-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By throwing BBZ · Posted
I don't expect his roll to change with Dayo, Lewis, and now Latu in the mix. His job #1 is to play the run on 1st down, to defend his edge, and cover the flat. Get them in 2nd and long. And I would wager on the under that he gets the 700 snaps that he got last year because of our talented depth. So repeating 8.5 sacks, i'll logically take the under. -
By richard pallo · Posted
I see your point but Jason Kelce just retired at age 36 from the World Champions. Many good OL play well into their mid 30’s. The Colts would save cap space by extending him just like they did with Buckner. Two years. I actually could see a contract structured like Buckners but half the number give or take. I’m not worried about future contracts at this point. AR is years away and he’s the big one. Bortolini sitting and learning for a few years doesn’t regulate him to being a career backup. Just makes him hopefully ready. I’m not saying it’s going to happen but it wouldn’t surprise me. I think Ballard has extended players during camp in the past if I’m not mistaken. Either way I’m glad he’s returning this year. -
-
By BeanDiasucci · Posted
If you think about how an average works, those additional years of trying have an equal chance of helping or hurting your average per year based on whether you are more or less successful in drafting in those additional years. This doesn't seem like a weakness in the analysis to me. I'll point out, too, that Ballard is first on the list only because it is in alphabetical order. The person who put this together doesn't seem to have any particular interest in Chris Ballard. I think the biggest flaw with this analysis is probably that the average number of All Pro players drafted per year is a less than ideal measure of a GM's effectiveness in drafting. This might be, for instance, because some All Pro players are much more valuable than others -- an All-Pro QB might be a lot more impactful than an All Pro at another position -- and players who aren't All Pro might be more valuable over the long haul than a guy who was All Pro one year. Also, as Superman suggested, being named All Pro can be impacted by other factors, such as having (or not having) an outstanding QB to work with. Even with these significant weaknesses, I believe the analysis may have some small value in trying to provide an objective, quantitative measure to compare the number of star players per year that each GM has drafted. I think, for instance, it shows that Chris Ballard has not been more effective than most other GMs in drafting star players. Hopefully, his average per year will improve if we look at this again in a year or two, but of course that depends on Colts' draft picks of the last couple of years panning out like we hope they will. -
By BeanDiasucci · Posted
You make good points. To me, besides being undermined by the lack of good quarterback play, the Colts have been limited by the lack of dynamic star players at DE and WR, which they have hopefully addressed (their list of All Pros under Ballard is light on high-impact players in the offensive and defensive passing game). Their last couple of drafts are very encouraging in terms of not just the current team but their approach and direction moving forward. In today's NFL, I think they should put more emphasis on elite cornerback play, too, but we'll see how that works out.
-
-
Members
-
Recommended Posts