Ballard's 2017 draft vs. Grigson's 2012

[Indy1996]

On 4/1/2018 at 11:56 AM, CanuckColtsFan said:

So this is the big thing with Grigson. His picks looked good immediately but turned into not much. Hilton was fantastic though. 

 

The whole point Ballard is after is there are no short cuts to greatness. Wait and see. The comparison is only rookie year. I think we we can count on 4 of the players from Ballards first draft to contribute nicely. 

Wilson was benched pretty much all year because of pagano

[PeterBowman]

41 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Say all the negative things about Grigson you care too but cap management is not one of them. He left this team in great shape as far as the cap is concerned.

this ^^^^^

 

the contracts he gave out were very team friendly....the problem is that their production wasn't team friendly.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, PeterBowman said:

this ^^^^^

 

the contracts he gave out were very team friendly....the problem is that their production wasn't team friendly.

Grigson did a great job at minimizing his losses with contracts. No one, in their right mind, would question he (and his team) on putting together team-friendly contracts that made sense. No one would doubt him bringing in Free Agents. 

 

He didn't have success with the big Free Agent pickups. His misses in the draft were incredible... both of those contributed greatly to him neglecting key areas of the roster like the offensive line and the defense.

[ColtStrong2013]

15 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Grigson's first draft earned him the GM of the year as I recall.

All this talk of players is fine but one thing you are all overlooking is Grigson made his first draft while the Colts were 39 million in cap hades and this team had no offense at all. He had no choice but to draft offense. The only players worth a damn on offense was Wayne.

If you look at Fleener and Allen both of them had great rookie seasons. Why they disappeared over time I don't have a clue because both of their rookie seasons didn't tell that.

Now fast forward to today what good does it do to bring up the past?

I keep hearing how this roster is total junk and we have no talent. We need so many positions there is not a clear cut player to take in the draft because we are needing players all over the roster.

It's kind of funny, I thought all the problems were Pagano and how we had the talent to win but it was him who was causing this team to lose.

Now here we are with a whole new coaching staff and I don't see any of you bringing that up.

Grigson lost his job because he couldn't find the players needed to get better.

Now comparing Grigson to Ballard serves what purpose? 

I know it's the off season but c-mon. 

I'm not sure why we should compare apple to oranges either. I do think it was unfair for many to pick one or the other to back with Pagano/Grigson.... Both were given contract extensions when they should have been fired and the organization move in a different direction altogether. The fact that Pagano was given an extra year still really bothers me. 

[ColtStrong2013]

On 4/1/2018 at 4:15 PM, ColtStrong2013 said:

Will you say the same if in 4 years Hooker and Wilson are all-pro, Mack is still our change of pace back, Basham is producing 8 sacks a year, and Hairston is still a solid depth/nickelback? 

 

2012 produced a lot as rookies because they had to and a lot should be credited to Andrew Luck and Bruce Arians for putting the ball in those guys hands. Where are they all now and what are they doing? 

@LJpalmbeacher2 ... I am not sure what you are confused about by this post. You say Grigsons draft blew Ballard's out of the water. I say you are crazy and basing it off of solely their rookie years, when all but 2 of 2012 busted completely for this organization. I want to know if you will stand by that comment in 4 years when last years draft blows Grigsons entire drafting career here out of the water in terms of longevity and productivity for this franchise. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

On 4/1/2018 at 4:15 PM, ColtStrong2013 said:

Will you say the same if in 4 years Hooker and Wilson are all-pro, Mack is still our change of pace back, Basham is producing 8 sacks a year, and Hairston is still a solid depth/nickelback? 

 

2012 produced a lot as rookies because they had to and a lot should be credited to Andrew Luck and Bruce Arians for putting the ball in those guys hands. Where are they all now and what are they doing? 

Where did you get Wilson & Basham being all pro from? Certainly not from their contributions on the field. Perhaps they will progress to above average players, bit lets wait until they do something before we tout them over Fleener, Allen, TY, Ballard....

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

@LJpalmbeacher2 ... I am not sure what you are confused about by this post. You say Grigsons draft blew Ballard's out of the water. I say you are crazy and basing it off of solely their rookie years, when all but 2 of 2012 busted completely for this organization. I want to know if you will stand by that comment in 4 years when last years draft blows Grigsons entire drafting career here out of the water in terms of longevity and productivity for this franchise. 

Crazy? Look in mirror lol. Dont let your bias for current colt employees over past ones taint your veiw. The topic was griggs first draft vs Ballards first draft. Period. 

Also, if you take what Parcells said "you are what your record says you are". Griggs was 11-5 in his first season(11-5 in next two also) Ballard was 4-12.

What ballards team and draft class does in next few seasons has nothing to do with thread topic. Griggs first draft was better than ballards first draft.

Im done talking about something so obvious.

[crazycolt1]

32 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I'm not sure why we should compare apple to oranges either. I do think it was unfair for many to pick one or the other to back with Pagano/Grigson.... Both were given contract extensions when they should have been fired and the organization move in a different direction altogether. The fact that Pagano was given an extra year still really bothers me. 

Pagano was kept to be the scape goat.  It's not rocket science.

Right now most all feel this roster is not good enough to win many games at all. But Pagano was expected to get wins with it. And when he didn't the fingers pointed at him as the problem.

He was set up to be the fall guy from game one last season.

[Finball]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

@LJpalmbeacher2 ... I am not sure what you are confused about by this post. You say Grigsons draft blew Ballard's out of the water. I say you are crazy and basing it off of solely their rookie years, when all but 2 of 2012 busted completely for this organization. I want to know if you will stand by that comment in 4 years when last years draft blows Grigsons entire drafting career here out of the water in terms of longevity and productivity for this franchise. 

 

Allen and Fleener were successful picks. Solid players, just not cornerstone players.. Ballard could've been too if not for career ending injury.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

38 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Where did you get Wilson & Basham being all pro from? Certainly not from their contributions on the field. Perhaps they will progress to above average players, bit lets wait until they do something before we tout them over Fleener, Allen, TY, Ballard....

 

Aside from the occasional rookie mistake, those 2 guys played pretty well considering the limited action they saw. Can we say that about ANY defensive player that Ryan Grigson drafted, in 2012 or otherwise? Henry Anderson is the only one that comes to mind, but I can't help but think he's 1 injury away from being cut.

[Peterk2011]

9 hours ago, DougDew said:

If you want to compare draft classes, the proper Grigson draft to compare should be 2016 since he picked in the middle of the round....18...compared to CBs 15. They're about the same so far, IMO

 

Ryan Kelly:  Pro bowl player but injured

TJ Green: Struggling

LeRaven Clark:  Struggling

Ridgeway:  Nice player

Morrison: Struggling

Haeg: Nice player

Trevor Bates Gone

Austin Blythe. Gone

 

It's not entirely fair comparision, because we compare 2 years to 1 rookie year. That 2nd year can change things a lot. So far, I think Ballard's draft looks better, but we'll see in 2 years.

 

The problem with Grigson was that this 2016 draft was by far his 2nd best draft, his 3 remaining drafts were bad to disastrous. And he paired them with terrible free agency acquisitions.

[ColtStrong2013]

3 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Crazy? Look in mirror lol. Dont let your bias for current colt employees over past ones taint your veiw. The topic was griggs first draft vs Ballards first draft. Period. 

Also, if you take what Parcells said "you are what your record says you are". Griggs was 11-5 in his first season(11-5 in next two also) Ballard was 4-12.

What ballards team and draft class does in next few seasons has nothing to do with thread topic. Griggs first draft was better than ballards first draft.

Im done talking about something so obvious.

You are what your record says you are... Grigson's record with a superstar once in a generation QB is that he was a bust as a GM. Plain. And. Simple. 

 

I have no bias. I have every reason, as do most Colts fans and longtime season ticket holders, to think Grigson ruined the first part of Andrew's career (possibly all of it)... and you want to talk about how great he was. LoL

[ColtStrong2013]

4 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Where did you get Wilson & Basham being all pro from? Certainly not from their contributions on the field. Perhaps they will progress to above average players, bit lets wait until they do something before we tout them over Fleener, Allen, TY, Ballard....

When did I say Basham would be all-pro? I said he could produce 8 sacks a year for us in the future. Not unquestionable and the organization thinks highly of his ceiling. Wilson was crapped on by Pagano, when he played very well in what little he was on the field last season. He has as high of a ceiling as anyone that Grigson brought in on defense over his career. 

 

Do you think Fleener and Allen were above average? Because I think everyone would disagree with you 100%. They were products of a tight end focus with a great qb and haven't done jack since being kicked to the curb. 

[Indy1996]

4 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Where did you get Wilson & Basham being all pro from? Certainly not from their contributions on the field. Perhaps they will progress to above average players, bit lets wait until they do something before we tout them over Fleener, Allen, TY, Ballard....

Remember wilson was benched because of pagano not because of production and basham is a good player he barely got playing time because of jabal sheard js dont judge after 1 year

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, Indy1996 said:

Remember wilson was benched because of pagano not because of production and basham is a good player he barely got playing time because of jabal sheard js dont judge after 1 year

Pagano didn't know talent that was right in his face because Grigson never gave it to him. Doesn't mean he wasn't a bad coach. 

 

Wilson was never given his fair shot at the field in a season that didn't make a difference who played. Basham didn't play much and when he did he succeeded in a scheme that wasn't built for him. Will be interesting to see how he performs as a 4-3 pass rusher. 

[AZColt11]

On 4/1/2018 at 12:40 PM, coltsblue1844 said:

Let's also realize that Grigson had the 1st pick in each round of his 1st draft, while Ballard had the 15th. Big difference between the two!

This!  I was just thinking the same thing.  It's sort of like saying the guy with the Mercedes drives faster than the guy with the Buick.  No kidding!

 

I think Ballard did a pretty good job with what he had to work with.  And I think, in hindsight, Grigson got a little bit lucky with some of his picks (although the same could be said of Ballard with Hooker falling in his lap at #15 when he was mocked MUCH higher in most mocks).  He sure as heck didn't demonstrate the same ability in any of his subsequent drafts.

[ColtStrong2013]

4 hours ago, AZColt11 said:

This!  I was just thinking the same thing.  It's sort of like saying the guy with the Mercedes drives faster than the guy with the Buick.  No kidding!

 

I think Ballard did a pretty good job with what he had to work with.  And I think, in hindsight, Grigson got a little bit lucky with some of his picks (although the same could be said of Ballard with Hooker falling in his lap at #15 when he was mocked MUCH higher in most mocks).  He sure as heck didn't demonstrate the same ability in any of his subsequent drafts.

Perfect analogy. Ha, love it. 

 

This years draft can be more indicative of the difference between the two GM's. I remember hearing several Philly scouting department folks say they couldn't believe Grigson was a GM in the first place... one former scout said comparing his reports to Louis Riddick (the director of pro scouting for Philly at the time) was like comparing Steph Curry to a point guard in the D-League... Have yet to hear anything remotely negative about Ballard. Ask Pat McAfee what he thinks about the difference between the two. Biggest upgrade in franchise history. 

 

Ballard's vision is solid. He just has to execute it, which is something Grigson failed miserably, although we never heard what his vision was... nor from him really at all. 

[Coltsfanforlife12]

On 4/1/2018 at 10:51 AM, DalTXColtsFan said:

Hooker:  Pro-bowl potential, hope his injury doesn't keep him from reaching it

Wilson - battled injury, didn't see much out of him

Basham - saw very little productivity out of him

Banner - didn't make the team

Stewart - didn't see much out of him

Mack - true playmaker/differencemaker as a complimentary running back.  Needs to prove he can be a #1

Hairston - seemed serviceable thrust into the duties asked of him

Walker - backup LB/special-teams player

 

I hate to say it, but it sure looked to me like Fleener, Allen, Hilton, Brazill, Chapman and Ballard collectively contributed more their rookie years than the above 8 players.  I left Luck off the list because he was a no-brainer.

 

Am I missing something? Was Ballard's first draft really any better than Grigson's?

Keep in mind that this draft was done with Grigsons personnel department.  Ballard hadn’t put his into place yet. 

[crazycolt1]

9 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Pagano didn't know talent that was right in his face because Grigson never gave it to him. Doesn't mean he wasn't a bad coach. 

 

Wilson was never given his fair shot at the field in a season that didn't make a difference who played. Basham didn't play much and when he did he succeeded in a scheme that wasn't built for him. Will be interesting to see how he performs as a 4-3 pass rusher. 

Horse dung.

[mirobi48]

It will be interesting to see the first true year of Ballards scout team? 

[DougDew]

On 4/2/2018 at 12:55 AM, crazycolt1 said:

 

All this talk of players is fine but one thing you are all overlooking is Grigson made his first draft while the Colts were 39 million in cap hades and this team had no offense at all. He had no choice but to draft offense. The only players worth a damn on offense was Wayne.

 

If you look at Fleener and Allen both of them had great rookie seasons. Why they disappeared over time I don't have a clue because both of their rookie seasons didn't tell that.

 

I thought all the problems were Pagano and how we had the talent to win but it was him who was causing this team to lose.

 

If you read/heard some of Ballard's comments, part of the problem with the Colts is that they failed to "develop young players".  That could point to poor drafting or it could point to poorer coaching.

 

Like many on the forum, I always thought Pagano was biased towards playing veterans over maybe more talented but rawer younger players.

 

[DougDew]

16 hours ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

It's not entirely fair comparision, because we compare 2 years to 1 rookie year. That 2nd year can change things a lot. So far, I think Ballard's draft looks better, but we'll see in 2 years.

 

The problem with Grigson was that this 2016 draft was by far his 2nd best draft, his 3 remaining drafts were bad to disastrous. And he paired them with terrible free agency acquisitions.

After one draft and one season with Ballard, nothing is a fair comparison.  I simply think comparing seasons where one had pick 18s and the other pick 15s is probably the most fairest we can do.

 

This thread starts with Grigson's second round and leaves out Luck because the forum has an emotional investment in Ballard succeeding over Grigson, so their is a constant bias towards skewing the data.  Luck fell in Grigson's lap as it was provided by Polian. OTOH, Ballard earned pick #3 this year.. He has the opportunity to trade the high 1 for a slew of other good picks.  Grigson had no opportunity to trade his #1 pick.

 

Pick 18s and pick 15s are the best way to compare GMs so far, if there is really a need to do that.

[dodsworth]

17 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Pagano was kept to be the scape goat.  It's not rocket science.

Right now most all feel this roster is not good enough to win many games at all. But Pagano was expected to get wins with it. And when he didn't the fingers pointed at him as the problem.

He was set up to be the fall guy from game one last season.

Pagano's head coaching track record speaks for itself. Grigson's personnel

moves may have played into the equation, but there are very few fans

who would want him back on the sideline.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

If you read/heard some of Ballard's comments, part of the problem with the Colts is that they failed to "develop young players".  That could point to poor drafting or it could point to poorer coaching.

 

Like many on the forum, I always thought Pagano was biased towards playing veterans over maybe more talented but rawer younger players.

 

That is what happens when you have a insufficient roster and you are trying to win at the same time.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, dodsworth said:

Pagano's head coaching track record speaks for itself. Grigson's personnel

moves may have played into the equation, but there are very few fans

who would want him back on the sideline.

His track record is 53-43 and 3-3 in the playoffs.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

His track record is 53-43 and 3-3 in the playoffs.

And where is he coaching now..? 

 

Teams were banging down his door weren't they? 

[crazycolt1]

3 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

And where is he coaching now..? 

 

Teams were banging down his door weren't they? 

He will end up being a head coach in the future if he wants to.

Honestly, I don't think he wants to.

Rag on him all you care to but the facts speak for themselves.

[dodsworth]

5 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

His track record is 53-43 and 3-3 in the playoffs.

Front loaded....not a championship caliber coach.

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, dodsworth said:

Front loaded....not a championship caliber coach.

Just how do we know that for sure? He didn't have a team to coach after his 3rd year.

We are hearing right now how this team is junk and how the roster is lacking serious talent at almost every position.

But Pagano was expected to make winners out of this team. Yeah, right.

[dodsworth]

1 minute ago, crazycolt1 said:

Just how do we know that for sure? He didn't have a team to coach after his 3rd year.

We are hearing right now how this team is junk and how the roster is lacking serious talent at almost every position.

But Pagano was expected to make winners out of this team. Yeah, right.

The offensive system he allowed on the field was predictable and 

inefficient. Luck masked alot of his lack of head coaching skills

early on while he was healthy.....which brings up why he wasn't healthy.

His offensive pass plays took forever to materialize and let's not bring

up some of his boneheaded in game decisions.

 

Pags is a good guy and I don't want to rag on him but am glad he is gone.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Just how do we know that for sure? He didn't have a team to coach after his 3rd year.

We are hearing right now how this team is junk and how the roster is lacking serious talent at almost every position.

But Pagano was expected to make winners out of this team. Yeah, right.

We don't for sure... but I highly doubt he will be handed the keys to a franchise any time soon without taking a smaller role first to get back in. And I agree with you in that I dont see him wanting to, and I dont blame him.

 

His offensive scheme this past year was embarrassing. His gameplanning for the past 5 years was embarrassing. That record you mention was not because of him, it was because of Andrew Luck being dug in holes and having the ability to pull games out of his buttcrack like none other. For every stat you pull for wins, I can find 10 that show that many of those wins should not have happened, statistically... 

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

We don't for sure... but I highly doubt he will be handed the keys to a franchise any time soon without taking a smaller role first to get back in. And I agree with you in that I dont see him wanting to, and I dont blame him.

 

His offensive scheme this past year was embarrassing. His gameplanning for the past 5 years was embarrassing. That record you mention was not because of him, it was because of Andrew Luck being dug in holes and having the ability to pull games out of his buttcrack like none other. For every stat you pull for wins, I can find 10 that show that many of those wins should not have happened, statistically... 

Look, all this has already been hashed over so many times it serves no purpose to rehash it.

Just answer one question. What offensive scheme works when you have no offensive line and no running game? I am sure there is a long list of head coaches who would like that scheme.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Look, all this has already been hashed over so many times it serves no purpose to rehash it.

Just answer one question. What offensive scheme works when you have no offensive line and no running game? I am sure there is a long list of head coaches who would like that scheme.

One that doesn't have tendencies so blatantly obvious that a middle school football coach can call a perfect defensive game. Have you seen the breakdown of the tendencies from last season? Brutal for an NFL football team. 

 

Get the ball of Brissetts hands quickly. Utilize Mack's speed and Gores strength. We failed miserably at taking advantage of strengths and minimizing the weakspots of the offense. How many times can you allow Brisseyt to drop back for 4 plus seconds with a horrible o-line and not make an adjustment? You can honestly say you thought that was a solid coaching effort last season??

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

One that doesn't have tendencies so blatantly obvious that a middle school football coach can call a perfect defensive game. Have you seen the breakdown of the tendencies from last season? Brutal for an NFL football team. 

 

Get the ball of Brissetts hands quickly. Utilize Mack's speed and Gores strength. We failed miserably at taking advantage of strengths and minimizing the weakspots of the offense. How many times can you allow Brisseyt to drop back for 4 plus seconds with a horrible o-line and not make an adjustment? You can honestly say you thought that was a solid coaching effort last season??

[ColtStrong2013]

37 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Good talk... Keep drinking the Chuck koolaid. Stunned there is actually an individual on this forum that can justify defending him as a good HC. 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Good talk... Keep drinking the Chuck koolaid. Stunned there is actually an individual on this forum that can justify defending him as a good HC. 

Good talk??  Really?? Hasn't this been covered enough for you?

[ColtStrong2013]

7 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Good talk??  Really?? Hasn't this been covered enough for you?

With you, yes.. Your condescension is enough for me. 

 

You asked me "one question" and I answered it. You are obviously one who high on your horse (no colts pun intended), when most Colts fans don't agree with you that Pagano was a good coach here... 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

With you, yes.. Your condescension is enough for me. 

 

You asked me "one question" and I answered it. You are obviously one who high on your horse (no colts pun intended), when most Colts fans don't agree with you that Pagano was a good coach here... 

I don't care if most Colt fans don't agree with me or not. If you gave a legitimate answer in your mind, then live with it.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Of course Grigson's 1st Draft was better. He was given Andrew Luck on a silver platter. How about Grigson's draft's from 2013-2016 . Those were awesome weren't they . Not to mention the Trent Richardson trade and the signings of Andre Johnson and Trent Cole - those are HOFame moves

[ColtStrong2013]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

I don't care if most Colt fans don't agree with me or not. If you gave a legitimate answer in your mind, then live with it.

Sigh