Should we consider trading Andrew Luck at this point?

[RockThatBlue]

3 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

 

Bucky explains it pretty well on the link.  6 First or Second rounders...fill a lot of holes.

 

That's not to suggest he is a bust or a colossal underachiever, but Luck definitely hasn't played to the narrative that's been attached to his name. He is a sub-60-percent passer with a penchant for turnovers. Say what you want about me being harsh, but the numbers don't lie.

In his NFL career, Luck sports a 59.2 percent completion rate, a 132:68 touchdown-to-interception ratio and an 87.3 passer rating. Those numbers aren't awful, but they're on par with a group of QBs that might surprise you, given all the hype Luck has received ...

Andy Dalton: 62.9 percent completion rate, 149:87 TD-to-INT ratio, 89.0 passer rating, 58-38-2 record.

Alex Smith: 62.3 percent completion rate; 172:91 TD-to-INT ratio, 87.1 passer rating, 84-58-1 record.

Sam Bradford: 62.5 percent completion rate; 101:57 TD-to-INT ratio, 85.1 passer, 34-45-1 record.

Now, I'm not saying those guys are comparable as pure football specimens, but their collective production puts them in the same class. Thus, you could make a reasonable argument that Luck is merely a top-15 quarterback at this point.

Luck >>>>>>>>> Bradford, Smith and Dalton.

 

You can't be serious putting those in the same class as Luck (though Smith is having a great year hes been a mostly average QB in his career, I'd still take Luck over him)

[2006Coltsbestever]

11 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

 

"

That's not to suggest he is a bust or a colossal underachiever, but Luck definitely hasn't played to the narrative that's been attached to his name. He is a sub-60-percent passer with a penchant for turnovers. Say what you want about me being harsh, but the numbers don't lie.

In his NFL career, Luck sports a 59.2 percent completion rate, a 132:68 touchdown-to-interception ratio and an 87.3 passer rating. Those numbers aren't awful, but they're on par with a group of QBs that might surprise you, given all the hype Luck has received ...

Andy Dalton: 62.9 percent completion rate, 149:87 TD-to-INT ratio, 89.0 passer rating, 58-38-2 record.

Alex Smith: 62.3 percent completion rate; 172:91 TD-to-INT ratio, 87.1 passer rating, 84-58-1 record.

Sam Bradford: 62.5 percent completion rate; 101:57 TD-to-INT ratio, 85.1 passer, 34-45-1 record.

Now, I'm not saying those guys are comparable as pure football specimens, but their collective production puts them in the same class. Thus, you could make a reasonable argument that Luck is merely a top-15 quarterback at this point."\

 

Sure Will... Go Colts

Gotta have faith in Ballard putting a better team around him. Luck has carried us for the most part.

[oldunclemark]

1 hour ago, FalseStart said:

 

Bucky explains it pretty well on the link.  6 First or Second rounders...fill a lot of holes.

 

That's not to suggest he is a bust or a colossal underachiever, but Luck definitely hasn't played to the narrative that's been attached to his name. He is a sub-60-percent passer with a penchant for turnovers. Say what you want about me being harsh, but the numbers don't lie.

In his NFL career, Luck sports a 59.2 percent completion rate, a 132:68 touchdown-to-interception ratio and an 87.3 passer rating. Those numbers aren't awful, but they're on par with a group of QBs that might surprise you, given all the hype Luck has received ...

Andy Dalton: 62.9 percent completion rate, 149:87 TD-to-INT ratio, 89.0 passer rating, 58-38-2 record.

Alex Smith: 62.3 percent completion rate; 172:91 TD-to-INT ratio, 87.1 passer rating, 84-58-1 record.

Sam Bradford: 62.5 percent completion rate; 101:57 TD-to-INT ratio, 85.1 passer, 34-45-1 record.

Now, I'm not saying those guys are comparable as pure football specimens, but their collective production puts them in the same class. Thus, you could make a reasonable argument that Luck is merely a top-15 quarterback at this point.

Bucky is wrong in his premise.: You probably wont get a single first round draft choice for Andrew Luck at this point. He's hurt.

You couldnt get 6 first and second round picks for our entire offense/

Numbers don't lie but numbers also don't matter.

With limited teammates (and that's being kind), Andrew Luck has never quarterbacked a losing NFL season and has never missed the playoffs in a year when he's played 16 games.

Luck is worth more to the Colts than he would be in trade.

 

You can make an argument about anything.

It depends on whether this is real football or fantasy football we're talking about.

 

[oldunclemark]

Has anyone in the history of the NFL ever been traded for 3 No.1 draft choices?

Not players who used to be No. 1 picks 10 years ago......but 3 No.1 draft choices.

 

Has anyone ever been traded for 2?

 

[FalseStart]

8 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

Has anyone in the history of the NFL ever been traded for 3 No.1 draft choices?

Not players who used to be No. 1 picks 10 years ago......but 3 No.1 draft choices.

 

Has anyone ever been traded for 2?

 

Not sure...I was thinking a couple round 1s and a second to go with our own picks...which would tally 7 picks total in 2018-2019 through rounds 1-2.  Good question.

[FalseStart]

18 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

Bucky is wrong in his premise.: You probably wont get a single first round draft choice for Andrew Luck at this point. He's hurt.

You couldnt get 6 first and second round picks for our entire offense/

Numbers don't lie but numbers also don't matter.

With limited teammates (and that's being kind), Andrew Luck has never quarterbacked a losing NFL season and has never missed the playoffs in a year when he's played 16 games.

Luck is worth more to the Colts than he would be in trade.

 

You can make an argument abut anything.

It depends on whether this is real football or fantasy football we're talking about.

 

I agree/disagree...but as teams would put him through his paces...I believe there would be a lot of interest in a few months...as his prognosis improves... Again, 6 players (RD1 and RD2) and a back-up QB (RD1 or Rd2) to Brissett fills a lot of holes that have been championship killers for the colts.

[oldunclemark]

1 minute ago, FalseStart said:

Not sure...I was thinking a couple round 1s and a second to go with our own picks...which would tally 7 picks total in 2018-2019 through rounds 1-2.  Good question.

Andrew 2 years ago might have gotten multiple picks but Andrew right now would not draw anybody's No. 1

Nobody gives up a No.1 choice for injured players

[FalseStart]

5 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

Andrew 2 years ago might have gotten multiple picks but Andrew right now would not draw anybody's No. 1

Nobody gives up a No.1 choice for injured players

I believe there would be a lot of interest in a few months...as his prognosis improves...a lot to be determined...including Brissett's QB play.  TBD

[oldunclemark]

5 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

I agree...but as teams would put him through his paces...I believe there would be a lot of interest in a few months...as his prognosis improves... Again, 6 players (RD1 and RD2) and a back-up QB (RD1 or Rd2) to Brissett fills a lot of holes that have been championship killers for the colts.

As his prognosis improves, why would we not keep him.?

We cannot draft his replacement.  That guy isnt in college.

 

No one has ever been traded for 3 No.1 picks..and I dont think anyone's ever been traded for 2/

We might get a low 1st round pick from someone like Denver or Minnesota and it better be the Vikings because otherwise we'd have to watch Denver go by us to the Super Bowl with our QB.

 

Sound familiar..

Edited October 21, 2017 by oldunclemark

[The Fish]

Comedian Bill Burr has a funny bit about stats and why he hates them. Basically the jist of the joke is that you can twist them to make bad arguments look a little less off.

[FalseStart]

13 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

As his prognosis improves, why would we not keep him.?

We cannot draft his replacement.  That guy isnt in college.

 

No one has ever been traded for 3 No.1 picks..and I dont think anyone's ever been trade for 2/

We might get a low 1st round pick from someone like Denver or Minnesota

Because...

1. Putting that player once again behind a shady Offensive line would, as history has shown, cause the player to miss games. play slightly above average football...

2. We have too many holes to fill...on Defense, Offense...

3. Right Now we are paying 20 million for a back that has trended mediocrity and injury.

4. We won with Hassellbeck an average player at ~80% reduced cost... 

5. Again, 2 Rd1s...and a 2nd Rounder...

Cheers.

 

[FalseStart]

6 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Comedian Bill Burr has a funny bit about stats and why he hates them. Basically the jist of the joke is that you can twist them to make bad arguments look a little less off.

Nice...  I like the quote... “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.” -Mark Twain

[FalseStart]

On 10/20/2017 at 3:08 AM, Blue Shoe Savior 12 said:

Keeping Luck in Indianapolis the Colts can contend in 2018 and beyond.

If they trade Luck away, well then we might not see the Colts become contenders for a very long time.

I think you are still living in the glitz-glamour of the Peyton Manning years...Our Offense was offensive...and entertaining...but we only one 1 Super Bowl in how many years...and that one player played average playoff football.  Played average football in all four SBs he appeared in...  Would rather have half a dozen first-second rounders to fill the holes and start fresh... We would be a better overall team.  Would be back in contention in 1-2 years...

[aaron11]

51 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

 

Bucky explains it pretty well on the link.  6 First or Second rounders...fill a lot of holes.

 

 

that is insane, nobody is worth 6 first round picks... nobody

 

lucks contract makes him almost un tradeable, if we did trade him it would be for 2 firsts and maybe a player or a late pick at the most.

 

the browns do have enough ammo to go after him, but it would probably end up being a bad trade for both teams

[The Fish]

22 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

Nice...  I like the quote... “Never let the truth get in the way of a good story.” -Mark Twain

The humor is blue, don't click it if that will bug you- but this is what I'm referencing. 

 

[oldunclemark]

27 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

Because...

1. Putting that player once again behind a shady Offensive line would, as history has shown, cause the player to miss games. play slightly above average football...

2. We have too many holes to fill...on Defense, Offense...

3. Right Now we are paying 20 million for a back that has trended mediocrity and injury.

4. We won with Hassellbeck an average player at ~80% reduced cost... 

5. Again, 2 Rd1s...and a 2nd Rounder...

Cheers.

 

We cant get any picks for Andrew  right now...We would be giving him away just to unload the salary.

All QBs cost $15 to $25 mil...That's today's NFL. Mike Glennon makes $15 mil

You have to pay the QB..and hope he's not hurt allt he time because they all get hurt (Rodgers, Cam. Mariotta, etc)

 

Find me anyone in the history of the NFL who was ever traded for two No.1 choices. That's fantasy football. Its CPH  (Cant Possibly Happen) talk

Matt Hassellbeck is one of the Top-20 QBs in the history of the NFL statistically....he was hardly average...  Younger folks just didn't know.

 

All teams always have lots of holes to fill..It is never a reason to trade an elite player (when healthy) in his prime.   WE must be patient and not give away our star QB because he's hurt..only to watch him take his new team to multiple Super Bowls.

 

Sound familiar??

Edited October 21, 2017 by oldunclemark
spell

[FalseStart]

12 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

that is insane, nobody is worth 6 first round picks... nobody

 

lucks contract makes him almost un tradeable, if we did trade him it would be for 2 firsts and maybe a player or a late pick at the most.

 

the browns do have enough ammo to go after him, but it would probably end up being a bad trade for both teams

He's adding what he thinks we would get for Luck with our own 1st rounders over the next couple drafts... not 6 for Luck

[oldunclemark]

6 years ago...we released our starting QB because we thought he would never be healthy again, his salary was too high and we had 'so many holes' on offense and defense.

We watched as the guy we gave up led his new team, which was .500 when he got there,  to multiple Super Bowls.

That guy was 35 years old.    This is a totally different situation.

 

Andrew Luck is only 28.

Edited October 21, 2017 by oldunclemark

[FalseStart]

8 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

We cant get any picks for Andrew  right now...We would be giving him away just to unload the salary.

All QBs cost $20 to $25 mil...That's today's NFL.

You have to pay the QB..and hope he's not hurt allt he time because they all get hurt (Rodgers, Cam. Mariotta, etc)

 

Find me anyone in the history of the NFL who was ever trade for two No1 choices. That's fantasy football.

Matt Hassellbeck is one of the Top-20 QBs in the history of the NFL statistically....he was hardly average...

 

All teams always have lots of holes to fill..It is never a reason to trade an elite player (when healthy) in his prime.

Brissett much better player than Hassellbeck (Colts Version). Didn't have to look very far to answer your question...

 

RAMS-Jared Goff 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000652822/article/la-rams-trade-up-to-acquire-no-1-pick-from-titans

 

"In a stunning move that shakes up the top of the draft and almost ensures that the Rams will be starting a rookie quarterback in 2016, the Tennessee Titans traded the No. 1 pick in the 2016 NFL Draft to the Los Angeles Rams, both teams announced Thursday morning. 

The Rams, previously selecting at No. 15, are one of the lowest-picking team in NFL history to trade up to the No. 1 spot. The move, however, did not come cheap. 

It is essentially the Rams' karmic payback for fleecing the Redskins back in 2012 for a treasure trove of picks that led to the selection of Robert Griffin III. The terms are as follows: Tennessee gets: Rams' first-round pick (2016), two second-round picks (2016), a third-round pick (2016), a first-round pick (2017) and another third-round pick (2017).

Rams get: Titans' first-overall pick (2016), a fourth-round pick (2016) and a sixth-round pick (2016)."

 

 

[FalseStart]

6 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

6 years ago...we released our starting QB because we thought he would never be healthy again, his salary was too high and we had 'so many holes' on offense and defense.

We watched as the guy we gave up led his new team to multiple Super Bowls.

That guy was 35 years old.

 

Andrew Luck is 28.

That QB, Peyton Manning, was a well below average quarterback in both Super Bowls and only won the second because of that elite defense.  He was also injured and missed a few important games (Sat behind a below average QB named Brocky Top) in the SB winning year.  Sorry very bad argument...

[oldunclemark]

2 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

Brissett much better player than Hassellbeck (Colts Version). Didn't have to look very far to answer your question...

 

RAMS-Jared Goff 

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000652822/article/la-rams-trade-up-to-acquire-no-1-pick-from-titans

 

"In a stunning move that shakes up the top of the draft and almost ensures that the Rams will be starting a rookie quarterback in 2016, the Tennessee Titans traded the No. 1 pick in the 2016 NFL Draft to the Los Angeles Rams, both teams announced Thursday morning. 

The Rams, previously selecting at No. 15, are one of the lowest-picking team in NFL history to trade up to the No. 1 spot. The move, however, did not come cheap. 

It is essentially the Rams' karmic payback for fleecing the Redskins back in 2012 for a treasure trove of picks that led to the selection of Robert Griffin III. The terms are as follows: Tennessee gets: Rams' first-round pick (2016), two second-round picks (2016), a third-round pick (2016), a first-round pick (2017) and another third-round pick (2017).

Rams get: Titans' first-overall pick (2016), a fourth-round pick (2016) and a sixth-round pick (2016)."

 

 

Hassellbeck is one of ther Top-20 QBs statistically of all time..Brissett is 2-3.

 

You haven't answered my question . Remember what I said.

That trade was NOT   trading choices for a player. That;s trading chices for other choices.

Not existing players with wear and tear on them. There';s a big difference.

Find me a player. A player. Not draft choices, was traded for 2 No,1 draft choices.

 

Carry on

[oldunclemark]

6 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

That QB, Peyton Manning, was a well below average quarterback in both Super Bowls and only won the second because of that elite defense.  He was also injured and missed a few important games (Sat behind a below average QB named Brocky Top) in the SB winning year.  Sorry very bad argument...

Is not arguement. Its fact. Manning led his team to 2 Super Bowls. They don't reach either one without him.

Denver didnt play Osweiler in any playoff games. Manning played and he was 6-0.

 

I love the Broncos but I dont want you to send our star QB to Denver again

[FalseStart]

10 minutes ago, oldunclemark said:

Is not arguement. Its fact. Manning led his team to 2 Super Bowls. They don't reach either one without him.

Denver didnt play Osweiler in any playoff games. Manning played and he was 6-0.

 

I love the Broncos but I dont want you to send our star QB to Denver again

Broncos don't get to either Super Bowl without that Defense and/or Running game either...Defense Primarily.

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

Andrew 2 years ago might have gotten multiple picks but Andrew right now would not draw anybody's No. 1

Nobody gives up a No.1 choice for injured players

The Vikings gave up a first for Bradford.    He has missed more games due to injury than he has played

[SaturdayAllDay]

1 hour ago, FalseStart said:

 

"

That's not to suggest he is a bust or a colossal underachiever, but Luck definitely hasn't played to the narrative that's been attached to his name. He is a sub-60-percent passer with a penchant for turnovers. Say what you want about me being harsh, but the numbers don't lie.

In his NFL career, Luck sports a 59.2 percent completion rate, a 132:68 touchdown-to-interception ratio and an 87.3 passer rating. Those numbers aren't awful, but they're on par with a group of QBs that might surprise you, given all the hype Luck has received ...

Andy Dalton: 62.9 percent completion rate, 149:87 TD-to-INT ratio, 89.0 passer rating, 58-38-2 record.

Alex Smith: 62.3 percent completion rate; 172:91 TD-to-INT ratio, 87.1 passer rating, 84-58-1 record.

Sam Bradford: 62.5 percent completion rate; 101:57 TD-to-INT ratio, 85.1 passer, 34-45-1 record.

Now, I'm not saying those guys are comparable as pure football specimens, but their collective production puts them in the same class. Thus, you could make a reasonable argument that Luck is merely a top-15 quarterback at this point."\

 

Sure Will... Go Colts

Funny how Brooks didnt mention Cam Newton in that list (58.8 completion % , 145/86 TD-to-INT Ratio, 86.1 QBR). But i guess comparing Luck to a recent NFL MVP kind of undermines his whole argument of him not doing well doesnt it?? 

[oldunclemark]

7 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

The Vikings gave up a first for Bradford.    He has missed more games due to injury than he has played

Good point...'J'.

It wasn't their finest hour..and they may regret it now...

.......but I stand corrected..  Teams do give up No. 1s for injured players.

[oldunclemark]

28 minutes ago, FalseStart said:

Broncos don't get to either Super Bowl without that Defense and/or Running game either...Defense Primarily.

That's just not the truth

Broncos were down 6 starters in the Super Bowl loss to Seattle including Von Miller and Chris Harris....

Don't use that argument again.

 

And if Peyton doesn't come off the bench to help beat San Diego in week 17, the Broncos are the 5th seed and they aren't in the Super Bowl 2 years ago...

..and if he doesn't throw two TDs on the Patriots in the AFC title game..or bring his team from behind against Pittsburgh.....

Manning was 35 and he was hurt bad..but he did go on to lead his team to two Super Bowls after we released him.  You cant change history .

 

....I'm glad we're off Luck because trading him at age 28 is not a serious notion anywhere but here or in Bucky-land

Edited October 21, 2017 by oldunclemark

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, oldunclemark said:

Has anyone in the history of the NFL ever been traded for 3 No.1 draft choices?

Not players who used to be No. 1 picks 10 years ago......but 3 No.1 draft choices.

 

Has anyone ever been traded for 2?

 

 

The biggest trade I know of was when Jimmy Johnson and the Cowboys dealt Herschel Walker to the Vikings.  Jimmy eventually turned the deal into 13 draft picks and players from that trade.

 

Interestingly, both teams fared better when Herschel was not on the squad...

[oldunclemark]

4 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

The biggest trade I know of was when Jimmy Johnson and the Cowboys dealt Herschel Walker to the Vikings.  Jimmy eventually turned the deal into 13 draft picks and players from that trade.

 

Interestingly, both teams fared better when Herschel was not on the squad...

That's a good one...5 players and future picks,. right?

..and there were strange contingencies ..Dallas did very well

 

But Herschel was healthy and at his peak at the time, wasn't he?

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

The biggest trade I know of was when Jimmy Johnson and the Cowboys dealt Herschel Walker to the Vikings.  Jimmy eventually turned the deal into 13 draft picks and players from that trade.

 

Interestingly, both teams fared better when Herschel was not on the squad...

I doubt too many teams right now would be as stupid as the Vikings were at the time.

Ditka traded a whole years draft for Williams just to have him go smoke weed.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

22 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I doubt too many teams right now would be as stupid as the Vikings were at the time.

Ditka traded a whole years draft for Williams just to have him go smoke weed.

That was an incredibly ignorant move..lol!  I remember Ricky was mocked to Indy but they took Edger instead.  I do however wonder if Indy was offered the same deal that Nawlins gave to draft Rickey?

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, TheRustonRifle#7 said:

That was an incredibly ignorant move..lol!  I remember Ricky was mocked to Indy but they took Edger instead.  I do however wonder if Indy was offered the same deal that Nawlins gave to draft Rickey?

Good point. I never really thought about it but  it does make one wonder.

[TheRustonRifle#7]

Just now, crazycolt1 said:

Good point. I never really thought about it but  it does make one wonder.

I always wondered that as they obviously wanted Edge....so trading their pick for all of Ditka's picks would have been a win win as they would have grabbed Edge regardless?