Dolphins & Bears showing strong interest in #6 overall pick

[Jaric]

[Yoshinator]

On 4/16/2018 at 7:32 AM, aaron11 said:

none of the draft experts agree with you.  most of them have him as the best player in the class

 

barkley is 234 pounds, that is not a scat back.  he doesnt remind me of mack

The draft experts hype up every early round pick. They even hyped up Johnny Manziel to an extent. If I disagreed with the draft experts 100% of the time and said every 1st rounder was a bust, I'd still be right 50% of the time. They don't have the guts to say any 1st round guy will be a bust before the draft. It's up to us to do our own homework and figure it out ourselves. They will merely make draft ranks and tout up every pick to sound like they will succeed. Barkley is by far the worst of the early picks we can get. I'm liking him less and less the more I research him before the draft. If Nelson, Chubb, and 3 QBs go before our pick at 6, I would still go Roquan Smith over Barkley if we can't trade down.

[Fisticuffs111]

I’m starting to think Ballard might not have that many trade back options considering the rumors that the Giants, Browns, and the Broncos are all considering trading back.

 

Not that I think all three of those teams trade back, but I could see two trades happening before our pick. There should still be a team that’s trying to move up but there might not be a bidding war that some are hoping for. This is all moot if a top option falls to us and Ballard doesn’t even look to trade.

[NewColtsFan]

49 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The draft experts hype up every early round pick. They even hyped up Johnny Manziel to an extent. If I disagreed with the draft experts 100% of the time and said every 1st rounder was a bust, I'd still be right 50% of the time. They don't have the guts to say any 1st round guy will be a bust before the draft. It's up to us to do our own homework and figure it out ourselves. They will merely make draft ranks and tout up every pick to sound like they will succeed. Barkley is by far the worst of the early picks we can get. I'm liking him less and less the more I research him before the draft. If Nelson, Chubb, and 3 QBs go before our pick at 6, I would still go Roquan Smith over Barkley if we can't trade down.

 

Personally, I'd prefer a defensive player or Nelson.

 

That said, Barkley is universally accepted as the best player in the draft.   Not the best running back, the best player.  We could do a lot worse than taking Barkley.

 

In the last three years four teams have taken a RB in the top-10.   And all of them have made their team better.  Gurley with the Rams.  Elliott with the Cowboys.  McCaffrey with the Panthers.  Fournette with the Jags.   Each pick can easily be defended.    And Barkley is viewed as being better than all of them.

 

Complaining about taking Barkley just seems silly to me.   And remember, I don't want us to take him, but I'm not going to complain (too much) if we do....

 

Just some food for thought...

 

 

 

[Myles]

44 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Personally, I'd prefer a defensive player or Nelson.

 

That said, Barkley is universally accepted as the best player in the draft.   Not the best running back, the best player.  We could do a lot worse than taking Barkley.

 

In the last three years four teams have taken a RB in the top-10.   And all of them have made their team better.  Gurley with the Rams.  Elliott with the Cowboys.  McCaffrey with the Panthers.  Fournette with the Jags.   Each pick can easily be defended.    And Barkley is viewed as being better than all of them.

 

Complaining about taking Barkley just seems silly to me.   And remember, I don't want us to take him, but I'm not going to complain (too much) if we do....

 

Just some food for thought...

 

 

 

If we draft 6th and he is there, I won't complain about taking him.   I'd prefer Nelson since this team seams to be a couple years away from contending and Nelson seems like a decade long plug and play for the O-line.   He may actually make Mack improve almost as much as the gap between Mack and Barkely.   Plus he protects Luck.    Now if the Colts would sign CJ Anderson, Luck would be in even better shape.

[Mitch Connors]

37 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

That said, Barkley is universally accepted as the best player in the draft.   Not the best running back, the best player.  We could do a lot worse than taking Barkley.

 

Complaining about taking Barkley just seems silly to me.   And remember, I don't want us to take him, but I'm not going to complain (too much) if we do....

 

Just some food for thought...

 

 

 

Not to be argumentative but Trent Richardson had one of the highest RB pre-draft ratings in history from nearly all major publications and that didnt turn out well at all. He was viewed as the best RB prospect since Peterson and a cant miss franchise changing back. McShay had/has them as the 2nd/3rd best RB prospect of all time - coincidentally enough Barkley is tied with Richardsons rating.

 

Also, while there are several 1st round backs that are great I can find just as many that are as good or better that were drafted in later rounds using much much less draft capital (Bell, Hunt, McCoy, Howard). I also grant that this isnt a truly fair comparison because theres way more 2-7 round picks than 1st round.

 

http://espn1005.com/mcshay-how-saquon-barkley-grades-vs-elite-running-backs/

 

[NewColtsFan]

39 minutes ago, Mitch Connors said:

Not to be argumentative but Trent Richardson had one of the highest RB pre-draft ratings in history from nearly all major publications and that didnt turn out well at all. He was viewed as the best RB prospect since Peterson and a cant miss franchise changing back. McShay had/has them as the 2nd/3rd best RB prospect of all time - coincidentally enough Barkley is tied with Richardsons rating.

 

Also, while there are several 1st round backs that are great I can find just as many that are as good or better that were drafted in later rounds using much much less draft capital (Bell, Hunt, McCoy, Howard). I also grant that this isnt a truly fair comparison because theres way more 2-7 round picks than 1st round.

 

http://espn1005.com/mcshay-how-saquon-barkley-grades-vs-elite-running-backs/

 

 

Mitch......

 

Thanks for the post,  appreciate it....

 

Here's where it breaks down for me....    You point to McShay's grade of Trent has an example of just how highly he was rated.    One guy.     I'm pointing to all the top evaluators for Barkley.     McShaw, Kiper,  Jeremiah and Brooks, both who were NFL scouts,   Mike Manock who played the game and Gil Brandt who was a GM.    All of those people have Barkley as the best PLAYER in the draft,  not just the best RB.      There's a big difference.

 

Also.....    many of the arguments you've presented to me here are arguments I've made myself many, many times over.     That's why I do NOT favor taking Barkley.    I favor taking a back in the 2nd or 3rd round.   I'd be willing to wait to the 4th if I had to.     But I'm NOT in favor of a first round RB for the Colts.

 

Also....   the examples I used were not just first round backs,  they were all TOP-10 picks.    That's a big difference.

Those guys are all very good and all helped their team.     If we take Barkley,  I think he will also help the Colts.

 

I just don't happen to want to take that approach.

 

Hope that clarifies my view.......

 

[MikeCurtis]

RBs are very much a hit/miss (mostly miss) proposition .... almost like QBs

 

Look at the RBs taken in round one

 

 

2008                                                                    Would drafting team take this player (if they could redraft)

 

4th Pick Darrin McFadden                                                                No

13th pick Jonathan Stewart                                                              Yes

27th pick Felix Jones                                                                        No

 

2009 

12th pick Knowshown Moreno                                                        No

27th pick Donald Brown                                                                  No

31st pick Beanie Wells                                                                    No

 

2010 Draft

9th pick CJ Spiller                                                                           No

12th pick Ryan Mathews                                                                 Yes

30th pick Javid Best                                                                        No

 

2011 Draft

28th Mark Ingram                                                                            Probably yes

 

2012 Draft

3rd Trent Ricardson                                                                         No 

31st Doug Martin                                                                              Yes

32st David Wilson                                                                             yes

 

 

2013/2014 - No RBs taken in round 1

 

2015

4th Ezekiel Elliott                                                                              YES (of course, he is a Buckeye..O-H)

 

 

If you look at the first round RBs for the past few years, you have a "hit ratio" of only a little more than 38%

 

I remember getting excited when we only gave up a late 1st for Trent Richardson, he had a few "cant miss" 

evaluations when he was drafted

 

I would MUCH rather have Nelson than Barkley...... If that was my only choice

 

Barkley may end up being fantastic....... but.... the odds are against that he can get to that level.... and stay at that level past 5 years

 

MOST NFL RBs have a shelf life of around 5 years... not all but most

 

OL and DL seem to last longer..... and early picks on RB seem to miss WAY too much for my liking.....   (3rd pick in 2nd round)...... Penny Please!

 

 

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:

Not to be argumentative but Trent Richardson had one of the highest RB pre-draft ratings in history from nearly all major publications and that didnt turn out well at all. He was viewed as the best RB prospect since Peterson and a cant miss franchise changing back. McShay had/has them as the 2nd/3rd best RB prospect of all time - coincidentally enough Barkley is tied with Richardsons rating.

 

Also, while there are several 1st round backs that are great I can find just as many that are as good or better that were drafted in later rounds using much much less draft capital (Bell, Hunt, McCoy, Howard). I also grant that this isnt a truly fair comparison because theres way more 2-7 round picks than 1st round.

 

http://espn1005.com/mcshay-how-saquon-barkley-grades-vs-elite-running-backs/

 

Bill Polian called him a sure thing. 

 

The consensus by the pundits was that TRich was a cant miss prospect.  Mike Holmgren drafted him #3 overall and I don't remember anybody calling it a reach at the time.  

[Coltsfan1955]

On ‎4‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 8:53 AM, masterlock said:

I wasn't a big fan of the first trade, but it was a gamble that could pay off. I say, take quality over quantity. I'd rather have one elite, marquee player than 2 "good" players. Enough trading down!

You don't know quality for several years; a lot of 2nd & 3rd round picks just signed big contracts in free agency.  Quantity will make us better sooner.  If we had 2 picks in the 1st round along with 3 in the 2nd round & say 2 in the 3rd; that's 7 chances to get not just a "good player" as you put it, but 7 chances instead of the original 3 to get not 1, not 2, but 3 or 4 quality (your word), maybe even elite players.  Remember, Freeney was picked at 11; Reggie Wayne was like the last pick in the first round, Bob Sanders was a 2nd round pick, Mathis a 4th round pick, TY was a 3rd round pick.  I would consider all those players as elite, although Sanders career was short.  Teams have 1st round busts every year.  Scouting & developing players is the key.

[aaron11]

8 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

 If I disagreed with the draft experts 100% of the time and said every 1st rounder was a bust, I'd still be right 50% of the time. 

oh i agree with that part.  i was saying the other day that fans can outsmart GMs at times just by reading scouting reports and making a lucky guess

 

i do think barkley will be good, with the chance to be very good.  he just looked for the big play a lot in college, nfl coaching should get him on track

[Yoshinator]

5 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

oh i agree with that part.  i was saying the other day that fans can outsmart GMs at times just by reading scouting reports and making a lucky guess

 

i do think barkley will be good, with the chance to be very good.  he just looked for the big play a lot in college, nfl coaching should get him on track

I'm worried with Barkley's yards after contact. He is so poor in that area, and it's so difficult to find wide open lanes in the pros, especially when we don't have a great O-Line. I'd be scared to death to draft him. I think it'd be like Trent Richardson 2.0 all over again. He can succeed on the right team and with good coaching, but with how our O-Line is right now, I don't think we are the right team for him.

[ColtV]

If you don't mind if I steer us away from what has been a weekly Barkley argument on the board, and back to the discussion of trading down with Chicago and picking up their 2nd round pick(not out of the realm of probability given what we got from 3 to 6). So I'm going to use the latest Kiper/McShay 3 round mock and make a few tweaks. That would/could be:

 

8. Roquan Smith lb

36. Harold Landry de

37. Billy Price c/g

39. Isaiah Oliver cb

49. Maurice Hurst dt

67. Rashaad Penny rb

 

Personally I don't think Landry or Hurst fall that far, but IMO, going to 8 and getting that extra 2nd rounder solidifies this draft for us.

 

[GoColts8818]

On 4/19/2018 at 2:07 PM, Fisticuffs111 said:

I’m starting to think Ballard might not have that many trade back options considering the rumors that the Giants, Browns, and the Broncos are all considering trading back.

 

Not that I think all three of those teams trade back, but I could see two trades happening before our pick. There should still be a team that’s trying to move up but there might not be a bidding war that some are hoping for. This is all moot if a top option falls to us and Ballard doesn’t even look to trade.

If they don’t then the Colts stay at six and get a good player at six.  Honestly I’d prefer if teams come up before the Colts because they are probably coming up to get a QB which means the Colts will probably their choice of two or three guys they could really use at six.  

[Narcosys]

On 4/19/2018 at 7:07 PM, Fisticuffs111 said:

I’m starting to think Ballard might not have that many trade back options considering the rumors that the Giants, Browns, and the Broncos are all considering trading back.

 

Not that I think all three of those teams trade back, but I could see two trades happening before our pick. There should still be a team that’s trying to move up but there might not be a bidding war that some are hoping for. This is all moot if a top option falls to us and Ballard doesn’t even look to trade.

 

Seems odd the giants would trade back. They need a qb desperately, Eli isn't going to be around that much longer. They may think they don't need O line, RB, or defense. But they can't say they didn't need a qb.

[Dark Superman]

I'm greedy I rather trade with Buffalo I want to first rounders and possibly both their seconds if I'm Ballard.

[MikeCurtis]

11 hours ago, ColtV said:

If you don't mind if I steer us away from what has been a weekly Barkley argument on the board, and back to the discussion of trading down with Chicago and picking up their 2nd round pick(not out of the realm of probability given what we got from 3 to 6). So I'm going to use the latest Kiper/McShay 3 round mock and make a few tweaks. That would/could be:

 

8. Roquan Smith lb

36. Harold Landry de

37. Billy Price c/g

39. Isaiah Oliver cb

49. Maurice Hurst dt

67. Rashaad Penny rb

 

Personally I don't think Landry or Hurst fall that far, but IMO, going to 8 and getting that extra 2nd rounder solidifies this draft for us.

 

Great haul

 

I like Price, Oliver, in those spots

 

Hurst, Landry, and Penny are great picks...... but I think they may go 20 picks before where you have them slotted

 

I am starting to drop interest in Smith........ he is like a really good strong safety.....AWESOME in space

 

But.........when Smith gets in and around the pile he gets owned.........  by college guards, tackles, and TEs

What will an NFL guard, tackle, or TE do with him?

 

I havent seen any tape where he disingages from a block, and makes a tackle........  (Not saying it didnt happen)

 

IF we draft him..... be ready for run after run RIGHT AT HIM......

 

My 2 cents

Deano

[Fisticuffs111]

5 hours ago, Narcosys said:

 

Seems odd the giants would trade back. They need a qb desperately, Eli isn't going to be around that much longer. They may think they don't need O line, RB, or defense. But they can't say they didn't need a qb.

Yeah, I think they need to go QB too. They're doing a good job of hiding their intentions though.

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, MikeCurtis said:

Great haul

 

I like Price, Oliver, in those spots

 

Hurst, Landry, and Penny are great picks...... but I think they may go 20 picks before where you have them slotted

 

I am starting to drop interest in Smith........ he is like a really good strong safety.....AWESOME in space

 

But.........when Smith gets in and around the pile he gets owned.........  by college guards, tackles, and TEs

What will an NFL guard, tackle, or TE do with him?

 

I havent seen any tape where he disingages from a block, and makes a tackle........  (Not saying it didnt happen)

 

IF we draft him..... be ready for run after run RIGHT AT HIM......

 

My 2 cents

Deano

 

I’m glad you posted that, I feel the same way.  He’s all over the field, great side to side coverage.  But he does not do well when they’re coming right at him.

 

Which really bothers me with our new scheme.  We’re going to be facing big, tough inside runners.  Our MLB has to get past that G or C and get to those guys if they bowl over our smaller DTs.  

 

I would not complain if we took him, but I’d be concerned how he fits.   But, as B.B. says, you draft talent, not need.  He’s definitely talented.  

 

[MikeCurtis]

19 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I’m glad you posted that, I feel the same way.  He’s all over the field, great side to side coverage.  But he does not do well when they’re coming right at him.

 

Which really bothers me with our new scheme.  We’re going to be facing big, tough inside runners.  Our MLB has to get past that G or C and get to those guys if they bowl over our smaller DTs.  

 

 

 

I think the defense that Georgia actually protected him a little, as he had some help from another ILB

 

In a 4-3 the MLB had BETTER be able to shed a block

 

Think about it another way...... in the history of he game, what other great defense had a MLB that would be 

easily run over?

 

Thats why his best spot is WSLB........ I think we can find a decent WSLB in round 2

 

If Chubb is gone (I go back and forth) I pick EDMUNDS at 6  

 

 

[Colt Overseas]

I also agree with the last two post with regards to Roquan Smith. His almost complete inability to disengage from blocks scares the living heck out of me, like that's a fundamental flaw for a linebacker. Brett Kollmann, one of the best draft analyst out there, believes there's a chance 'he could be in for a huge fall in the 1st round.' I don't think he will fall to be honest, but I'm just not comfortable at taking him at 6. He is a WILL and only a WILL in the pros. Sure he can improve, and he has excellent athleticism, leadership and instincts, but when Ballard talks about getting a premium level player, one that teams have to game plan for... I think team will game plan for him, but mainly to exploit his glaring weakness (see vs. Oklahoma) not limit his play. Nevertheless, I still think he will make a good WILL at the next level and if we select him say at 11/12th overall and pick up another 1st round pick, I would be good with that.