.

 

That being said, whether it is his plan or not, I think outside of needing a corner pretty bad, I think he's set us up well enough that I could care less about most positions we draft or where we draft them. As long as the player can be a game changer, I'm happy! 

[KB]

I would prefer a build overall roster through time. Doing one position at a time is flawed in the way of say we focus heavily in one position this year then we will be weak in the other positions, of course. So the next year we focus on a different one. Well that still leaves very weak areas. By the time you make it all the way around to making a strong all around roster the original focus will most likely be a weakness due to some of those players leaving to other teams. Even if we resigned a good amount alot would leave.

 

From your train of thought I think we should do a mix of them. Start this year building depth across the roster. Find some good pieces and evaluate the roster again. If more over all depth is needed do another roster boost like before. Once you get to a point to where all the team needs is a strong boost in a couple areas then go all out for them (as long as the draft is good in the position that year, if not then hopefully you land a strong FA). At that point we would have a roster full of depth and most likely some strong players throughout. We would be able to do as CB mentioned in an interview and cut good players because they weren't as good as the ones we kept.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, funktacious2 said:

I don't think anything Ballard has done in FA is indicative of what we are going to do in the draft. We can speculate all we want, but I think what he's done so far can spell a few different things. Maybe he's leaving CB weak because he knows it's a good draft for CBs, or maybe he just got rid of Robinson because he played bad and wasn't worth the contract? Maybe the signings are just a way to try and get as much depth and competiton all around? Maybe we plan to just go truly BPA? Maybe it's a mix of all these things? There are so many theories we can talk about. I just don't think we can truly know how this man drafts until... well, you know... he drafts.

 

That being said, whether it is his plan or not, I think outside of needing a corner pretty bad, I think he's set us up well enough that I could care less about most positions we draft or where we draft them. As long as the player can be a game changer, I'm happy! 

 

1 hour ago, KB said:

I would prefer a build overall roster through time. Doing one position at a time is flawed in the way of say we focus heavily in one position this year then we will be weak in the other positions, of course. So the next year we focus on a different one. Well that still leaves very weak areas. By the time you make it all the way around to making a strong all around roster the original focus will most likely be a weakness due to some of those players leaving to other teams. Even if we resigned a good amount alot would leave.

 

From your train of thought I think we should do a mix of them. Start this year building depth across the roster. Find some good pieces and evaluate the roster again. If more over all depth is needed do another roster boost like before. Once you get to a point to where all the team needs is a strong boost in a couple areas then go all out for them (as long as the draft is good in the position that year, if not then hopefully you land a strong FA). At that point we would have a roster full of depth and most likely some strong players throughout. We would be able to do as CB mentioned in an interview and cut good players because they weren't as good as the ones we kept.

I am also leaning for a draft that goes BPA.  Yes I know we have a couple of positions that are very weak but building a team of the quickest and best players available will pay off. I think this draft is defensive deep enough to improve us across the board. On the offensive side there is also a couple of players that can improve that side of the game. Young and quick players also make for better special team players. Hopefully Ballard will make the moves that will improve this team. We are not that far away from being competitive this year and improve going forward.

[chad72]

There are still talent deficiencies along several fronts that the best talent available when you are picking would help with the KISS principle for most GMs. I don't think Ballard is immune to that.

[Coltfreak]

9 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

My god I am done with you. All you want to do is argue and you make it impossible to reason with. Don't bother to response because you will not get a response.

of course not...     I didnt think you could answer it

[Coltfreak]

9 hours ago, akcolt said:

I'm not ruling anything out. I don't see an OL in the top 15 players. We aren't desperate at OT so I'd be surprised with OL at 15. I'm sure 2-4 O lineman will come off in the first round. I think we are more likely to go Dawkins or Moton maybe Robinson day 2. If Ballard feels we need immediate OL help. 

 

I guess I am not following what you are trying to say. If Adams Davis and Njoku are all available at 15. I think you are mistaken to think Adams is the pick for sure. We could just as easily go with Reddick Conley Humphrey or even Harris among others. Tankersley 40 could push him up boards.

 

Garrett is easy. When you get 14 players into the draft it's much more likely that there are 20 different opinions who should go at 15 then everyone agreeing it's Adams. The boards aren't going to be the same from team to team not even close. 

you are missing the point, this was an example......  I am responding to CrazyColt  and his theory that if a top rated player falls would Ballard change his board on draft day.  I am saying that the top players are already on his board so he wouldn't have to "vary" his pick.   Ballard will already have all the players ranked by round and a points system and will take the one that he has ranked highest.  So there can be no "varying" from his pick, if let's say Myles Garrett falls to us (he wont) and Ballard has him ranked the BPA then there is no "varying" his pick.   He may anticipate that Foster will be there and they have a chance to get him with the pick but I guarantee he doesnt have Foster as the highest rated 1st rounder in the draft.