Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Roquan Smith set to visit Colts tomorrow


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, BProland85 said:

 

He should still be there at 11 or 12 if Miami or Buffalo wants to move up for a QB at 6. 

 

I think this may be the consensus, but the two bold words are the overwhelmingly important words in this thought.

I'm certain the Colts would think so, as well, and they'd have to weigh their interest in him against that risk.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, buccolts said:

 

I think this may be the consensus, but the two bold words are the overwhelmingly important words in this thought.

I'm certain the Colts would think so, as well, and they'd have to weigh their interest in him against that risk.

That is the million dollar question... 

I also think Arizona might be in the fold to throw in the kitchen sink to a top 6 team for one of the big 4 qb's... Would Ballard be willing to move back to 15 again this year, to stack up picks for this year and next? I would, without question, and hope AZ and the Jets picking top 5 next year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, waka waka said:

I think some forget before N.Chubb got hurt he was suppose to be the next great RB prospect. While at the combine he looked just as fluid as Sony. I think has he gets further past his injury he can come back to his old self. He's can be more than just a one-cut runner. I think he's going to be a steal for whoever drafts him.

I agree. I think he can be almost a clone of the one and only Frank Gore. The further he got away from his injury the stronger and faster he got and they seem to run very similarly. He may not be the home run hitter but dang I think he will make a career full of doubles and singles...guy rarely strikes out....like he falls forward and gets 2-3 yards minimum. In my opinion outside of Barkley he is the safest RB in the draft. He may not have the same ceiling as others but this kid will produce.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

That is the million dollar question... 

I also think Arizona might be in the fold to throw in the kitchen sink to a top 6 team for one of the big 4 qb's... Would Ballard be willing to move back to 15 again this year, to stack up picks for this year and next? I would, without question, and hope AZ and the Jets picking top 5 next year.

I could be wrong but I think Arizona sits this year out. I think they are going to see moving up as too expensive without the right ammo (combo of firsts and seconds that a team like Buffalo, Jets, and Denver had). If something fell in their laps sure but they spent a lot of money bringing in Bradford and Glennon. I think they can afford to wait a year until the drama at the top is less. I look for them to be a round 2 kinda team. I think at this point teams will have to target 2nd and 4th pick especially if they want to land a qb. Maybe Denver at 5 if their guy is off the board but even they are going to think long and hard about qb. If you want one of the top 4...you gotta think you trade into top 4 to get them. Since your likely targeting one...I don't see how you trade until you know they are there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, aaron11 said:

i agree with doug about hooker

 

he reads QBs and plays the deep ball well.  he doesnt play the run or come up and tackle receivers very well at all

 

thats pretty much what his scouting profile said too.  

Fine....   except that is not all that Doug said.    And that's not all his profile said either.

 

Look...  I don't object to what Doug said.   I object to him bringing it up in nearly every draft related thread possible.   It's the same post over and over again.

 

We get it.   You don't like the pick!

 

And now he's adding smugness.  He implies that Hooker was falling in the draft due to something that the other GMs knew about but Ballard didn't.   Doug always finds new ways of disrespecting Ballard and Hooker. 

 

Rare is the time Doug doesn't take a shot at one or both of them.   It's gotten old quite fast.    And that's why I respond...   to let Doug know that we get his point...

 

Remember...   this is the same person who thought/thinks that Ryan Grigson was the innocent victim of evil Chuck   Pagano....    you can't makeup this kind of nonsense.... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, DougDew said:

Didn't realize Hooker and Ballard are like family to you, but thanks for swooping into the conversation to try to pick a fight.

 

Yeah, I sit here and just stew on one pick from last year and try to work it into every response because Malik Hooker means so much to me.

 

The point is, picking the 12th best player at 6 would be the opposite of picking the 7th best player at 15.  So we get a "steal" one year and a "reach" the next.  (In quotes because neither are true). And, IMO, the reach looks like a better player than the steal.  I like defenders who make their living by denying first downs and touchdowns by tackling or denying the ball.  Catching the ball when its in the air 4 seconds is a bonus, but I'd prefer defenders that are known for getting the ball back to the O via the first two methods.

 

Its not my analysis of Hooker or Smith. Read the scouting reports. 

 

I've read the scouting reports....   and I'll say you do an excellent job of cherry picking what you want and ignoring  everything else.

 

And the only time I make this response is when you take one if your many shots at Hoover or Ballard.    So, if it seems like I do that a lot, perhaps that should tell you just how often you make those posts...

 

Just some food for thought.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dgambill said:

I could be wrong but I think Arizona sits this year out. I think they are going to see moving up as too expensive without the right ammo (combo of firsts and seconds that a team like Buffalo, Jets, and Denver had). If something fell in their laps sure but they spent a lot of money bringing in Bradford and Glennon. I think they can afford to wait a year until the drama at the top is less. I look for them to be a round 2 kinda team. I think at this point teams will have to target 2nd and 4th pick especially if they want to land a qb. Maybe Denver at 5 if their guy is off the board but even they are going to think long and hard about qb. If you want one of the top 4...you gotta think you trade into top 4 to get them. Since your likely targeting one...I don't see how you trade until you know they are there.

I posted a little bit ago touching on this point, but these teams don't just wait on something to happen. Perhaps they are trying to trade into the top 4, and struggling to get anywhere. Perhaps Ballard has already taken a phone call that goes something along the lines of "what if Chubb Barkley and Nelson go 2, 4 and 5, and there is a couple nice QBs sitting there at 6... what would it take to swing that pick." 

 

I think it's naive to think these things don't happen heading into the draft. There is no way that there isn't serious negotiating in the weeks leading up to draft day. Round 2-7, probably not so much. But round 1, especially top 10 with franchise QBs on the line... absolutely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I've read the scouting reports....   and I'll say you do an excellent job of cherry picking what you want and ignoring  everything else.

 

And the only time I make this response is when you take one if your many shots at Hoover or Ballard.    So, if it seems like I do that a lot, perhaps that should tell you just how often you make those posts...

 

Just some food for thought.

 

You've got a mental block bout this.  This is a Roquan Smith thread...about possibly picking him 6 when all of the pundits so far have "valued" him between 8 and 12.  Many here don't like the pick because it would be a considered a "reach"

 

..in the same way as Hooker was considered a "steal" last year.  Neither is true.  Both would be wrong. Smith might go 6 relative to Hooker's 15, because that's the value NFL GMs have placed on them. Because 7 other GMs decided to pass on him doesn't mean he was a steal at 15.

 

Sorry but its true.  The scouting report said he was elite at one thing, nothing else, but could project to get there.  Compare that to just about every positional player picked to go top 10 this year and you'll see that just about all of them are much more well rounded than Hooker was.  So 15...not top ten... is about where he belonged.  No steal, and Ballard isn't smarter than the other GMs who passed on him because of it. 

 

Smith's profile distinctly outshines his, so I have no problem taking Smith at 6, and can't figure why the forum wouldn't like it when they were ready to take Hooker at 7 if they could.  (shhhh...its about OSU) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You've got a mental block bout this.  This is a Roquan Smith thread...about possibly picking him 6 when all of the pundits so far have "valued" him between 8 and 12.  Many here don't like the pick because it would be a considered a "reach"

 

..in the same way as Hooker was considered a "steal" last year.  Neither is true.  Both would be wrong. Smith might go 6 relative to Hooker's 15, because that's the value NFL GMs have placed on them. Because 7 other GMs decided to pass on him doesn't mean he was a steal at 15.

 

Sorry but its true.  The scouting report said he was elite at one thing, nothing else, but could project to get there.  Compare that to just about every positional player picked to go top 10 this year and you'll see that just about all of them are much more well rounded than Hooker was.  So 15...not top ten... is about where he belonged.  No steal, and Ballard isn't smarter than the other GMs who passed on him because of it. 

 

Smith's profile distinctly outshines his, so I have no problem taking Smith at 6, and can't figure why the forum wouldn't like it when they were ready to take Hooker at 7 if they could.  (shhhh...its about OSU) 

 

There is a lot that goes into value. Ballard valued a Free Safety that can be a ballhawk because he had a vision for what his defense was going to be... It had high emphasis on a good centerfielder, and Hooker was at the top of his board... 

 

No one cares if it was a steal or not. Malik Hooker was playing damn good football last season before his injury. He will play even better ball this year in a defense that is suited to his style. 

 

Ballard was able to take Hooker in the top 10 if he really wanted him... he got him at 15, because that's what he was picking at, and to Ballard that is considered a steal.

 

Apples and oranges to this years draft. We have the 6th pick this year and if Ballard wants Smith, he will take him at 6. If he isn't the highest rated player on his board when the 6th pick comes, and he thinks he can move back a few notches and get Smith when he is at the top of his board, he might do it if the price is right... Who cares if we 'steal' anybody. Load up on picks (check) and draft good football players with great value to the franchise. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

There is a lot that goes into value. Ballard valued a Free Safety that can be a ballhawk because he had a vision for what his defense was going to be... It had high emphasis on a good centerfielder, and Hooker was at the top of his board... 

 

No one cares if it was a steal or not. Malik Hooker was playing damn good football last season before his injury. He will play even better ball this year in a defense that is suited to his style. 

 

Ballard was able to take Hooker in the top 10 if he really wanted him... he got him at 15, because that's what he was picking at, and to Ballard that is considered a steal.

 

Apples and oranges to this years draft. We have the 6th pick this year and if Ballard wants Smith, he will take him at 6. If he isn't the highest rated player on his board when the 6th pick comes, and he thinks he can move back a few notches and get Smith when he is at the top of his board, he might do it if the price is right... Who cares if we 'steal' anybody. Load up on picks (check) and draft good football players with great value to the franchise. 

Right.  GMs decide if it is a reach or a steal.  Smith is properly valued at 6 if picked, just like Hooker was properly valued by 15 GMs at 15 last year. 

 

Interesting though, I've also read some revisionist history where Kelly was supposedly projected to go in the second round.  Every mock I ever saw showed him to the Colts at 18, and that was correctly projected. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

You've got a mental block bout this.  This is a Roquan Smith thread...about possibly picking him 6 when all of the pundits so far have "valued" him between 8 and 12.  Many here don't like the pick because it would be a considered a "reach"

 

..in the same way as Hooker was considered a "steal" last year.  Neither is true.  Both would be wrong. Smith might go 6 relative to Hooker's 15, because that's the value NFL GMs have placed on them. Because 7 other GMs decided to pass on him doesn't mean he was a steal at 15.

 

Sorry but its true.  The scouting report said he was elite at one thing, nothing else, but could project to get there.  Compare that to just about every positional player picked to go top 10 this year and you'll see that just about all of them are much more well rounded than Hooker was.  So 15...not top ten... is about where he belonged.  No steal, and Ballard isn't smarter than the other GMs who passed on him because of it. 

 

Smith's profile distinctly outshines his, so I have no problem taking Smith at 6, and can't figure why the forum wouldn't like it when they were ready to take Hooker at 7 if they could.  (shhhh...its about OSU) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only you, Doug....   only you would turn this into my problem when it's obviously yours.

 

If you would simply stop turning every thread into a chance to insult Ballard and Hooker even when the thread has nothing to do with them there would be no problem.

 

As for what other GMs did last year?   That's a classic Doug Dew Strawman.   No one said the other GMs were dumb or that Ballard was smart.    That's just you working your twisted logic.     Funny how you think Smith might be ranked around 8-12 but ignore the fact that Hooker was a top-10 for most everyone, compared with Errol Thomas, the best FS of the currrnt generation and Ed Reed the best FS of the previous generation and a Hall of Famer.   You conveniently managed to to leave those off your evaluation.

 

As you did when you forget to note that Hooker was only a 3-star recruit to Ohio State.   Why?   Because he played more basketball than football in HS.   Which meant he was performing at a very high level on very little experience.   And that means his ceiling, his projection is huge.   But since you don't like him you manage to leave this off too.    Again, I called it cherry picking.    Busted.

 

Oh, and the idea that that Hooker's 7 interceptions were all badly thrown passes that he was lucky to catch and required no ability or skill is the kind of thing you do when you're trying to deliberately distort an argument.  His coverage ability is good.

 

You have an agenda Doug.   You're going to throw shade at Hooker and Ballard whenever you can.   And I'll be there to rebut those arguments to keep you honest.  

 

Seems only fair...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

There is a lot that goes into value. Ballard valued a Free Safety that can be a ballhawk because he had a vision for what his defense was going to be... It had high emphasis on a good centerfielder, and Hooker was at the top of his board... 

 

No one cares if it was a steal or not. Malik Hooker was playing damn good football last season before his injury. He will play even better ball this year in a defense that is suited to his style. 

 

Ballard was able to take Hooker in the top 10 if he really wanted him... he got him at 15, because that's what he was picking at, and to Ballard that is considered a steal.

 

Apples and oranges to this years draft. We have the 6th pick this year and if Ballard wants Smith, he will take him at 6. If he isn't the highest rated player on his board when the 6th pick comes, and he thinks he can move back a few notches and get Smith when he is at the top of his board, he might do it if the price is right... Who cares if we 'steal' anybody. Load up on picks (check) and draft good football players with great value to the franchise. 

If he takes smith at 6 with edmunds still there i'll be angry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stephen said:

If he takes smith at 6 with edmunds still there i'll be angry

Edmund's has high potential. 

 

I still think it's highly unlikely Ballard goes Linebacker round 1. He was at Nelson's pro day and very hot on him. I really think we will see who ever is left of the big 3 (Barkley chubb and Nelson) taken.  If they all three are gone, he's entertaining trade offers. He's doing his homework on the remaining non-qb's that fits their 4-3 defense and what they are looking at offensively... just in case

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

This mindset also paints Ballard as the type of GM that narrowly focuses on single player instead of the big picture, which is acquiring picks and getting players of value at valueable positions throughout the draft. If he has Smith as a top 5 player, and he is on top of his board, he'll obviously take him. If he is high on Smith but thinks 6 is a reach, then he will look to move back, and move on if Smith is taken. 

 

Thing is, is there a 'guy' he has to have within the top 15? If yes, where is a good estimate where he will go based  upon other teams needs?  GM's will not trade down if there is 'a guy' they have to have but might trade into a position where another team takes him off the board before your new draft slot.  It's not like "darn, he's gone. OK, next BPA up..."

 

9 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

Looking at our "top 30" visits at opposed to other teams is interesting...at least so far.

A lot of teams seem to have focused their top 30 visits on guys projected to go in the first few rounds, or guys I'm more familiar with. Meanwhile most of the Colts private visits so far (CB Dunlap -- Illinois, FB Hill -- Michigan, CB Meander -- Grambling, LB Smith -- Central Arkansas) are guys I'm really not familiar with. 

Obviously we still have like 20+ more private visits available, just something I noticed when looking at all the "top 30" visits. I figured we'd mostly be looking at guys projected to go in the 2nd-3rd. But still, lots of time.

 

Genius.

 

The later you interview prospects, the more info you may also get regarding other teams they visited and potential interest from them.  Let's see who Ballard brings in later, and when he does it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Thing is, is there a 'guy' he has to have within the top 15? If yes, where is a good estimate where he will go based  upon other teams needs?  GM's will not trade down if there is 'a guy' they have to have but might trade into a position where another team takes him off the board before your new draft slot.  It's not like "darn, he's gone. OK, next BPA up..."

 

 

Genius.

 

The later you interview prospects, the more info you may also get regarding other teams they visited and potential interest from them.  Let's see who Ballard brings in later, and when he does it...

 

I agree, but is there a guy Ballard "has to have" in this draft? I think he has shown already he is willing to move out of position to get who ever he wants at #3 if the price is right... and 3 2nd round picks makes it damn worth it to move back 3 positions. 

 

If the Bears decide they want to throw a few more 2nd rounders at us to swap 8 for 6, I think Ballard would pass on most guys and be thrilled to sucker a couple teams into moving up a few spots. This draft has immediate starters well into the 2nd round, possibly 3rd, and CB wants a new roster that he thought would take 3-5 years to put together... Moving back a few times in one draft could make the difference between 5 years and 2...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

I agree, but is there a guy Ballard "has to have" in this draft? I think he has shown already he is willing to move out of position to get who ever he wants at #3 if the price is right... and 3 2nd round picks makes it damn worth it to move back 3 positions. 

 

If the Bears decide they want to throw a few more 2nd rounders at us to swap 8 for 6, I think Ballard would pass on most guys and be thrilled to sucker a couple teams into moving up a few spots. This draft has immediate starters well into the 2nd round, possibly 3rd, and CB wants a new roster that he thought would take 3-5 years to put together... Moving back a few times in one draft could make the difference between 5 years and 2...

 

Regardless if he trades down in the first round again, I think Ballard trades down 2nd-7th at least once, maybe more. I think we draft at least 10 players this year, if not closer to 12 or 13.. early round picks in each round, especially after the first couple, could produce a lot of extra later round picks. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stephen said:

I like edmunds over smith. Edmunds has similiar speed, but it is the right size

 

2 hours ago, Stephen said:

If he takes smith at 6 with edmunds still there i'll be angry

Edmunds has the higher upside and projects as a MLB, but needs a lot of polish on his game. Smith could step in and be your starting WILL from day one, which is an extremely important position in our new scheme.

 

Edmunds would be best playing WILL initially to maximize his current skill set while he develops the skills needed to play MLB. He may not start immediately, but definitely has upside.

 

Personally, I'd take the safe, blue-chip Smith over the big, athletic upside of Edmunds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Smith.  I love Edmunds more but I would definitely be fine taking Smith at 6 and someone like Evans at the top of the 2nd.  That would be insane. Plus Evans can play some DE on 3rd down and ILB on first and second.

 

Sign me up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/4/2018 at 10:46 AM, Fisticuffs111 said:

I go back and forth on Roquan probably more than any other potential pick at #6 (or in a trade down).


Some days I think his speed and leadership would be great to have (and it would). But other days I really worry about his struggles at the point of attack/inability to fight through blocks and how, in this defense, our run D is going to be VERY reliant on our Mike. I just can't help but envision our new look interior D-line and Smith getting gashed for big run gains. He seems like he'd be much more suited as a Will here.

I have been watching quite a few games  (I don't like watching highlights because they are... well.. highlights) and I really have not seen the inability to fight through blocks or struggles at the POA.  He does an excellent job at using his hands to keep olineman off of him and he does such an unbelievable job of diagnosing the play and determining where the block will be coming from the he often times avoids it just by beating the guy to the spot.

 

People act like he is undersized but he's the same size (height and weight) that Ray Lewis was when he was drafted, he's 6 lbs lighter than Luke Kuechly was when he was drafted.  It's not like he is a 210lb LB like Arizona is using.  He's NFL LB size right in the average for NFL MLB.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For people saying he's small he's pretty much the same size as Ray Lewis and Patrick Willis. He actually ran a better 40. I'd have to look at the rest of his combine numbers but he's there. Now the Edmunds kid is just freakish size and speed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do honk he played much lighter and came in heavier for combine. From watching tape he doesn't seem to be physically imposing or a thumper. He does come in and wrap up at least but he doesn't have that Lewis, Willis factor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I posted a little bit ago touching on this point, but these teams don't just wait on something to happen. Perhaps they are trying to trade into the top 4, and struggling to get anywhere. Perhaps Ballard has already taken a phone call that goes something along the lines of "what if Chubb Barkley and Nelson go 2, 4 and 5, and there is a couple nice QBs sitting there at 6... what would it take to swing that pick." 

 

I think it's naive to think these things don't happen heading into the draft. There is no way that there isn't serious negotiating in the weeks leading up to draft day. Round 2-7, probably not so much. But round 1, especially top 10 with franchise QBs on the line... absolutely. 

Oh...I agree all teams are doing their due diligence. Checking the cost etc associated with moving up...I just felt that Arizona specifically doesn't have a lot of ammo to make a trade. There are some teams with extra first and second round picks that have the capital to make moves without having to mortgage too much of their future to move up. Jets, Buffalo, Cleveland, NE these were teams that had extra draft picks that I thought could really make a jump up the draft board without as much problems. I just thought Arizona not having the extra picks and being a team that just signed veteran talent would be one that will try to go a different route unless a guy slides back close to them. I'm surprised Buffalo and NY hasn't been able to come to an agreement...unless NY is looking hard at a qb too. To invest in moving up to 12 and trading away their qb I figure Buffalo is all in to move up if they find a trade partner. There is a strong group of qbs to choose from but you gotta think they want to jump the Jets and get their preferred qb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we don't trade back further than 12...,

 

I think there's a drop-off at that spot.   The talent is less in my judgement.

 

I hope we stay in the top-12 to get the most bang for your buck.

 

And if we stay at 6 and take Chubb or Nelson or Edmunds or Smith then I'm good with that too...    a slight trade back puts us in range for James or Ward...   

 

We should be in a win-win spot.   I don't want us to overthink this...

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

 

Yup, Smith's tape blows Edmunds' out of the water.  Counting on physical freaks to reach there potential is a pretty good way to find yourself with a huge bust on your hands.  If we took him I would not weep because he could be amazing, I am not willing to take that risk though.  Hopefully Ballard isnt either.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

 

Couldn't have said it better. He has Micah Hyde like coverage abilities in a LB's body.

 

Perfect candidate if we were to trade down to 11 or 12, IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

The bolded is likely to be exposed at the next level if true...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

The problem Roquan's  size presents is not with his tackling - he was one of the best tacklers in the country. The problem his size presents is with getting off blocks. When a lineman or a TE or ... whoever lands his hands on him it's over - he gets washed out of plays. This is why he cannot play middle linebacker, unlike Edmunds. They are different types of players. If we are getting Roquan we are getting him to be will linebacker. Edmunds IMO can be mike and be an exceptional mike in due time. Oh and BTW I do think he's worth a top 10 pick. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

I agree with this. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Ballard would go with Edmunds over Smith because of his continued comments on development of draft picks. If Ballard believes there is a much higher ceiling for Edmunds and that he can develop him over the next several years versus get better results in the short term with Smith, he's going Edmunds. 

 

Either one of them is a gigantic upgrade at Inside Linebacker than we have had maybe ever. But with Edmund's versatility to play multiple spots in Eberflus' 4-3, I would be more shocked if Smith is the pick

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Edmund's has high potential. 

 

I still think it's highly unlikely Ballard goes Linebacker round 1. He was at Nelson's pro day and very hot on him. I really think we will see who ever is left of the big 3 (Barkley chubb and Nelson) taken.  If they all three are gone, he's entertaining trade offers. He's doing his homework on the remaining non-qb's that fits their 4-3 defense and what they are looking at offensively... just in case

I agree. I think those have been his targets all along. He moved back to six because of the value proposition and the fact that he believed he would still land one of those players based on his feelings of qbs going high. We should land one of those 3 guys. If they are all gone...then that likely means a qb or two is falling...and that means teams like Buffalo and Arizona etc will likely be looking to move up and get a guy...and we would re-evaluate if we want to trade back again for this next group of players (Smith and co.) or if we think we can't get a guy we want and stay at home at 6 and still take one of these guys like Smith. Personally I think if we can't land one of the "big three" I think we are open for a trade back...doesn't mean someone wants to move up with us but I think we are much more open to doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

1 hour ago, stitches said:

The problem Roquan's  size presents is not with his tackling - he was one of the best tacklers in the country. The problem his size presents is with getting off blocks. When a lineman or a TE or ... whoever lands his hands on him it's over - he gets washed out of plays. This is why he cannot play middle linebacker, unlike Edmunds. They are different types of players. If we are getting Roquan we are getting him to be will linebacker. Edmunds IMO can be mike and be an exceptional mike in due time. Oh and BTW I do think he's worth a top 10 pick. 

Smith is definitely one of the best tacklers in the country. he only missed 6 tackles all last season, which is INSANE. With Smith, he isn't the kind of guy that's going to drive a ball-carrier backwards. He'll hit a guy after a 2 yd gain and end up with a 4-5 yd gain, but it's an almost certainty that he'll make that tackle. He also blows up practically any outside play like screens, stretches, etc.

 

I'm more of a fan of Smith than Edmunds at this point.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/3/2018 at 10:12 PM, BlueShoe said:

 

Now that’s funny. 

 

Best tackler I have seen since Joe Montana. 

 

 

Now this is a rather epic response! Well done, sir! Sort of a hilarious set up hahaha, you had to take it lol!

 

#Don’t feed the troll!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carlos Danger said:

Smith is a an absolute stud. Easily the best LB in this class, imo. 

 

The size thing is no issue to me... Compare his tape to Edmunds' and you'll see that Smith has significantly more "pop" behind his pads when tackling, despite the weight differential. I think this is due to his exceptional ability to diagnose plays and be in the correct spot to make the stop. He always looks to be in position, whereas as Edmunds uses his long arms to grab offensive players from a position of weaker leverage. 

 

Smith can stop and turn on a dime... He is so so good at reacting to a ball carrier's cut and making a strong tackle where lesser LBs would have been juked out of their shoes. It is a special quality and very rare. 

 

I like Edmunds in the sense that he could eventually drop down to add another pass rusher on obvious passing downs, making him a true 3 down player, but I think the hype train has gone off the tracks if people think he's worthy of a top 10 pick with his obviously raw tape... Even Edmunds' highlight reel shows areas where he needs to improve. He's only 19, which means that he will probably be able to fix a lot of his issues, but it is speculation, at this point, to say that he will ever be as good as Smith is right now. 

 

 

I will say, the thing I don't like about Smith' tackling is he leaves his feet too often for my liking.  But that is really the only weakness I have seen in his game even though I have not seen him miss the tackle when he leaves his feet.

 

The thing I like about Edmunds is has has the potential to change the NFL like Ray Lewis and Patrick Willis did for LBers or like Manning did for the QB position. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, stitches said:

The problem Roquan's  size presents is not with his tackling - he was one of the best tacklers in the country. The problem his size presents is with getting off blocks. When a lineman or a TE or ... whoever lands his hands on him it's over - he gets washed out of plays. This is why he cannot play middle linebacker, unlike Edmunds. They are different types of players. If we are getting Roquan we are getting him to be will linebacker. Edmunds IMO can be mike and be an exceptional mike in due time. Oh and BTW I do think he's worth a top 10 pick. 

Bobby Wagner is 6'  245lbs and he's a Mike.  Smith needs to add 15lbs, but he has instincts. All the tape I've watched of Edmunds tells me he has very little instincts and plays only on his athletic ability. Roquan is the better long-term LB, even at Mike, in my opinion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2018 at 1:36 PM, Coffeedrinker said:

I have been watching quite a few games  (I don't like watching highlights because they are... well.. highlights) and I really have not seen the inability to fight through blocks or struggles at the POA.  He does an excellent job at using his hands to keep olineman off of him and he does such an unbelievable job of diagnosing the play and determining where the block will be coming from the he often times avoids it just by beating the guy to the spot.


Yeah, I'm not gonna act like my analysis is perfect, I don't watch full games (wish I had the time). But I do watch as many breakdowns I can get my hands on and read whatever I can on the guy. I do think there's evidence to suggest he struggles shedding blocks/getting pushed back in the run game. I don't think he struggles because of size though..I think it comes from technique to some degree, I don't think he uses his hands that well yet, and at times I think he zones in on the ball so hard that he doesn't see blockers coming.

That said, right now I like Smith over Edmunds. I think Eberflus could use him really well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoColts00 said:

Bobby Wagner is 6'  245lbs and he's a Mike.  Smith needs to add 15lbs, but he has instincts. All the tape I've watched of Edmunds tells me he has very little instincts and plays only on his athletic ability. Roquan is the better long-term LB, even at Mike, in my opinion 

Agree to disagree. Not a single team in the league will draft Roquan to be their mike. I can almost guarantee you that. I also disagree about Edmunds' instincts. If you are comparing them to Roquan then yes - they are inferior, but you are comparing it to a player that's at the top of the game instincts-wise. Pretty much anyone you compare to him will look like he lacks instincts. Edmunds instincts are average to above average and with him being this young you can expect them to improve with experience and coaching. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • As a Ballard type player, he seems to fit the bill.  Big 10. Excels at zone coverage. Good tackler. etc. Colts may be able to trade back, and still land DeJean   Considered one of the Safest picks. Seven 2024 NFL Draft Prospects Who Are Safest Bets to Succeed at Next Level https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10113875-7-2024-nfl-draft-prospects-who-are-safest-bets-to-succeed-at-next-level   DB Cooper DeJean, Iowa   A fractured fibula during a November practice tempered any excitement regarding Cooper DeJean's draft status. So he's not been in the same conversations as the class' top defensive backs, specifically Toledo's Quinyon Mitchell and Alabama's Terrion Arnold. DeJean's profile projects just as well or better than the aforementioned cornerbacks.   Three specific attributes set DeJean's floor higher than anyone else among the back end.   First, the reigning Big Ten Defensive Back of the Year presents the positional flexibility and traits to start at cornerback or safety at the professional level, with B/R's Cory Giddings highlighting his coverage skills:   "DeJean excels in zone coverage, but he's versatile enough to play man as well. He shows a smooth backpedal and the ability to keep his leverage and quick footwork with few wasted steps. Although he transitions well, there are times where DeJean hops into his breaks; allowing a step of separation.   "When in zone, DeJean does a great job of reading and reacting to the quarterback's eyes. Pairing that skill set with his route recognition, he often puts himself in good position with leverage and positioning.   "While working downfield, DeJean has the strength necessary to hand-fight with tight ends and bigger receivers, as well as the speed necessary to carry twitchier receivers downfield. He also does a very good job of locating the ball and playing through the catch point."   Second, the high school track standout is an elite athlete who captured Iowa state titles in the long jump and 100-meter dash. Many expected him to blow the doors off Lucas Oil Stadium. Unfortunately, he wasn't ready to test in Indianapolis after being cleared a few weeks earlier.   "His acceleration is incredibly fluid and super powerful," NFL combine trainer Jordan Luallen told The Athletic's Bruce Feldman last summer. "He's the best athlete I've seen in person, pound for pound."   Finally, DeJean adds significant value as an elite collegiate returner. Big Ten coaches also awarded him Return Specialist of the Year this past season. DeJean averaged 13.1 yards per punt return over the last two seasons. A top-notch contributor anywhere along the defensive backfield and on special teams will provide excellent value in the NFL.   Potential Landing Spots: Indianapolis Colts, Philadelphia Eagles    
    • He could, but I think he's way more athletic than people give him credit for and projects way better as CB. Definitely could be a good safety, but I think if we drafted him, he fits well as a boundary corner for us.
    • I think we need to sign a vet, but Jackson isn't it. Age and his dirty playstyle are non-starters for me.   JuJu definitely flashed pretty well in the limited games we saw him in. If he's healthy, I think he'll be a solid CB for us.   He dominated every WR at the Senior Bowl, specifically in drills that heavily skew towards WRs, often using techniques he was just really learning in the pro-bowl practices (mainly press man techniques). He dominated in the MAC and dominated at Senior Bowl practices, and with his athletic traits, he projects very well to the NFL. I see him being a dominant CB in the near future. I don't necessarily want to take a CB at 15, but I wouldn't be mad if we took Mitchell.
    • There are quite a few articles on the internet that say he may transition to safety in the NFL. Interesting reads
    • He could feel that he needs Paye to develop into a more complete edge rusher. He keeps promoting that he was great as a run defender, but needs to continue improving. He invested a 1st on him, so he could very well want to retain him. My thought on drafting an edge rusher at 15 is that it works as a hedge in the event you don’t retain Paye or if the player shows far more promise than Paye moving forward. My comment about Pierce is that he invested a good draft pick on him- so the argument could be made that had Pittman walked, he would have Pierce (although we all agree that Pierce hasn’t performed like we hoped, nor would he be a wr1 by any means). He would have options this draft had Pittman not worked out.   The idea was more behind longterm planning when Pierce was drafted. Keep them coming in the pipeline so that you have options, and ideally good ones. Remember when Phillip dorsett was drafted? Many thought at the time the idea was to add to the room and hedge in the event TY walked when his contract was up. I’m not opposed to looking at stacking premium position players in the 1st round. That provides depth at the position short term and options longterm. It lessens the burden on a 1st round rookie at those positions, giving them time to develop. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...