Unpopular Draft Strategy

[Scott Pennock]

Ballard spoke about staying in the Top 10, eluding to not trading back BUT also still made it known that he's open for business still.

 

What about revisiting that trade back with Buffalo? If the right guy drops they could still move up.....

 

Trade our 6th overall pick for thier 12th and 22nd in the 1st Round and the 1st pick in the 3rd round.

 

1.12

1.22 

2.36 

2.37

2.49

3.65

3.67

4.104

5.140

6.178

7.221

 

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

The 4th through 7th rounds can be used to get a WR, RB and 2 other small school prospects that could grow into regulars.

 

Everyone wants that one 5 Star recruit (with the 6th pick), but we'll have our 5 Star recruit coming back in Andrew Luck when he takes his first snap....

 

Personally, I'd take a healthy Luck and add in 7 potential 4 Star recruits. In addition to that, for all the naysayers Luck would have won 10+ games with last years roster. Those 4th Quarter collapses simply wouldn't have happened.

[esmort]

I am all for trading back again. 

[Indy500]

I agree get as many picks as possible, still get a game changer at 12

[Boiler_Colt]

I dont see Buffalo as a trading partner for us anymore. They should really be lookinG at trading with the Giants if they have a QB they want or Cleveland at 4 to get ahead of Denver. After Denver no team needs a QB until Miami at 11 so they would really just need to jump them, not go all the way to 6. 

 

To answer the question though I would probably take this deal but would need to see who is available at 6 first. Chubb and Nelson would haveto be gone for me to do so.

[oldunclemark]

The value of any draft strategy is zero until the picks are made and developed..

we so much want to know quickly...but we won.

 

...and Scott is right..If we get a healthy Andrew Luck back, we'll win 10 games next year with the roster we have now...

The people we draft next month wont have a lot to do with it one way or another

[TheRustonRifle#7]

47 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

Ballard spoke about staying in the Top 10, eluding to not trading back BUT also still made it known that he's open for business still.

 

What about revisiting that trade back with Buffalo? If the right guy drops they could still move up.....

 

Trade our 6th overall pick for thier 12th and 22nd in the 1st Round and the 1st pick in the 3rd round.

 

1.12

1.22 

2.36 

2.37

2.49

3.65

3.67

4.104

5.140

6.178

7.221

 

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

The 4th through 7th rounds can be used to get a WR, RB and 2 other small school prospects that could grow into regulars.

 

Everyone wants that one 5 Star recruit (with the 6th pick), but we'll have our 5 Star recruit coming back in Andrew Luck when he takes his first snap....

 

Personally, I'd take a healthy Luck and add in 7 potential 4 Star recruits. In addition to that, for all the naysayers Luck would have won 10+ games with last years roster. Those 4th Quarter collapses simply wouldn't have happened.

 

[P'Son]

I believe that Ballard's strategy is to do exactly as you and several others have pointed out whether any of "the fans" like it or not.  Look for this to happen (with or without Luck).

[SolidGold]

[SolidGold]

52 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

Ballard spoke about staying in the Top 10, eluding to not trading back BUT also still made it known that he's open for business still.

 

What about revisiting that trade back with Buffalo? If the right guy drops they could still move up.....

 

Trade our 6th overall pick for thier 12th and 22nd in the 1st Round and the 1st pick in the 3rd round.

 

1.12

1.22 

2.36 

2.37

2.49

3.65

3.67

4.104

5.140

6.178

7.221

 

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

The 4th through 7th rounds can be used to get a WR, RB and 2 other small school prospects that could grow into regulars.

 

Everyone wants that one 5 Star recruit (with the 6th pick), but we'll have our 5 Star recruit coming back in Andrew Luck when he takes his first snap....

 

Personally, I'd take a healthy Luck and add in 7 potential 4 Star recruits. In addition to that, for all the naysayers Luck would have won 10+ games with last years roster. Those 4th Quarter collapses simply wouldn't have happened.

 

[jameszeigler834]

57 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

Ballard spoke about staying in the Top 10, eluding to not trading back BUT also still made it known that he's open for business still.

 

What about revisiting that trade back with Buffalo? If the right guy drops they could still move up.....

 

Trade our 6th overall pick for thier 12th and 22nd in the 1st Round and the 1st pick in the 3rd round.

 

1.12

1.22 

2.36 

2.37

2.49

3.65

3.67

4.104

5.140

6.178

7.221

 

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

The 4th through 7th rounds can be used to get a WR, RB and 2 other small school prospects that could grow into regulars.

 

Everyone wants that one 5 Star recruit (with the 6th pick), but we'll have our 5 Star recruit coming back in Andrew Luck when he takes his first snap....

 

Personally, I'd take a healthy Luck and add in 7 potential 4 Star recruits. In addition to that, for all the naysayers Luck would have won 10+ games with last years roster. Those 4th Quarter collapses simply wouldn't have happened.

Don't know that he can not get a pass off if he is on his back.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

4 minutes ago, jameszeigler834 said:

Don't know that he can not get a pass off if he is on his back.

 

I could throw it over that mountain, from my back, if coach just gave me a chance.

 

[JColts72]

1 minute ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I could throw it over that mountain, from my back, if coach just gave me a chance.

 

Uncle riccos arm looks better then lucks currently.

[Myles]

If we can get Nelson at 6, I wouldn't make the trade.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 minutes ago, JColts72 said:

Uncle riccos arm looks better then lucks currently.

 

Uncle Rico would have the best arm in the league, if coach just gave him a chance.

 

[SolidGold]

13 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

Uncle Rico would have the best arm in the league, if coach just gave him a chance.

 

 

[Peterk2011]

2 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

Those 7 picks would all be the cream of the crop, all 1st and 2nd rounders, who are typically day one starters. Even for best teams. Putting 7 rookies into starting roles are way too many to be competitive. If they don't start, they won't develop as quickly as they could. Which is a waste of valuable time and talent for 1st and 2nd rounders. Thats catch 22. You have to let them all play, but you can't.

 

So, if trading back, I prefer 2019 picks over further stockpiling 2018s. The Colts will have 4(+) guys picked in the top50 already. That's enough. Don't push it too much. Repeat it next year instead. (You will need to resign these players, when rookie contracts expire. This is also something to consider. You cant resign 5-6-7 guys in one year.)

 

If it's swapping picks - lets say getting the 1/21 for the 2/4. etc. -, or getting more late round picks, so we could pick some of our "UDFA"-s, that's totaly fine.

[neug3246]

44 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Those 7 picks would all be the cream of the crop, all 1st and 2nd rounders, who are typically day one starters. Even for best teams. Putting 7 rookies into starting roles are way too many to be competitive. If they don't start, they won't develop as quickly as they could. Which is a waste of valuable time and talent for 1st and 2nd rounders. Thats catch 22. You have to let them all play, but you can't.

 

So, if trading back, I prefer 2019 picks over further stockpiling 2018s. The Colts will have 4(+) guys picked in the top50 already. That's enough. Don't push it too much. Repeat it next year instead. (You will need to resign these players, when rookie contracts expire. This is also something to consider. You cant resign 5-6-7 guys in one year.)

 

If it's swapping picks - lets say getting the 1/21 for the 2/4. etc. -, or getting more late round picks, so we could pick some of our "UDFA"-s, that's totaly fine.

Say what, damn that's a terrible problem to have especially in a game where nothing is promised. good thing you aren't our GM. How can more be a bad thing. Pick them and sign them all. CB doesn't spend cap money anyway so we will have plenty when they are due to be signed

[Peterk2011]

7 minutes ago, neug3246 said:

Say what, damn that's a terrible problem to have especially in a game where nothing is promised. good thing you aren't our GM. How can more be a bad thing. Pick them and sign them all. CB doesn't spend cap money anyway so we will have plenty when they are due to be signed

 

Let's sign 10 running backs then. How can more be a bad thing?

 

It's not less vs more. You get your picks both ways. It's about timing / structuring your resources.

[Luck 4 president]

54 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Which is a waste of valuable time and talent for 1st and 2nd rounders. Thats catch 22. You have to let them all play, but you can't.

 

So, if trading back, I prefer 2019 picks over further stockpiling 2018s.

With the lack of added FAs I think there is a good chance all the players in round 1,2,3 and maybe even 4 can start day 1 as long as we draft at a position of need. Our needs are RT, 2x G, DT, DE, CB, SS, 3x LB, RB, WR. Anyone we draft in the first 3 rounds at OL, CB, LB, WR, RB should start because who else would? And I agree with getting 2019 picks. Who knows we could pull a Boston Celtics and end up with the #1 overall pick. 

[esmort]

I like the idea of trading back again even if it's for good 2019 picks.  

[PowerballBlue]

2 hours ago, Myles said:

If we can get Nelson at 6, I wouldn't make the trade.

I'd easily trade back to the 12 spot.  William Hernandez is a beast, and McGlichey might be there as well.  If someone offers a Jet stupid deal, heck yes.

[neug3246]

1 hour ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

Let's sign 10 running backs then. How can more be a bad thing?

 

It's not less vs more. You get your picks both ways. It's about timing / structuring your resources.

I was talking about draft picks... in that regard how can more be a bad thing? You get young talent will they have ups and downs sure but they develop together and get better together over time... aka late season playoff push. you will still have draft picks next year like the 2nd rounder we got from jets.. comp picks we may get.. potential trade backs we may see, but more picks cant be a bad thing. So your point is mute!

[PowerballBlue]

Something I don't like is that there is no depth to this OL class.  Kolton Miller, Braden Smith and Martinas Rankin.  Yuck.   If we don't get our premium guy in the first, we'd just have to hope guys like Isiah Wynn or Billy Price fall to us.  All those second round picks, and the OL and CB after the first are abysmal.  This is our chance to get linebackers to fit our scheme, and a quality running back.  I really like the WR depth for rounds 3 and 4.

[AwesomeAustin]

I’ve mentioned to a few of my friends future draft picks would need to be involved.  You just can’t have 4-5 really good players needing new contracts in the same year. This would require great drafting but Seattle, Jacksonville and kinda the Cowboys were able to turn around quickly with a few drafts.  We are seeing with Seattle it was expensive to keep the core together and the offensive line suffered bc of it. Now that team is being broke up and I’m not sure if they are reloading or doing a small rebuild.  

[dgambill]

IM happy staying where we are. We still should get an elite talent in the top 10 there...Nelson or Chubb likely. Those 3 seconds should allow us to add a lb, lineman, maybe a corner and an early 3rd means a rb or wr. We are in good shape already to really pack this team with good young talent and with an extra second next year we are building something special here.

[funktacious2]

I think we have a good means to retool even if we stay where we are. We won't upgrade everything, but FA isn't over... we'll patch some stuff up. 4 picks in the first 2 rounds and an early 3rd is looking mighty nice if the plan for our future is really to rebuild our home-grown base.

[crazycolt1]

9 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

I’ve mentioned to a few of my friends future draft picks would need to be involved.  You just can’t have 4-5 really good players needing new contracts in the same year. This would require great drafting but Seattle, Jacksonville and kinda the Cowboys were able to turn around quickly with a few drafts.  We are seeing with Seattle it was expensive to keep the core together and the offensive line suffered bc of it. Now that team is being broke up and I’m not sure if they are reloading or doing a small rebuild.  

The reason Seattle had such a problem re signing was too many of their draft picks became pro bowl players at once. Very seldom does any team pick that many pro bowlers out of two drafts.

[crazycolt1]

2 hours ago, funktacious2 said:

I think we have a good means to retool even if we stay where we are. We won't upgrade everything, but FA isn't over... we'll patch some stuff up. 4 picks in the first 2 rounds and an early 3rd is looking mighty nice if the plan for our future is really to rebuild our home-grown base.

Call it a retool if you want but it's a rebuild anyway you look at it.

With a total new coaching staff, yes it is a rebuild.

[Myles]

24 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

The reason Seattle had such a problem re signing was too many of their draft picks became pro bowl players at once. Very seldom does any team pick that many pro bowlers out of two drafts.

While true, the reality is a little misleading.   Teams that do well will almost always have more probowlers.    I last years Colts team would have won 12 games, even by getting lucky, they would have had a couple pro bowlers on the team.  

 

[LockeDown]

If the the success rate of a 7 pick draft is 50 or 60%, which I don't know but is probably close, then i would think an 11 pick draft would increase the odds of success.  Remember, Ballard believes in competition in camp. Whether through FA, UFA or the draft, he is going to do it regardless.  They will get weeded out in practice and camp.  Just like Banner.  It didn't take long to see he wasn't good enough.  The only downside is if we miss on a generational player at 6....which I don't think he would do if that guy was there.  

[lollygagger8]

13 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Ballard spoke about staying in the Top 10, eluding to not trading back BUT also still made it known that he's open for business still.

 

What about revisiting that trade back with Buffalo? If the right guy drops they could still move up.....

 

Trade our 6th overall pick for thier 12th and 22nd in the 1st Round and the 1st pick in the 3rd round.

 

1.12

1.22 

2.36 

2.37

2.49

3.65

3.67

4.104

5.140

6.178

7.221

 

That would be 11 picks overall and 7 of the first 67 picks......those two third rounders (the 1st and 3rd of the round) are basically 1st or 2nd rounders that may have fallen based on the rush on QB's or other "issues" and all 7 could be potential starters from day 1. Could add an impact to solid starter at every level - 2 olineman, 2 dlineman, 2 linebackers,  and 1 cornerback.

 

The 4th through 7th rounds can be used to get a WR, RB and 2 other small school prospects that could grow into regulars.

 

Everyone wants that one 5 Star recruit (with the 6th pick), but we'll have our 5 Star recruit coming back in Andrew Luck when he takes his first snap....

 

Personally, I'd take a healthy Luck and add in 7 potential 4 Star recruits. In addition to that, for all the naysayers Luck would have won 10+ games with last years roster. Those 4th Quarter collapses simply wouldn't have happened.

 

This sounds awesome....until in 4 years when we have to try and re-sign 11 players at the same time. lol

 

That would be a good problem to have really because that mean Ballard hit on all 11.  

[John Waylon]

31 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

This sounds awesome....until in 4 years when we have to try and re-sign 11 players at the same time. lol

 

That would be a good problem to have really because that mean Ballard hit on all 11.  

 

And what are the chances Ballard hits on all 11? 

 

I’m still skeptical after last year’s draft. It wasn’t exactly a shiny example. 

 

Beyond that we need more than 11 players to fill out this roster. We can’t even get the middle-of-the-road free agents to sign here. We’re literally going to be fielding a team largely comprised of unwanted free agent scraps. 

 

He’s gonna have to have a much higher than usual success rate drafting players to do what he’s trying to do. 

 

I’m not ready to believe he can do that yet. 

[lollygagger8]

3 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

 

And what are the chances Ballard hits on all 11? 

 

I’m still skeptical after last year’s draft. It wasn’t exactly a shiny example. 

 

Beyond that we need more than 11 players to fill out this roster. We can’t even get the middle-of-the-road free agents to sign here. We’re literally going to be fielding a team largely comprised of unwanted free agent scraps. 

 

He’s gonna have to have a much higher than usual success rate drafting players to do what he’s trying to do. 

 

I’m not ready to believe he can do that yet. 

 

I am. 

[John Waylon]

Just now, lollygagger8 said:

 

I am. 

 

Zach Banner. 

[lollygagger8]

Bring us the Nelson (#56)  to Indy! 

[lollygagger8]

25 minutes ago, John Waylon said:

 

Zach Banner. 

 

That was a Philbin pick, cmon man. 

[John Waylon]

25 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

That was a Philbin pick, cmon man. 

 

In that case it’s still on Ballard to know when to say no. Ultimately the call to pick him went through Ballard. 

 

Add to that the fact that Ballard came in and had to be leery of Pagano and staff. There’s no way Ballard came in and said “this is a staff I want for the long haul.” So why would he let them dictate picks to him when, chances are, he knew they were all going to be gone at seasons end?

 

If we’re going to rely totally on the draft to fill this team that sort of thing can’t happen. Even his bad picks are going to have to be serviceable players. It’s hard to make that work. 

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

While true, the reality is a little misleading.   Teams that do well will almost always have more probowlers.    I last years Colts team would have won 12 games, even by getting lucky, they would have had a couple pro bowlers on the team.  

 

I agree but the Seahawks had something like 7 players that made the pro bowl n 2016. I would have to look it up but when all the pro bowlers want paid there is where the problems come in.

[aaron11]

we have enough picks now.  we are about to have a rookie head coach and a team full of rookie players 

[lollygagger8]

2 hours ago, John Waylon said:

 

In that case it’s still on Ballard to know when to say no. Ultimately the call to pick him went through Ballard. 

 

Add to that the fact that Ballard came in and had to be leery of Pagano and staff. There’s no way Ballard came in and said “this is a staff I want for the long haul.” So why would he let them dictate picks to him when, chances are, he knew they were all going to be gone at seasons end?

 

If we’re going to rely totally on the draft to fill this team that sort of thing can’t happen. Even his bad picks are going to have to be serviceable players. It’s hard to make that work. 

True. 

 

You'd think that your O-Line coach would know how to evaluate an O-Lineman. Even if that coach wasn't your guy. Lesson learned for Ballard's big folder.