Why Ballard should take Bradley Chubb at #3

[bWild]

Chris Ballard (and the rest of the world) knows that we need help on defense. Sure, we could trade down and gain some more draft picks, but we’d potentially miss out on a chance to draft this kid (providing he’s still available at #3). If history has shown us anything, it’s that you never pass up on an elite, game changing player. With the QB needy Browns and Giants picking before us, I believe we have a real chance at getting an elite edge rusher in Bradley Chubb. Sure, Saquon Barkley is a beast and we do need help in the backfield, but running backs don’t hold up as well as edge rushers and it’s been proven that you can find quality backs later in the draft, if you do your homework (which Ballard does). The tape doesn’t lie. 

 

 

 

[dodsworth]

I am warming up the the Chubb pick with this highlight reel.

If we could trade back and still get this guy then that would

be a perfect world scenario.

[Smonroe]

And for the Counterpoint Jane... (Here’s what I just posted in a different thread)

 

 

In 2012 JJ Watt had a career year, the Texans made the playoffs (but the Colts shut him done in their last game that they really needed).

 

In 2013 JJ Watt had another great year, the Texans were 2-14.

 

So, for those people citing the Browns taking a RB at 3 and how it backfired, I’ll say that you can get the best D player in the draft and it may not mark a difference either.  

 

I sure won’t complain if we take Barkley!

[dodsworth]

1 minute ago, Smonroe said:

And for the Counterpoint Jane... (Here’s what I just posted in a different thread)

 

 

In 2012 JJ Watt had a career year, the Texans made the playoffs (but the Colts shut him done in their last game that they really needed).

 

In 2013 JJ Watt had another great year, the Texans were 2-14.

 

So, for those people citing the Browns taking a RB at 3 and how it backfired, I’ll say that you can get the best D player in the draft and it may not mark a difference either.  

 

I sure won’t complain if we take Barkley!

I wouldn't complain with the Barkley pick, imagine him in McDaniels

offensive scheme. With that being said, defense wins championships.

In Ballard I trust.

[atapcl]

If we can poach Ezekiel Ansah from Detroit it would lessen the need for Chubb. Also Cleveland could take him or Barkley with the first pick. The QB position is so deep in this draft that they could get a very good QB at pick 4 or pick 33. Barkley to me is an elite RB so I would take him if he is there and if not then Fitzpatrick or Chubb.

[Defjamz26]

I was anti-Chubb for awhile. I’ve warmed up to him. Mostly because of the signs of us moving to a 4-3. That’d make him a better fit. I just hope he tests well. He has the relentless motor, but If all he has is motor and effort, then that’s basically Terell Basham.

[Smonroe]

3 minutes ago, dodsworth said:

I wouldn't complain with the Barkley pick, imagine him in McDaniels

offensive scheme. With that being said, defense wins championships.

In Ballard I trust.

 

Agree with your last sentence.  But a lot of times, really good offense beats great defenses.

 

The Jags gave up how many yards and points to the Steelers?  They won with offense.  

[Jdubu]

6 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

And for the Counterpoint Jane... (Here’s what I just posted in a different thread)

 

 

In 2012 JJ Watt had a career year, the Texans made the playoffs (but the Colts shut him done in their last game that they really needed).

 

In 2013 JJ Watt had another great year, the Texans were 2-14.

 

So, for those people citing the Browns taking a RB at 3 and how it backfired, I’ll say that you can get the best D player in the draft and it may not mark a difference either.  

 

I sure won’t complain if we take Barkley!

My counterpoint to this will be, if Texans would have had a healthy Luck as their QB instead of whatever QB they had during JJ Watt’s incredible season, do you honestly think they go 2-14? The point being, we already have that franchise QB with Luck (assuming he is now to be healthy)  add in a real defense threat and perhaps you get what Denver just did with Peyton’s run and make it to a couple SB appearances at a time when Luck is way younger than Manning was in his run. I’ll be ecstatic with Chubb, Barkley or the ND lineman if it makes this team better. We have the option of hitting a superstar on offense or defense imho. 

[Mr.Debonair]

Garrett and Chubb would be a very scary tandem

[WarGhost21]

I have to be the buzzkill here, sorry. You can't judge a player off of a highlight reel. They never will show anything bad. You need to watch full game tape to see everything. So I can't really take this seriously. Yes, Chubb is a good football player, but in actual full game tapes you will see him taking plays off every so often and I would rather have a player like Marcus Davenport as an EDGE guy in the second round seeing as he took maybe only one play off all season. It's an effort issue, and you don't see that in highlight reels!

[dodsworth]

8 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Agree with your last sentence.  But a lot of times, really good offense beats great defenses.

 

The Jags gave up how many yards and points to the Steelers?  They won with offense.  

The Jags defense had 2 sacks and 2 forced turnovers, one was for

a pick six. The Steelers did score 35 points with one of the better

offenses in the NFL though. I will meet you halfway and say it was 

a well rounded game by the Jags.

 

 

[bWild]

Don’t get me wrong, if we either A) chose Saquon Barkley or B) traded down and stocked up on draft picks, I would still be a happy camper. 

[lollygagger8]

My dream is that the Colts will trade down to a QB needy team. Then we could hopefully pick up Raquon Smith at ILB

 

If they don't, I think Chubb makes sense.

 

I'm warming up to Minkah Fitzpatrick too.

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, dodsworth said:

The Jags defense had 2 sacks and 2 forced turnovers, one was for

a pick six. The Steelers did score 35 points with one of the better

offenses in the NFL though. I will meet you halfway and say it was 

a well rounded game by the Jags.

 

 

 

Right, there are no absolutes.  Teams have won it all with great Ds and lackluster Os.  But mostly it’s like you said, a well rounded team playing their best game.   

 

In my heart I know the right thing to do is trade the pick and get an extra player.  I also know RBs don’t last and with few exceptions aren’t really diffence makers.  I know the best way to neutralize a good QB is to pressure him.

 

All that said, I won’t be upset if we take Barkley.  

[Boiler_Colt]

17 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

Agree with your last sentence.  But a lot of times, really good offense beats great defenses.

 

The Jags gave up how many yards and points to the Steelers?  They won with offense.  

True, but think about when the Giants beat the Pats in both Super Bowls. They won in part because they had a tremendous pass rush with just the front four and put pressure on Brady constantly.

 

Don't forget we'll have to be chasing Watson around in the backfield for the next 10 years or so too. We desperately need all the pass rush we can get.

[bWild]

8 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

I have to be the buzzkill here, sorry. You can't judge a player off of a highlight reel. They never will show anything bad. You need to watch full game tape to see everything. So I can't really take this seriously. Yes, Chubb is a good football player, but in actual full game tapes you will see him taking plays off every so often and I would rather have a player like Marcus Davenport as an EDGE guy in the second round seeing as he took maybe only one play off all season. It's an effort issue, and you don't see that in highlight reels!

 

I completely understand your stance on this. The highlight reel is meant to showcase the players abilities, not analyze his entire body of work. Bottom line is, sure it’s all pre-combine/draft hype, but the kid has a high motor, prototypical size and speed, and very versatile skill set. 

[krunk]

There has been literally nobody that has questioned Bradley Chubbs motor.    Stop making stuff up.

[BProland85]

Ballard could most definitely trade down with either Denver or NYJ and still get either Chubb or Fitzpatrick on defense. I'd much rather do that and still land a few extra draft picks.

[WarGhost21]

12 minutes ago, krunk said:

There has been literally nobody that has questioned Bradley Chubbs motor.    Stop making stuff up.

I'm not making it up because I'm the one questioning it from the tape I've seen. You might see something different, but I don't see him giving it all on every play!

[krunk]

2 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

I'm not making it up because I'm the one questioning it from the tape I've seen. You might see something different, but I don't see him giving it all on every play!

And therefore we should just completely dismiss him and go with the guy you're recommending because you like him. Right?

[krunk]

5 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

I'm not making it up because I'm the one questioning it from the tape I've seen. You might see something different, but I don't see him giving it all on every play!

You could dismiss darn near the entire NFL for taking a play off here or there. It's easy for us to say stuff like that because we aren't the ones out there playing. If there is any concern with Chubb and effort it's very minute because no one has

mentioned it as a red flag. 

[WarGhost21]

1 minute ago, krunk said:

And therefore we should just completely dismiss him and go with the guy you're recommending because you like him. Right?

I never said that, and I'm certainly not dismissing Chubb. He is a fantastic player, and I wouldn't mind having him here in Indy, but I personally would prefer Davenport in the second as I see him as a higher-motor player whose bigger, more athletic, and only slightly under Chubb in the pass rushing area of his game than use the #3 pick on Chubb. I like Chubb, but I like Davenport a bit more.

[John Waylon]

I really don't think he'll be there at 3. The Browns are going to go wth a safer bet and sign Cousins to a big deal, and then take him at #1 and pair him with Garrett. That gives them a huge boost on both sides of the ball. 

 

If I were running the show in Cleveland that's what I would do. No doubt. Take the gamble out of drafting a QB, and help your defense. 

[NorthernBlue]

29 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

I'm not making it up because I'm the one questioning it from the tape I've seen. You might see something different, but I don't see him giving it all on every play!

If that's what you see, that's fine, but don't you think if his effort was to be questioned, it would be mentioned by now from scouts and analysts?

[Indyfan4life]

2 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

I really don't think he'll be there at 3. The Browns are going to go wth a safer bet and sign Cousins to a big deal, and then take him at #1 and pair him with Garrett. That gives them a huge boost on both sides of the ball. 

 

If I were running the show in Cleveland that's what I would do. No doubt. Take the gamble out of drafting a QB, and help your defense. 

I doubt Cleveland gets him. Cousins will more than likely end up in Denver. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

1 hour ago, Mr.Debonair said:

Garrett and Chubb would be a very scary tandem

 

Considering the Browns have the 1st & 4th overall picks, I wouldn't rule it out. They could take Chubb at 1 and still get their QB at 4.

[John Waylon]

1 minute ago, Indyfan4life said:

I doubt Cleveland gets him. Cousins will more than likely end up in Denver. 

 

In brutal honesty Cleveland is a safer bet. 

 

With all the picks they have it is the safer bet. 

 

Why burn another #1 on a QB after doing it last year? 

 

Get Cousins and see if you can help tutor Kiser under him for a few. 

[John Waylon]

2 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Considering the Browns have the 1st & 4th overall picks, I wouldn't rule it out. They could take Chubb at 1 and still get their QB at 4.

 

This is just as likely to happen as my theory. 

 

People have got to stop getting attached to Chubb. It's probably not gonna happen. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

5 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

 

This is just as likely to happen as my theory. 

 

People have got to stop getting attached to Chubb. It's probably not gonna happen. 

 

Giants could swoop him up as well, I mean, how many years does JPP really have left?

[WarGhost21]

17 minutes ago, NorthernBlue said:

If that's what you see, that's fine, but don't you think if his effort was to be questioned, it would be mentioned by now from scouts and analysts?

I am honestly surprised none of them have said anything about it yet. It may just be the way I'm looking at the tape, and I plan on going and watching more of it later, but I don't see him giving 100% on every play. I see it most plays, but there are times where he needs to come up big for his team and he relaxes a bit. Don't take my word for it though, I'm bound to get some things wrong every once in a while.

[John Waylon]

10 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Giants could swoop him up as well, I mean, how many years does JPP really have left?

 

I think there's a far less chance there. I think they go QB no matter what. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

Just now, John Waylon said:

 

I think there's a far less chance there. I think they go QB no matter what. 

 

Probably right about them not taking Chubb, but I could definitely see them taking Barkley to make Eli's life easier. I kind of get the feeling that they're going squeeze 2 more years out of Eli, for better or worse, since the cap hit for cutting him prior to his contract expiring is so hefty.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/eli-manning-4348/

[Smonroe]

2 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Probably right about them not taking Chubb, but I could definitely see them taking Barkley to make Eli's life easier. I kind of get the feeling that they're going squeeze 2 more years out of Eli, for better or worse, since the cap hit for cutting him prior to his contract expiring is so hefty.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/eli-manning-4348/

 

They wont cut Eli either way.  They could also trade back and get Mayfield later.  As we saw last year, anything is possible.  

 

Free Agency is going to be very telling for us, and the draft is going to be exciting.  Can’t wait to get JM in here to get this train rolling!

[Colt.45]

2 hours ago, Smonroe said:

And for the Counterpoint Jane... (Here’s what I just posted in a different thread)

 

 

In 2012 JJ Watt had a career year, the Texans made the playoffs (but the Colts shut him done in their last game that they really needed).

 

In 2013 JJ Watt had another great year, the Texans were 2-14.

 

So, for those people citing the Browns taking a RB at 3 and how it backfired, I’ll say that you can get the best D player in the draft and it may not mark a difference either.  

 

I sure won’t complain if we take Barkley!

Great point. That's why you take the best player available and try to flesh out the roster as best possible thru free agency.

[Andrew Luck fan club]

You take the elite edge prospect. 

[HarryTheCat]

1 hour ago, bWild said:

Don’t get me wrong, if we either A) chose Saquon Barkley or B) traded down and stocked up on draft picks, I would still be a happy camper. 

Not sure how many additional picks qualify as "stocking up", but you aren't going to get much more than an extra 2nd and 3rd rounder, or a 2nd and a 4th, this year by moving down and taking someone else's 1st rounder, depending on how far down you drop. Getting a 1st this year plus a 1st next year is also a crapshoot. You never really know where next year's 1st will be. 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I was anti-Chubb for awhile. I’ve warmed up to him. Mostly because of the signs of us moving to a 4-3. That’d make him a better fit. I just hope he tests well. He has the relentless motor, but If all he has is motor and effort, then that’s basically Terell Basham.

 

You were doing so well.....

 

And then you had to write one more sentence.    One more.

 

You tried to reduce Bradley Chubb to Tarrell Basham....    (Sigh....)

 

oh well....

 

[bWild]

20 minutes ago, HarryTheCat said:

Not sure how many additional picks qualify as "stocking up", but you aren't going to get much more than an extra 2nd and 3rd rounder, or a 2nd and a 4th, this year by moving down and taking someone else's 1st rounder, depending on how far down you drop. Getting a 1st this year plus a 1st next year is also a crapshoot. You never really know where next year's 1st will be. 

 

Extra picks are extra picks. Honestly, how many picks and where the picks lay all depend on the trade partner(s). 

[Defjamz26]

2 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

You were doing so well.....

 

And then you had to write one more sentence.    One more.

 

You tried to reduce Bradley Chubb to Tarrell Basham....    (Sigh....)

 

oh well....

 

That’s not what I tried to do. What I’m saying is that Basham is a guy who didn’t test elite but people praised him for his effort and motor. Chubb is good but he needs to test well to show that he’s a true difference maker. He’s a better pass rusher overall than Basham but the combine will show where his real ceiling is.

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Defjamz26 said:

That’s not what I tried to do. What I’m saying is that Basham is a guy who didn’t test elite but people praised him for his effort and motor. Chubb is good but he needs to test well to show that he’s a true difference maker. He’s a better pass rusher overall than Basham but the combine will show where his real ceiling is.

 

Unless Chubb's tests go terribly...   I'm talking spectacularly bad,  his real ceiling is still going to be higher than Basham.

 

Chubb played against much better competition and posted dramatically better stats.    Heck..   Chubb's stats are better than Garretts were.   He's not quite the athlete that Garrett is, but I'm hopeful we will find out he's pretty close to him...