Roster Building: The Case for a 1st Rd WR is Pretty Strong

[stitches]

23 hours ago, coltfaninnewyork said:

Cain may end being good ,but had not played a game .We need to sign a player such as golden Tate .

I agree with this one. I don't think we can go into next season penciling Cain in as a top 3 receiver for this team. Not only has he not proven anything in the league, but he also returns from a serious injury and you don't know how it will affect him even if you thought he was going to play well had he not been injured. 

 

I think I'm one of the few people around here who wouldn't mind a WR in the first or even better  in the second round. I do think a good playmaker who can make plays after the catch can be a big boost for this offense. 

 

I'm still firmly in the draft BVA camp(my version of BPA only the V stands for 'value' rather than 'player'), and I definitely wouldn't mind us drafting a WR if Ballard decides that this is the best value at the position we are drafting. With that said - this draft is incredibly strong on defense and I actually think we can get game changing talent on the defensive line even if we are drafting in the 20s. There are just way too many great prospects this year. 

[shasta519]

14 hours ago, DougDew said:

Too bad Dorsett didn't work out.  Smart idea at the time.  Poor scouting evidently.

 

Drafting a WR at #29 was a good idea? I disagree. Maybe if they drafted Lockett. But look at that draft class...it was a poor decision. It was a weak WR draft group (except for Cooper, White and Parker...who were all gone at that point)...but somehow the #1 S and every ILB were all available...both big long-term needs at the time.

 

The play was to draft defense and then grab Lockett later...if a speedy WR was the goal. The affinity for crappy Florida college players was a strange part of the Grigs regime.

 

Not to mention passing on Collins indirectly led to the awful Green pick...and passing on Kendricks indirectly led to the awful Morrison pick.

 

But Grigs (and Pagano) were just awful at talent evalution when it came to the draft. What's funny is if you make a couple of reasonable changes to a couple of picks (like the two above)...the dominoes could have fallen so much better. Another couple of examples would be Xavier Rhodes/Deandre Hopkins over Werner in 2013. Rhodes negates the need to pick D'Joun Smith....and Hopkins negates the need to pick Moncrief and (especially) Dorsett. 

 

Yes...it's a bit of hindsight...but those examples were the most popular mock AND fan picks at the time. I stand by my contention that the Colts would have drafted better if they crowd-sourced the early picks during the Grigs era.

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Drafting a WR at #29 was a good idea? I disagree. Maybe if they drafted Lockett. But look at that draft class...it was a poor decision. It was a weak WR draft group (except for Cooper, White and Parker...who were all gone at that point)...but somehow the #1 S and every ILB were all available...both big needs long-term at the time.

 

The play was to draft defense and then grab Lockett later...if a speedy WR was the goal. The affinity for crappy Florida college players was a strange part of the Grigs regime.

 

Not to mention passing on Collins indirectly led to the awful Green pick...and passing on Kendricks indirectly led to the awful Morrison pick.

 

But Grigs (and Pagano) were just awful at talent evalution when it comes to the draft. What's funny is if you make a couple of reasonable changes to a couple of picks (like the two above)...the dominoes could have fallen so much better. Another couple of examples would be Xavier Rhodes/Deande Hopkins over Werner in 2013. Rhodes negates the need to pick D'Joun Smith....and Hopkins negates the need to pick Moncrief and (especially) Dorsett. 

You guys know I'm definitely not Grigson's biggest fan, but IMO the problem with him drafting Dorsett at 29 was not that Dorsett was a WR... it was that Dorsett was Dorsett(i.e. the problem wasn't that we drafted a WR, but that we drafted a bad WR). Contrary to popular belief(and especially on Colts forums thanks to the poor Dorsett evaluation), WR is one of the most valuable positions in the league. Had he drafted a great receiver who posts 1000 yard 10 TD seasons noone would be complaining about drafting a WR at 29... 

[aaron11]

32 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  Scheme and pattern helps TY get open more than his talent would suggest.  

 

The expression, "a rising tide lifts all boats" is not criticizing the quality of any boat.

 

In the context of the thread, it implies that a highly talented receiver isn't needed.

 

I contend that the old scheme required more talent.  With that thought, Ebron would be much better at Fleener's job than Fleener. (and Fleener was a receiver, not really a TE, that was DA)

 

Does that satisfy you?

  i think a top flight receiver could take the offense from good to great.  we still struggle when ty misses games too, though a high impact WR may not  even be available 

 

as for ebron, i dont think its scheme per say.  i think the colts just know when to use him and the lions didnt.  hes a red zone receiver and one of the best in the league at that.  hes not a chain moving tight end, but red zone receivers are more valuable and harder to find anyway 

[shasta519]

6 minutes ago, stitches said:

I agree with this one. I don't think we can go into next season penciling Cain in as a top 3 receiver for this team. Not only has he not proven anything in the league, but he also returns from a serious injury and you don't know how it will affect him even if you thought he was going to play well had he not been injured. 

 

I think I'm one of the few people around here who wouldn't mind a WR in the first or even better  in the second round. I do think a good playmaker who can make plays after the catch can be a big boost for this offense. 

 

I'm still firmly in the draft BVA camp(my version of BPA only the V stands for 'value' rather than 'player'), and I definitely wouldn't mind us drafting a WR if Ballard decides that this is the best value at the position we are drafting. With that said - this draft is incredibly strong on defense and I actually think we can get game changing talent on the defensive line even if we are drafting in the 20s. There are just way too many great prospects this year. 

 

I want to see them draft a WR in the 2nd round this year...if the talent is there.

 

But I still wish they would have drafted Christian Kirk...and rolled the dice on Smith being available. Kirk was a perfect fit for this quick-attack offense...and Luck would probably have him in the running for OROY right now. Instead, he is catching passes from Josh Rosen on a very poor offense. 

 

But beyond WR, I still wouldn't be opposed to drafting a Kamara/Hunt type player...if the player was there. It still sort of irks me that neither of those players are Colts right now...when both were available.

 

Ultimately, I am a huge proponent of gettng offensive talent on Day Two (outside of rare WR and RB talent coming out). With the way the NFL has evolved, great offenses are beating great defenses...and those offense have playmakers all over the place.

 

Don't get me wrong...the Colts definitely need help on defense...but that doesn't mean they have to take the discount/value approach at RB/WR. And with Luck healthy and better than ever, the Colts are much closer to being a great offense than a great defense...so it would be almost criminal to not take advantage (for Luck and the team's sake). 

 

 

[OffensivelyPC]

22 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

this is a really good point.  if a guard is on the table that high then a WR or pretty much anything could be as well

 

i think he looks at bpa first, and then applies some common sense based on team need

Yeah, I expect certain positions, such as WR, to get a little bump in the BPA equation because they're more glaring of a need.  But I would also expect positional value to be the bigger factor in that calculation.  WRs are pretty close to interior DL, assuming the former is a true #1 and the latter is strong against both the pass and run.  I expect that we'll be able to find a suitable prospect that fits into what we're doing here at either of those positions.  It just obviously won't be the top 5 name that people will be hoping for and we'll question whether or not we should have lost to so and so

[OffensivelyPC]

18 minutes ago, stitches said:

You guys know I'm definitely not Grigson's biggest fan, but IMO the problem with him drafting Dorsett at 29 was not that Dorsett was a WR... it was that Dorsett was Dorsett(i.e. the problem wasn't that we drafted a WR, but that we drafted a bad WR). Contrary to popular belief(and especially on Colts forums thanks to the poor Dorsett evaluation), WR is one of the most valuable positions in the league. Had he drafted a great receiver who posts 1000 yard 10 TD seasons noone would be complaining about drafting a WR at 29... 

In today's NFL, i'd probably put an elite interior DL (especially NT) above an elite WR, but they're close enough that any they would compute about the same in the BPA equation.

[BProland85]

Yeah with the record probably looking to be somewhere around 8-8 or 9-7 this year, I would be completely fine with getting someone like WR AJ Brown to be the team's future #1 WR, and then in round 2 load up on some DL talent, unless a stud were still there at DL in round 1. 

 

Ballard will also still need another starting LB to go along with Leonard and Walker, and another starting caliber CB and Safety. 

[OffensivelyPC]

32 minutes ago, stitches said:

I agree with this one. I don't think we can go into next season penciling Cain in as a top 3 receiver for this team. Not only has he not proven anything in the league, but he also returns from a serious injury and you don't know how it will affect him even if you thought he was going to play well had he not been injured. 

 

I think I'm one of the few people around here who wouldn't mind a WR in the first or even better  in the second round. I do think a good playmaker who can make plays after the catch can be a big boost for this offense. 

 

I'm still firmly in the draft BVA camp(my version of BPA only the V stands for 'value' rather than 'player'), and I definitely wouldn't mind us drafting a WR if Ballard decides that this is the best value at the position we are drafting. With that said - this draft is incredibly strong on defense and I actually think we can get game changing talent on the defensive line even if we are drafting in the 20s. There are just way too many great prospects this year. 

I think WR is one of those positions that will also be strong enough to compete with the DL talent.  We'll see early next year just how good each of those positions are, but I expect Interior DL and WR to be among the best groups of next year's draft class.

[OffensivelyPC]

5 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

Yeah with the record probably looking to be somewhere around 8-8 or 9-7 this year, I would be completely fine with getting someone like WR AJ Brown to be the team's future #1 WR, and then in round 2 load up on some DL talent, unless a stud were still there at DL in round 1. 

 

Ballard will also still need another starting LB to go along with Leonard and Walker, and another starting caliber CB and Safety. 

At 1.20ish, I'm really hoping for someone like N'Keal Harry.  For both of them, they'll have to prove they can beat press coverage, and neither of them has shown that.  N'Keal has struggled with it, and AJ plays slot too much to know whether he can, which means (probably) that he's probably less refined than even N'Keal.

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

You guys know I'm definitely not Grigson's biggest fan, but IMO the problem with him drafting Dorsett at 29 was not that Dorsett was a WR... it was that Dorsett was Dorsett(i.e. the problem wasn't that we drafted a WR, but that we drafted a bad WR). Contrary to popular belief(and especially on Colts forums thanks to the poor Dorsett evaluation), WR is one of the most valuable positions in the league. Had he drafted a great receiver who posts 1000 yard 10 TD seasons noone would be complaining about drafting a WR at 29... 

 

I agree regarding WR (and I think it can be applied to RB as well). If Dorsett was Michael Thomas...no one would care. I just think, in that case, it was a bad time to make that move, considering the draft class. 

 

But I do think pass catchers are becoming more valuable now than ever. The rules are so friendly to offenses now...it's becoming about big play upside and who can consistently make plays (YAC, contested catches, etc.).

 

I get a little annoyed by the idea that a team can easily build a great WR group (or RB group) without investing "early" picks. Look at the top 20 in receiving yards at WR...16 of them were picked in rounds 1-3. Look at RB and rushing yards...very similar. The Colts two best weapons weren't late picks.

 

Ballard is doing a great job...but this is an area where I hope he makes a shift. When Dontrelle Inman can come in off the street mid-season and be your second-best WR...then maybe you need to rethink your original offseason approach to the WR position.

 

 

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree regarding WR (and I think it can be applied to RB as well). If Dorsett was Michael Thomas...no one would care. I just think, in that case, it was a bad time to make that move, considering the draft class. 

 

But I do think pass catchers are becoming more valuable now than ever. The rules are so friendly to offenses now...it's becoming about big play upside and who can consistently make plays (YAC, contested catches, etc.).

 

I get a little annoyed by the idea that a team can easily build a great WR group (or RB group) without investing "early" picks. Look at the top 20 in receiving yards at WR...16 of them were picked in rounds 1-3. Look at RB and rushing yards...very similar. The Colts two best weapons weren't late picks.

 

Ballard is doing a great job...but this is an area where I hope he makes a shift. When Dontrelle Inman can come in off the street mid-season and be your second-best WR...then maybe you need to rethink your original offseason approach to the WR position.

 

 

Inman is perfectly serviceable. He's nothing special, though. Which is good for an off the street FA. But IMO this team needs playmakers. We can do fine with this bad WR core... Luck elevates the receiving talent simply because he always finds the mismatches and rarely misses throws within the structure of the offense and is accurate. As you can see our offense is still top 10 or thereabout but almost all of it is thanks to Luck(and the newfound OL)... but IMO this is still not enough and it can still be much better. Being just fine is not good enough at the highest levels(where we should be striving for), especially when we already have one of the best QBs. We can be in contention for no. 1 offense in the league if we had offensive weapons that can not only catch the passes from Luck(something this receiving core has had troubles with at times), but also make some plays after the catch.  We are dead last in the NFL for yards after the catch. DEAD LAST! With Luck at QB and this OLine protecting him. We just have close to zero offensive playmaking. Even Hilton is not a typical after the catch weapon because he makes business decisions when defenders get close to him(I do NOT blame him for it because of his frame and I would prefer him to stay healthy and have this type of production to getting injured trying to avoid some tackle from a safety 50 pounds heavier than him).  

[Superman]

On 11/25/2018 at 8:03 AM, The Fish said:

You pick the guy who's the best blue chip potential in round 1 for my dollar. Don't overvalue a position (is this subconsciously planted in my mind buy Superman's sig?), find the guy with the most upside. 

 

 

Thing is, it's planted in my mind by draft/roster study, and reinforced by what almost every GM says. I think that approach is best for building a talented roster. It just needs to be executed properly; doesn't matter whether you reach for need or go BPA if you're scouting is flawed.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I think I'm one of the few people around here who wouldn't mind a WR in the first or even better  in the second round. I do think a good playmaker who can make plays after the catch can be a big boost for this offense. 

 

I'm kind of starting to devalue receiver in the draft. Not starting... I've been thinking about this for a few years now. 

 

I think a lot of "first round" receivers in the last few years have been overvalued and overhyped. Lots of busts and under-performers at that position, and I think first round receivers are running something like a 40% success rate over the last few years. Many of these are H/W/S guys who don't convert to NFL producers, but the main things draftniks and fans go gaga over at WR are H/W/S. This is why Stephen Hill was a second rounder once upon a time, despite basically zero college production.

 

Also, while I'd love to have a red zone monster / possession guy like Davante Adams or DeAndre Hopkins, I've become more partial to technically sound receivers who catch the ball reliably, who are quick rather than track fast, and who can pick up yards after the catch. And we have a ton of those guys coming outside of the first round, having more success than the H/W/S hype guys -- Thielen, M. Thomas, JuJu, Lockett, Landry, etc. Even Hopkins was a late first, and Adams was a second. So I'm cooling on hyped first round receivers, particularly toward the top of the first round.

 

I can't remember the last time I really felt great about a first round WR prospect -- maybe Amari Cooper (I liked Corey Coleman, don't know if I felt great about him). But I loved Tyler Lockett, Christian Kirk, etc. 

 

I think you can get H/W/S monsters with potential in mid to late rounds. Guys who are ready to produce on Day 1 are typically the more refined guys, not the athletic freaks. And the more refined guys are usually there are Day 2. 

 

So, while a well rounded offense definitely needs good WRs with varied traits and abilities, I don't really like the value or the history of success with first round WRs. I'd have to think a guy has not only the physical traits to be a monster but also the skill, refinement and production to be ready to play right away, to really be all-in on a first round WR. And if I felt nearly as good as some Day 2 prospects, my board might still be weighted away from the WR group.

[ztboiler]

2 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

You know as well as anyone the answer is that we'll just wait and see how the draft board falls come draft day.  I think the only answer I wouldn't prefer is to trade up to nab a #1 WR.  If for no reason other than, they are just one of the most shaky draft positions developmentally speaking, spending more resources to acquire something that fails at a higher rate than most other positions is a tough sell for me.

 

That being said, I'm not against drafting a WR in the first round.  I mean if we drafted an OG 6th overall, I doubt Ballard's draft philosophy would exclude a WR in the first round.  It'd be a huge bump in talent, to be sure, and it looks like there will be plenty of big body type receivers in this next class that would be a nice compliment to Hilton

You’re absolutely right...and it would never enter my mind to go into the first round thinking anything but BPA despite the way I titled the thread.  

 

The more we win, the less likely BPA will be a disruptive interior DT...which increases the likelihood that value could come to our draft board at other positions of need...including WR where we clearly need to develop an outside threat.

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Drafting a WR at #29 was a good idea? I disagree. Maybe if they drafted Lockett. But look at that draft class...it was a poor decision. It was a weak WR draft group (except for Cooper, White and Parker...who were all gone at that point)...but somehow the #1 S and every ILB were all available...both big long-term needs at the time.

 

The play was to draft defense and then grab Lockett later...if a speedy WR was the goal. The affinity for crappy Florida college players was a strange part of the Grigs regime.

 

Not to mention passing on Collins indirectly led to the awful Green pick...and passing on Kendricks indirectly led to the awful Morrison pick.

 

But Grigs (and Pagano) were just awful at talent evalution when it came to the draft. What's funny is if you make a couple of reasonable changes to a couple of picks (like the two above)...the dominoes could have fallen so much better. Another couple of examples would be Xavier Rhodes/Deandre Hopkins over Werner in 2013. Rhodes negates the need to pick D'Joun Smith....and Hopkins negates the need to pick Moncrief and (especially) Dorsett. 

 

Yes...it's a bit of hindsight...but those examples were the most popular mock AND fan picks at the time. I stand by my contention that the Colts would have drafted better if they crowd-sourced the early picks during the Grigs era.

I don't want to get into the history of alternative decisions, with MANY advocating picking DT Brown during that time also.  I only saw a few comments about Kendrick and Collins at the time, without benefit of hindsight.

 

My overall point is that the OP is making a case for a first round pick THIS YEAR when we have needed an upgrade to the #2 spot since Wayne went down with his knee injury; Hicks, DHB, and AJ being stop gaps, when that offense needed more than that.  I thought then that the strategy of picking a WR at 29 was a good move, assuming the guy actually picked had #29 valued ability. (I'm not a scout.)

 

I have wanted a guy with route precision and wiggle over the tough-guy contested catch type, (Hicks, AJ, and to some extent Ebron), and we've never gone in that direction.  Even more so now considering the new  offense.

[stitches]

42 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm kind of starting to devalue receiver in the draft. Not starting... I've been thinking about this for a few years now. 

 

I think a lot of "first round" receivers in the last few years have been overvalued and overhyped. Lots of busts and under-performers at that position, and I think first round receivers are running something like a 40% success rate over the last few years. Many of these are H/W/S guys who don't convert to NFL producers, but the main things draftniks and fans go gaga over at WR are H/W/S. This is why Stephen Hill was a second rounder once upon a time, despite basically zero college production.

 

Also, while I'd love to have a red zone monster / possession guy like Davante Adams or DeAndre Hopkins, I've become more partial to technically sound receivers who catch the ball reliably, who are quick rather than track fast, and who can pick up yards after the catch. And we have a ton of those guys coming outside of the first round, having more success than the H/W/S hype guys -- Thielen, M. Thomas, JuJu, Lockett, Landry, etc. Even Hopkins was a late first, and Adams was a second. So I'm cooling on hyped first round receivers, particularly toward the top of the first round.

 

I can't remember the last time I really felt great about a first round WR prospect -- maybe Amari Cooper (I liked Corey Coleman, don't know if I felt great about him). But I loved Tyler Lockett, Christian Kirk, etc. 

 

I think you can get H/W/S monsters with potential in mid to late rounds. Guys who are ready to produce on Day 1 are typically the more refined guys, not the athletic freaks. And the more refined guys are usually there are Day 2. 

 

So, while a well rounded offense definitely needs good WRs with varied traits and abilities, I don't really like the value or the history of success with first round WRs. I'd have to think a guy has not only the physical traits to be a monster but also the skill, refinement and production to be ready to play right away, to really be all-in on a first round WR. And if I felt nearly as good as some Day 2 prospects, my board might still be weighted away from the WR group.

One of the reasons I've started becoming more open for a first round WR is the fact that as we keep winning the pick becomes more and more likely to be around the 20s(thus not premier pick) and this is the range I think those receivers have better value. I don't know how much you've watched from the receivers in this particular draft, but IMO there are some very interesting prospects in variety of types. There are burners and playmakers, there are red zone threats. there are some athletic freaks that need refinement... I like this WR class especially in the late first - second round-third rounds... 

 

Also... I have to agree and I've been thinking the same thing about the receivers that can get you yards after the catch. I even posted a similar post in the draft sub-forum - the more I watch how this game and league is going, the more I feel like the players that separate horizontally(on the ground) and can make plays after the catch are better investment than the big receivers that win in the air(although, JJ Arcega Whiteside is a favorite of mine, I would love to hear what you think about him, because he has a weird playstyle and he seems unstoppable in the redzone, especially on jumpballs, but I don't know how translatable that is to the NFL). 

 

My newest favorites in this draft are Marquise Brown(looks like Tyreek Hill type) and Deebo Samuel(again smallish but well built receiver(looks like a RB) who separates and can run after the catch). 

 

I am not going to lock myself to a policy of draft or don't draft receiver in the first round or in the top 10 or wherever because I continue to think that if you trust your evaluation and if your evaluation tells you that the guy will be special(and is BPA) you have to take him even early in the 1st.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

But a 1st rounder for a WR makes much less sense now than it did a few years ago.  Scheme and pattern variety helps the receivers, like Ebron, to get separation and do better than their talent would suggest.

 

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

"Talent helps receivers, like Ebron, get open rather than scheme and pattern variety enhancing their ability."

 

I'm not opining on his level of talent, or if he gets open more than others.  I'm opining on the impact the scheme has on receivers, and I'm saying Ebron saying is a receiver. 

 

I didn't say, "talented receivers like Ebron".  There's a difference.

 

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

I contend that the old scheme required more talent.  With that thought, Ebron would be much better at Fleener's job than Fleener. (and Fleener was a receiver, not really a TE, that was DA)

 

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

I brought up Ebron in this thread because its obvious that he goes into pattern a lot and he's being treated almost as WR#2, even though he lines up differently than a traditional receiver.

 

If you're confident that defenses won't eventually counter Ebron, we don't need a highly talented true #2 WR.  If they do eventually get to him, then the need for a different #2 goes up, IMO.

 

If we drafted a WR with the first round, will he be getting the ball so much that it would take opportunities  away from Ebron?

 

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I have wanted a guy with route precision and wiggle over the tough-guy contested catch type, (Hicks, AJ, and to some extent Ebron), and we've never gone in that direction. 

 

Dear God...    You just cannot help yourself can you?

   

I think you have an Ebron problem.  The first step is to admit that you have a problem.  Seek help. 

[DougDew]

Just now, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

 

 

 

 

Dear God...    You just cannot help yourself can you?

   

I think you have an Ebron problem.  The first step is to admit that you have a problem.  Seek help. 

No problem.  We're talking about devoting a 1st round pick to fill the #2 receiving spot when that role is being filled already to a large degree.

 

Talking about Ebron and the level of talent needed in this offense to fill that role is a legitimate part of the discussion.

 

Thanks for putting together that collage of posts for me.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Talking about Ebron and the level of talent needed in this offense to fill that role is a legitimate part of the discussion.

 

I believe what we have here is a deep-seeded problem with Ballard that is manifesting itself as a chronic Ebron problem.

 

 

Would you be willing to enter a treatment facility for a time so that we can get to the bottom of this and try to heal?

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I believe what we have here is a deep-seeded problem with Ballard that is manifesting itself as a chronic Ebron problem.

 

 

Would you be willing to enter a treatment facility for a time so that we can get to the bottom of this and try to heal?

I have no problem with Ballard at all. 

 

Unless not having unconditional biased loved from day 1 is considered a problem.  I think it is for some.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

Inman is perfectly serviceable. He's nothing special, though. Which is good for an off the street FA. But IMO this team needs playmakers. We can do fine with this bad WR core... Luck elevates the receiving talent simply because he always finds the mismatches and rarely misses throws within the structure of the offense and is accurate. As you can see our offense is still top 10 or thereabout but almost all of it is thanks to Luck(and the newfound OL)... but IMO this is still not enough and it can still be much better. Being just fine is not good enough at the highest levels(where we should be striving for), especially when we already have one of the best QBs. We can be in contention for no. 1 offense in the league if we had offensive weapons that can not only catch the passes from Luck(something this receiving core has had troubles with at times), but also make some plays after the catch.  We are dead last in the NFL for yards after the catch. DEAD LAST! With Luck at QB and this OLine protecting him. We just have close to zero offensive playmaking. Even Hilton is not a typical after the catch weapon because he makes business decisions when defenders get close to him(I do NOT blame him for it because of his frame and I would prefer him to stay healthy and have this type of production to getting injured trying to avoid some tackle from a safety 50 pounds heavier than him).  

 

I agree 100%.

 

"Good enough" shouldn't be enough...when it comes to the offense. Especially not in the current NFL...and not when you have Luck playing like he is...and as good as he is. Not to mention having a dominant OL. What is the point of having an elite QB and an elite OL then? I think an an elite offense is within grasp...certainly much closer than a top defense. So it would be misguided to not add a couple of playmakers and take full advantage.

[Superman]

34 minutes ago, stitches said:

One of the reasons I've started becoming more open for a first round WR is the fact that as we keep winning the pick becomes more and more likely to be around the 20s(thus not premier pick) and this is the range I think those receivers have better value. I don't know how much you've watched from the receivers in this particular draft, but IMO there are some very interesting prospects in variety of types. There are burners and playmakers, there are red zone threats. there are some athletic freaks that need refinement... I like this WR class especially in the late first - second round-third rounds... 

 

Also... I have to agree and I've been thinking the same thing about the receivers that can get you yards after the catch. I even posted a similar post in the draft sub-forum - the more I watch how this game and league is going, the more I feel like the players that separate horizontally(on the ground) and can make plays after the catch are better investment than the big receivers that win in the air(although, JJ Arcega Whiteside is a favorite of mine, I would love to hear what you think about him, because he has a weird playstyle and he seems unstoppable in the redzone, especially on jumpballs, but I don't know how translatable that is to the NFL). 

 

My newest favorites in this draft are Marquise Brown(looks like Tyreek Hill type) and Deebo Samuel(again smallish but well built receiver(looks like a RB) who separates and can run after the catch). 

 

I am not going to lock myself to a policy of draft or don't draft receiver in the first round or in the top 10 or wherever because I continue to think that if you trust your evaluation and if your evaluation tells you that the guy will be special(and is BPA) you have to take him even early in the 1st.

 

I agree, the value changes toward the end of the first round, but then you're maybe looking at guys that aren't significantly better prospects than the Day 2 guys. I'm definitely not completely against a WR in the first, if I think he has the right combo of traits, skill and production, but my value on receivers has cooled over time. 

 

I haven't specifically watched anyone yet. I've seen Arcega-Whiteside play, and I don't know how much I like him. I get a Mike Williams (USC, 2005) kind of feel from him. 

 

Like you said, I'm more interested in the guys who get separation horizontally than the guys who can stretch the field deep. Those are the guys who get the ball on money downs, who can catch the ball short and still convert on 3rd and 8, who will make a defender miss, etc. And the best part is that they get open quickly, not on long-developing plays.

[shasta519]

53 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't want to get into the history of alternative decisions, with MANY advocating picking DT Brown during that time also.  I only saw a few comments about Kendrick and Collins at the time, without benefit of hindsight.

 

My overall point is that the OP is making a case for a first round pick THIS YEAR when we have needed an upgrade to the #2 spot since Wayne went down with his knee injury; Hicks, DHB, and AJ being stop gaps, when that offense needed more than that.  I thought then that the strategy of picking a WR at 29 was a good move, assuming the guy actually picked had #29 valued ability. (I'm not a scout.)

 

I have wanted a guy with route precision and wiggle over the tough-guy contested catch type, (Hicks, AJ, and to some extent Ebron), and we've never gone in that direction.  Even more so now considering the new  offense.

 

Gotcha. I agree hypothetically with taking a WR there...just not circumstantially in that case. As it pertains to next draft...I would be for it if WR is a legit BPA and a potentially special player.  

 

Ideally though, that WR is available with one of those 2nd round picks. Day Two is the sweet spot for me...and it allows the Colts to take a stud DL player in the 1st round. But the draft seldom works out like we think...unless the Colts are targeting a very specific position early, like G or C.

 

It's funny...Irsay's comments about Star Wars numbers aged very poorly...because that is now what is required. A good defense is important as well...because it can help manage the margin for error...but the Colts are in a position where they could (and should) take the offense to another level by investing a bit more. 

[DougDew]

15 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Gotcha. I agree hypothetically with taking a WR there...just not circumstantially in that case. As it pertains to next draft...I would be for it if WR is a legit BPA and a potentially special player.  

 

Ideally though, that WR is available with one of those 2nd round picks. Day Two is the sweet spot for me...and it allows the Colts to take a stud DL player in the 1st round. But the draft seldom works out like we think...unless the Colts are targeting a very specific position early, like G or C.

 

It's funny...Irsay's comments about Star Wars numbers aged very poorly...because that is now what is required. A good defense is important as well...because it can help manage the margin for error...but the Colts are in a position where they could (and should) take the offense to another level by investing a bit more. 

Yeah, I think second round is/was the spot for the WR we need (if talent equals round).   I think Cain and the others probably have enough holes in their talent to not be the reliable guy we want there.  I think 3rd round is okay too as long as Ebron keeps it up.

 

I wanted Christian Kirk with our 49th pick last year but Zona took him right before us at 47, so I was a bit disappointed we settled for Turay and then also got Lewis in the mid second, (in my mind it was a settle)

[stitches]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I agree, the value changes toward the end of the first round, but then you're maybe looking at guys that aren't significantly better prospects than the Day 2 guys. I'm definitely not completely against a WR in the first, if I think he has the right combo of traits, skill and production, but my value on receivers has cooled over time. 

 

I haven't specifically watched anyone yet. I've seen Arcega-Whiteside play, and I don't know how much I like him. I get a Mike Williams (USC, 2005) kind of feel from him. 

 

Like you said, I'm more interested in the guys who get separation horizontally than the guys who can stretch the field deep. Those are the guys who get the ball on money downs, who can catch the ball short and still convert on 3rd and 8, who will make a defender miss, etc. And the best part is that they get open quickly, not on long-developing plays.

@MikeCurtis on the draft board posted about Parris Campbell from Ohio State. He's a bit of a YAC receiver but he lines up almost exclusively in the slot and thus I don't know how to value him. Would you draft such a receiver no matter how talented he is early? 1st or 2nd round? He seems very good at what he does - slants, crossing routes, abusing natural picks created from bunched up formations close to the box. They use him on jet sweeps and on screen plays so it looks like his coaches believe in his ability to create with ball in his hands and he seems shifty and explosive with ball in his hands... but he pretty much never lines up outside... How high do you draft this type of player? 

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, stitches said:

@MikeCurtis on the draft board posted about Parris Campbell from Ohio State. He's a bit of a YAC receiver but he lines up almost exclusively in the slot and thus I don't know how to value him. Would you draft such a receiver no matter how talented he is early? 1st or 2nd round? He seems very good at what he does - slants, crossing routes, abusing natural picks created from bunched up formations close to the box. They use him on jet sweeps and on screen plays so it looks like his coaches believe in his ability to create with ball in his hands and he seems shifty and explosive with ball in his hands... but he pretty much never lines up outside... How high do you draft this type of player? 

 

I'll have to watch him closely, but I don't feel like there's any reason he can't play on the outside. I've started to feel like B1G teams are using their best receivers in the slot more because they can better take advantage of less talented defensive personnel, and make life easier on their less talented passers. Are there any B1G QBs who can deliver the ball upfield and outside the numbers right now?

 

If he has the balance, route-running ability (probably doesn't run a full route tree right now), hands, body control, change of direction, speed and ball tracking to play outside, I wouldn't pigeon-hole him as a slot receiver.

 

If a player is primarily a slot prospect, then I'd downgrade him. I think getting production out of a slot receiver doesn't require a Day 1 prospect. I would want a relatively highly drafted WR to be able to play inside and out. The slot guy is also going to compete with my varied TEs and backs for short/intermediate opportunities. I loved Christian Kirk, but never would have drafted him in the first round.

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 I think Cain and the others probably have enough holes in their talent to not be the reliable guy we want there. 

 

What holes does Cain have?

 

I'm pretty sure the only reason he dropped was attitude concerns, and the only concern I have with him on the field is his ability to come back from injury. I think he's a complete prospect.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I'm kind of starting to devalue receiver in the draft. Not starting... I've been thinking about this for a few years now. 

 

I think a lot of "first round" receivers in the last few years have been overvalued and overhyped. Lots of busts and under-performers at that position, and I think first round receivers are running something like a 40% success rate over the last few years. Many of these are H/W/S guys who don't convert to NFL producers, but the main things draftniks and fans go gaga over at WR are H/W/S. This is why Stephen Hill was a second rounder once upon a time, despite basically zero college production.

 

Also, while I'd love to have a red zone monster / possession guy like Davante Adams or DeAndre Hopkins, I've become more partial to technically sound receivers who catch the ball reliably, who are quick rather than track fast, and who can pick up yards after the catch. And we have a ton of those guys coming outside of the first round, having more success than the H/W/S hype guys -- Thielen, M. Thomas, JuJu, Lockett, Landry, etc. Even Hopkins was a late first, and Adams was a second. So I'm cooling on hyped first round receivers, particularly toward the top of the first round.

 

I can't remember the last time I really felt great about a first round WR prospect -- maybe Amari Cooper (I liked Corey Coleman, don't know if I felt great about him). But I loved Tyler Lockett, Christian Kirk, etc. 

 

I think you can get H/W/S monsters with potential in mid to late rounds. Guys who are ready to produce on Day 1 are typically the more refined guys, not the athletic freaks. And the more refined guys are usually there are Day 2. 

 

So, while a well rounded offense definitely needs good WRs with varied traits and abilities, I don't really like the value or the history of success with first round WRs. I'd have to think a guy has not only the physical traits to be a monster but also the skill, refinement and production to be ready to play right away, to really be all-in on a first round WR. And if I felt nearly as good as some Day 2 prospects, my board might still be weighted away from the WR group.

 

I don't know why the 1st round WR success rate is so low. Seems like many of these guys look like studs against college competition...and have monster junior/senior seasons before hitting the draft. But then something happens when they have to face actual NFL CBs (who are sometimes even more athletic than they are)...and some make it and others don't. It's sort of a crapshoot...unlike any other position.

 

Maybe it's scouting...but the same team that drafted Lockett in the 3rd...also drafted Paul Richardson shortly before three Pro Bowlers in Adams, Robinson and Landry. So who knows.

 

But despite that, I still think a team's best chance at getting a legit one is still "early" in the draft. For me, Day Two is that sweet spot. GB has been very successful at this...and I think the Colts can be as well.

 

 

[stitches]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'll have to watch him closely, but I don't feel like there's any reason he can't play on the outside. I've started to feel like B1G teams are using their best receivers in the slot more because they can better take advantage of less talented defensive personnel, and make life easier on their less talented passers. Are there any B1G QBs who can deliver the ball upfield and outside the numbers right now?

 

If he has the balance, route-running ability (probably doesn't run a full route tree right now), hands, body control, change of direction, speed and ball tracking to play outside, I wouldn't pigeon-hole him as a slot receiver.

 

If a player is primarily a slot prospect, then I'd downgrade him. I think getting production out of a slot receiver doesn't require a Day 1 prospect. I would want a relatively highly drafted WR to be able to play inside and out. The slot guy is also going to compete with my varied TEs and backs for short/intermediate opportunities. I loved Christian Kirk, but never would have drafted him in the first round.

Well his QB is Dwayne Haskins who many believe will be a 1st round QB and he is good at stretching the field. I'm not certain about his outside the numbers ability but his completion % is about 70% so I wouldn't think he has a problem with ball placement outside the numbers. 

 

About Campbell's route tree - yeah, I have seen very limited tree, he runs slants, crossing routes, short posts and that's about it... I don't think I've seen him run a corner route or anything more advanced. 

 

(Disclaimer: keep in mind that I've only seen a couple of games of him, and highlights, but even in the highlights I don't think I've seen anything I didn't see in the game tape I saw)

[lollygagger8]

Defense is a much higher priority than Offense right meow. 

 

 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I don't know why the 1st round WR success rate is so low. Seems like many of these guys look like studs against college competition...and have monster junior/senior seasons before hitting the draft. But then something happens when they have to face actual NFL CBs (who are sometimes even more athletic than they are)...and some make it and others don't. It's sort of a crapshoot...unlike any other position.

 

Maybe it's scouting...but the same team that drafted Lockett in the 3rd...also drafted Paul Richardson shortly before three Pro Bowlers in Adams, Robinson and Landry. So who knows.

 

But despite that, I still think a team's best chance at getting a legit one is still "early" in the draft. For me, Day Two is that sweet spot. GB has been very successful at this...and I think the Colts can be as well.

 

I think the pro passing game has become so much more about timing and separation, so the big jump ball receivers aren't translating as much if they don't have the refinement to fit into a timing based passing offense. (Watch Rodgers' TD throw to Adams from last night. He throws an outside fade while Adams is still running upfield, and Adams has to turn backside, find the ball, and catch it, all while the ball is in the air. It's impossible to defend if the receiver knows what he's doing.)

[Superman]

7 minutes ago, stitches said:

Well his QB is Dwayne Haskins who many believe will be a 1st round QB and he is good at stretching the field. I'm not certain about his outside the numbers ability but his completion % is about 70% so I wouldn't think he has a problem with ball placement outside the numbers. 

 

About Campbell's route tree - yeah, I have seen very limited tree, he runs slants, crossing routes, short posts and that's about it... I don't think I've seen him run a corner route or anything more advanced. 

 

(Disclaimer: keep in mind that I've only seen a couple of games of him, and highlights, but even in the highlights I don't think I've seen anything I didn't see in the game tape I saw)

 

Then maybe it's more about the matchups in this case. But in the little I've seen from Campbell, I think he has the traits needed to play outside. I'd like to see how he tracks the ball, though.

[Defjamz26]

5 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I don't know why the 1st round WR success rate is so low. Seems like many of these guys look like studs against college competition...and have monster junior/senior seasons before hitting the draft. But then something happens when they have to face actual NFL CBs (who are sometimes even more athletic than they are)...and some make it and others don't. It's sort of a crapshoot...unlike any other position.

 

Maybe it's scouting...but the same team that drafted Lockett in the 3rd...also drafted Paul Richardson shortly before three Pro Bowlers in Adams, Robinson and Landry. So who knows.

 

But despite that, I still think a team's best chance at getting a legit one is still "early" in the draft. For me, Day Two is that sweet spot. GB has been very successful at this...and I think the Colts can be as well.

 

 

Most college WRs run limited route trees in college. Bubble screens, go routes, and slants are about the bulk of what they do in spread offenses. The corners are a part of it as well, as most of them don’t face heavy press coverage in college. 

 

Unfortunately, it’s not the job of college coaches to prepare players for the next level. Their job is to take players and coach them up to be able to play in their scheme so they can win football games.

 

With spread offenses, a lot of receivers are schemed to get wide open. It’s tougher to get open in the NFL....unless you’re playing the Colts soft zone coverage.

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

Then maybe it's more about the matchups in this case. But in the little I've seen from Campbell, I think he has the traits needed to play outside. I'd like to see how he tracks the ball, though.

Yeah, that's one thing I want to see too... that and how he beats press man... can he beat his man jamming him at the LOS one on one, because I haven't really seen that. 

[Matthew Gilbert]

7 minutes ago, stitches said:

About Campbell's route tree - yeah, I have seen very limited tree, he runs slants, crossing routes, short posts and that's about it... I don't think I've seen him run a corner route or anything more advanced. 

At this point Campbell looks like a gadget player to me.  At Ohio St they just try to get the ball in his hands and let him go. One scouting service has him as their #2 WR. I'm just not seeing it. His ceiling is high but he has a ton of work to do. 

[shasta519]

53 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah, I think second round is/was the spot for the WR we need (if talent equals round).   I think Cain and the others probably have enough holes in their talent to not be the reliable guy we want there.  I think 3rd round is okay too as long as Ebron keeps it up.

 

I wanted Christian Kirk with our 49th pick last year but Zona took him right before us at 47, so I was a bit disappointed we settled for Turay and then also got Lewis in the mid second, (in my mind it was a settle)

 

Yeah...Kirk was favorite 2nd rounder this year (Kamara the year before). Guys that create after the catch are so incredibly valuable. They are back breakers for an opposing team...and take so much pressure off a QB...especially one that is coming off shoulder surgery.

 

In hindsight, I wish they would have taken him after Leonard and then let the round play out in regards to Smith and other OL players. OR at least traded up to grab him. But I don't even know if he was on Ballard's radar. Considering he traded back with Anthony Miller available...I am not sure WR was near the top of his list.

 

For next season, I think the plan should be that Cain is battling for the WR3 spot...along with a handful of guys (including a Day Two prospect). There's no way you assume he is going to be the WR2...or even WR3. If it turns out that he is that good...then it's not a bad problem to have (especially with TY being another year older). 

 

For next season, I would sign a vet WR and draft a WR on Day Two. The WR depth chart would be Hilton, vet WR, Rookie/Cain/Fountain/Inman/Rogers/Pascal for the last three spots.

[horseshoecrabs]

Go with Veteran FA if available, With the unknown about Cain, for now maybe in the later rounds draft a wide receiver. But we really should go heavy early for Defense. 

[shasta519]

10 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think the pro passing game has become so much more about timing and separation, so the big jump ball receivers aren't translating as much if they don't have the refinement to fit into a timing based passing offense. (Watch Rodgers' TD throw to Adams from last night. He throws an outside fade while Adams is still running upfield, and Adams has to turn backside, find the ball, and catch it, all while the ball is in the air. It's impossible to defend if the receiver knows what he's doing.)

 

Yeah...Rodgers also missed Adams on at least one TD last night as well. Adams is an interesting case...because he actually took a couple years to develop. I think a big part of why he was able to develop into a top 10 WR was working with a QB like Rodgers. If Adams was playing in BAl, for example, it probably doesn't happen for him (as we saw with Torrey Smith, Perriman and some of the TEs they have drafted).

 

The Colts have a QB like this in Luck. So for me, it's even more of a reason to not hesistate pulling the trigger on a WR. We have seen what Luck can do with average WRs...so imagine what he can do with legit talents (like he did with Hilton).

[stitches]

@Superman Here's a snap of him on a go route where he tracks the ball over his shoulder(go to about 1:10)