Outlook of our 2019 Offseason

[Scott Pennock]

I know we're knee deep in the playoffs right now, but, this probably the prime opportunity for this convo!

 

Just as we fans are watching this team grow up all season, soon to be free agents (both in 19 and 20) are watching too!

 

Don't think for one second if they get a call from West 56th Street they won't be intrigued with the opportunity to join this squad either as the missing piece or a sustaining piece.

 

Regardless of the outcome this weekend, this season has been a blast and this coming draft and free agency will be fun to see what Ballard/Dodds/Hogan have up thier sleeve(s)!

 

I think the "core" is in place, the locker room has it's leaders and they can afford (financially as well) to be picky who they choose to add.

 

I will make a few predictions of course.....of our own unrestricted free agents I think they re-sign:

 

Inman

Glowinski

Rogers

 

Geathers

Desir

Hunt

 

As far as the draft and Free Agency, I look forward to sitting back and seeing what happens!

[bsteves]

I'm placing blame on this thread if we lose this weekend.

[Fluke_33]

I think if we can get past the Chiefs this weekend, the Super Bowl is a real possibility in 2019. 

[Tsarquise]

Why would it be the prime opportunity for this thread? 

[Fat Clemenza]

Sorry-right now the only Colts activities that can fit in my mind beyond the Kansas City game, is who we put on Edelman if we play in Foxboro if we go man in short yardage. 

 

As an aside, the mighty Chiefs are 2-4 this year against playoff teams...

[Scott Pennock]

This thread will cost us a loss? Really? Not the one bashing on the Chiefs or the one giving 101 reasons why we should win?

 

Grow up folks.

 

Yes this is the prime time for this type of thread BECAUSE free agents are just as interested as we are of the proceedings!

[CR91]

4 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

This thread will cost us a loss? Really? Not the one bashing on the Chiefs or the one giving 101 reasons why we should win?

 

Grow up folks.

 

Yes this is the prime time for this type of thread BECAUSE free agents are just as interested as we are of the proceedings!

 

Pretty sure it was a joke

[Fat Clemenza]

10 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

This thread will cost us a loss? Really? Not the one bashing on the Chiefs or the one giving 101 reasons why we should win?

 

Grow up folks.

 

Yes this is the prime time for this type of thread BECAUSE free agents are just as interested as we are of the proceedings!

 

I just have limited brain space available to spend on the Colts at any one time and right now it's consumed w playoff football.  I thonk a lot of folks are maybe thinking similar things..? Plus superstition can be as big a part of fandom as analysis! 

 

Scott Pennock, you are defimtely one of my favorite posters and thread starters, sorry if I came across snarky- I'm looking forward to thinking about personnel specifics after we're done watching what this group does in the playoffs!

[MikeCurtis]

12 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I know we're knee deep in the playoffs right now, but, this probably the prime opportunity for this convo!

 

Just as we fans are watching this team grow up all season, soon to be free agents (both in 19 and 20) are watching too!

 

Don't think for one second if they get a call from West 56th Street they won't be intrigued with the opportunity to join this squad either as the missing piece or a sustaining piece.

 

Regardless of the outcome this weekend, this season has been a blast and this coming draft and free agency will be fun to see what Ballard/Dodds/Hogan have up thier sleeve(s)!

 

I think the "core" is in place, the locker room has it's leaders and they can afford (financially as well) to be picky who they choose to add.

 

I will make a few predictions of course.....of our own unrestricted free agents I think they re-sign:

 

Inman

Glowinski

Rogers

 

Geathers

Desir

Hunt

 

As far as the draft and Free Agency, I look forward to sitting back and seeing what happens!

I think in the offseason, we will see 3-4 new starters brought in via draft and FA

 

What will be key is the added depth that we should get from this next draft

 

When one of our starters get hurt (It happens) we have a deep hole that the 2nd string guy isnt able to fill........

 

I truly dont think that we will stay with 9 draft picks this year........  There really isnt 9 roster spots to fill  .......  I believe we may add 1-2 FAs that will take up a roster spots as well

 

Horse trading ahead.

[HOZER]

12 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Why would it be the prime opportunity for this thread? 

More input maybe? A lot of posters disappear in the off-season even during the draft, seems pretty busy around here now that the Colts have been doing great! Either way, regardless of this weekends outcome, it’s nice to have something to look forward and not have that uncertainty that we dealt with the last couple of seasons

[Mel Kiper's Hair]

I would say that going into the 2019 season that the Colts will probably be named the favorites to win the AFC South and as a challenger to win the Conference. So going with that line of thinking I think we will be on the short list of teams with legitimate Super Bowl expectations next season.

[Pelt]

I don't know... I think we really screwed ourselves in draft position by winning that playoff game last week...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(For those imbiciles that don't get sarcasm)

[John Waylon]

12 minutes ago, Pelt said:

 

(For those imbiciles that don't get sarcasm)

 

Just so we’re clear that won’t be enough to connect the dots for some around here. 

[Jdubu]

3 hours ago, MikeCurtis said:

I think in the offseason, we will see 3-4 new starters brought in via draft and FA

 

What will be key is the added depth that we should get from this next draft

 

When one of our starters get hurt (It happens) we have a deep hole that the 2nd string guy isnt able to fill........

 

I truly dont think that we will stay with 9 draft picks this year........  There really isnt 9 roster spots to fill  .......  I believe we may add 1-2 FAs that will take up a roster spots as well

 

Horse trading ahead.

I agree, the team doesn’t really have room for 9 draftees. Just wondering if we bundle some of those picks to move up in the first or bundle to get a second pick in the first round. I’d rather take a shot of a few quality picks than a smorgasbord of late round gambles. One thing we do need based off of this year is a couple improvements at the back up safety spot. We know Geathers, I’d retained, is still likely to be injured at some point. Mitchell was fine the first few games and then he turned into JAG. We need better back ups waiting to take up the role when called. Need that pass rusher from the dline and we could use additional cb’s.

 

Surely we are going to get a big prize from the FA this year, guys do see this team is on a major upward curve and we don’t have an * like Grigson running it nor do we have an old, entrenched, arrogant Polian (he had a rep). We have a young, GM who seems to react well with current generation players and we have most of the pieces in place......and money. We have the ingredients for a FA haven here right now. We aren’t the only team but we have more cap space than all the others. The only thing this team lacks for FA choice is we aren’t close to a coastline and we get cold here. 

[Narcosys]

13 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

This thread will cost us a loss? Really? Not the one bashing on the Chiefs or the one giving 101 reasons why we should win?

 

Grow up folks.

 

Yes this is the prime time for this type of thread BECAUSE free agents are just as interested as we are of the proceedings!

 

[The Peytonator]

2 hours ago, Pelt said:

I don't know... I think we really screwed ourselves in draft position by winning that playoff game last week...

 

For real....think about it, we might end up getting the dreaded 32 draft pick, what good does that do when we already have the Jets’ 34? Freakin bust of a season if I ever saw one. 

[Myles]

16 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

I know we're knee deep in the playoffs right now, but, this probably the prime opportunity for this convo!

 

Just as we fans are watching this team grow up all season, soon to be free agents (both in 19 and 20) are watching too!

 

Don't think for one second if they get a call from West 56th Street they won't be intrigued with the opportunity to join this squad either as the missing piece or a sustaining piece.

 

Regardless of the outcome this weekend, this season has been a blast and this coming draft and free agency will be fun to see what Ballard/Dodds/Hogan have up thier sleeve(s)!

 

I think the "core" is in place, the locker room has it's leaders and they can afford (financially as well) to be picky who they choose to add.

 

I will make a few predictions of course.....of our own unrestricted free agents I think they re-sign:

 

Inman

Glowinski

Rogers

 

Geathers

Desir

Hunt

 

As far as the draft and Free Agency, I look forward to sitting back and seeing what happens!

I think were sign most of our own FA's, pick up 2 quality players on the market and draft well.  

[Pelt]

3 hours ago, John Waylon said:

 

Just so we’re clear that won’t be enough to connect the dots for some around here. 

Sad, yet true...

[Scott Pennock]

1 hour ago, Narcosys said:

 

I have one nerve and one feeling......neither are sensative! Lol

[Coffeedrinker]

16 hours ago, Fat Clemenza said:

As an aside, the mighty Chiefs are 2-4 this year against playoff teams...

And the Colts are 2-3 against playoff teams.  So what?

[Coffeedrinker]

3 hours ago, Pelt said:

I don't know... I think we really screwed ourselves in draft position by winning that playoff game last week...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(For those imbiciles that don't get sarcasm)

You can't build a winning team by winning games.

 

 

At least according to some.

[Myles]

1 hour ago, Coffeedrinker said:

You can't build a winning team by winning games.

 

 

At least according to some.

I don't think anyone feels that way.   Not that I have seen anyway.

There is a kernel of truth to it.   Having a real bad season help you be successful in future years.   Colts fan know this more than any other.   Manning and Luck have been responsible for much of the success we have had.   We don't get either one if we are drafting 15th in those drafts.   Barkley, Mayfield, Chubb, Nelson and and most of the other top 10 picks will be great players for many years.  

Tampa who is sitting in the 5th draft spot with 5 wins.   Would you trade 2 wins for going 7-9 and falling to the 16th spot?    

I don't think players tank.   I don't think most coaches would tank.   I do think some owners/GM's and coaches get together and make decisions with a loss in mind.   Little things like sitting a player who is questionable.   If they really wanted a win maybe they would play him. but since their season is over and they could fall a bit in draft position, it would be best for the team to lose.  

[Coffeedrinker]

26 minutes ago, Myles said:

I don't think anyone feels that way.   Not that I have seen anyway.

There is a kernel of truth to it.   Having a real bad season help you be successful in future years.   Colts fan know this more than any other.   Manning and Luck have been responsible for much of the success we have had.   We don't get either one if we are drafting 15th in those drafts.   Barkley, Mayfield, Chubb, Nelson and and most of the other top 10 picks will be great players for many years.  

Tampa who is sitting in the 5th draft spot with 5 wins.   Would you trade 2 wins for going 7-9 and falling to the 16th spot?    

I don't think players tank.   I don't think most coaches would tank.   I do think some owners/GM's and coaches get together and make decisions with a loss in mind.   Little things like sitting a player who is questionable.   If they really wanted a win maybe they would play him. but since their season is over and they could fall a bit in draft position, it would be best for the team to lose.  

It seems you are contradicting yourself here.

 

I'm not going to get into the tanking good or bad debate because the people that think having a higher draft position is the way to build a winning franchise are not going to change their minds.  I will just say, you don't build a winning culture by losing games, no matter how they are lost.

[Myles]

5 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

It seems you are contradicting yourself here.

 

I'm not going to get into the tanking good or bad debate because the people that think having a higher draft position is the way to build a winning franchise are not going to change their minds.  I will just say, you don't build a winning culture by losing games, no matter how they are lost.

Not contradicting myself at all.   Just stating that there are different ways to accomplish the same goal.  

I am certainly glad that the Colts went 2-14 in 2011.   Had the Colts won 2 of those many close games that season, they would have been drafting 5th or 6th.   So by losing those games, we are now building a winning culture.   The next 2 QB's drafted after that 5th and 6th spot were Tannehill and Weedon.   Not much chance of a winning culture with them.  

 

I don't think tanking happens much.  I don't think any players tank.   I do think a loss and the #1 pick in the draft is more valuable than a win and the 4th pick in the draft.  

[DougDew]

Here's what some don't get.  You don't draft depth.  You improve depth by improving your starters, thereby pushing the former starter onto the bench, and the former bench guy elsewhere (like Vujnovich). 

 

We don't need more late 3rd, late 4th, late 5th round draft picks because they won't be good enough to replace the other guys we just drafted in round 4 5 and 6.  They definitely won't be able to replace the starters.

 

This team needs a marquis player on the DL, (or two), a marquis player in the Dbackfield (not confident Hooker will get there). and the reliable WR compliment TY has never had since Reggie's injury.

 

All three (or four) of those players will be gone by pick 50.  We have 2 picks in the top 50.  Using our late positioned picks to move up into the bottom of round 1 (if needed) or the top of round 2 seems like the right strategy this year.  Especially since we are drafting late in each round, and don't have a high 1st rounder to trade down.

[Myles]

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Here's what some don't get.  You don't draft depth.  You improve depth by improving your starters, thereby pushing the former starter onto the bench, and the former bench guy elsewhere (like Vujnovich). 

 

 

I agree but would say a little of both.   I think it is a good idea to draft depth if you have them involved in your succession plan.  I don't think Ballard drafted Smith to be a starter this year.   Just added depth with the plan of him moving into a starter role in the next year or 2.  

[Superman]

4 hours ago, Jdubu said:

I agree, the team doesn’t really have room for 9 draftees.

 

Sure it does.

 

Here are pending free agents presently on the active roster that shouldn't be back:

Grant, Goode, Milton.

 

Here are players that will be on the roster bubble as soon as the 2019 league year begins: Clark, Andrews, Franklin, Grissom, Haeg, Hairston, Milligan, Odum, Rogers, Williams.

 

Here are veteran free agents over 30: AV, Slauson, Hunt, Woods, Mitchell, Inman, Webb, Wilcox.

 

That's 21 guys right now. Four are on IR, so 17 spots that might be open. There are returnees from IR, but we'll lose others to IR. There's a lot of time between April and September.

 

We might not have nine drafted rookies on the active roster in Week 1, but there's room for them, between IR and practice squad. 

 

I could see Ballard consolidating down to six or seven picks, but the roster isn't so stocked that we can't make room for nine picks. 

[Superman]

26 minutes ago, Myles said:

by losing those games, we are now building a winning culture.

 

That's a greater stretch than I can sign on to.

 

By losing those games, we had a higher draft pick. The player we drafted was instrumental to building a winning culture, but that was not the only way to build a winning culture.

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree but would say a little of both.   I think it is a good idea to draft depth if you have them involved in your succession plan.  I don't think Ballard drafted Smith to be a starter this year.   Just added depth with the plan of him moving into a starter role in the next year or 2.  

Just my philosophy here:

 

The o line is the perfect example.  We improved our Oline starter quality AND its depth by pick 6 Nelson and pick 37 Smith.  That relegated Haeg to the bench and Vuj gone.  We didn't improve the oline depth by picking a guy with a late 4th.

 

The same thing can happen with the dline, and the back field where Moore can be your 3rd or 4th guy if he's replaced by a legit starter.  And WR corps, if we get that #2, Inman looks like a solid #3 or 4.   Maybe 5th round pick Cain if not Inman.  We won't find the #2 WR that's any better than what we have beyond pick 50, IMO

  

How should we improve the RB depth through the draft?  Take one in the late 3rd round?  How much better will that guy be than Hines, Mack, or Wilkins?

 

We can also sign mid level free agents.  Vet guys that can fill in once in a while.

 

We don't need picks from the late 2nd back.  We need more before pick 50, and have needed more for a few years.

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's a greater stretch than I can sign on to.

 

By losing those games, we had a higher draft pick. The player we drafted was instrumental to building a winning culture, but that was not the only way to build a winning culture.

So we are in agreement that there is more than one way to build the winning culture.  

I think #1 is building a team that can win.  Through the draft and through free agency.   Not solely one or the other.   Ballard seems to have a good balance of both.   But I cannot deny that if we were not in position to draft Luck, the ceiling would not be as high.   We could still be good though. 

[shasta519]

37 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Here's what some don't get.  You don't draft depth.  You improve depth by improving your starters, thereby pushing the former starter onto the bench, and the former bench guy elsewhere (like Vujnovich). 

 

We don't need more late 3rd, late 4th, late 5th round draft picks because they won't be good enough to replace the other guys we just drafted in round 4 5 and 6.  They definitely won't be able to replace the starters.

 

This team needs a marquis player on the DL, (or two), a marquis player in the Dbackfield (not confident Hooker will get there). and the reliable WR compliment TY has never had since Reggie's injury.

 

All three (or four) of those players will be gone by pick 50.  We have 2 picks in the top 50.  Using our late positioned picks to move up into the bottom of round 1 (if needed) or the top of round 2 seems like the right strategy this year.  Especially since we are drafting late in each round, and don't have a high 1st rounder to trade down.

 

Ballard will have a lot of flexibility in this draft. 

 

I do agree with upgrading starters to create depth. Colts should be looking to upgrade positions this offseason...not just maintain what they have.

[Superman]

30 minutes ago, Myles said:

So we are in agreement that there is more than one way to build the winning culture.  

I think #1 is building a team that can win.  Through the draft and through free agency.   Not solely one or the other.   Ballard seems to have a good balance of both.   But I cannot deny that if we were not in position to draft Luck, the ceiling would not be as high.   We could still be good though. 

 

In talking about the theory of team building and culture building, yes, there are different steps that can be taken to put together a winning program. I wouldn't say that getting the #1 pick necessarily leads to a winning program, and we have plenty of evidence of that.

 

Specific to the Colts, I think it's a stretch to say that getting the #1 pick was the key in 2012. First, we already had a winning culture, just had one bad season in a decade. Second, we still had Peyton Manning under contract, so while the way things worked out was probably for the best, it's not like we would have had no options otherwise. The Colts also weren't the Browns or the Bills or the Jags, a team that's been stuck at the bottom of the league for a long time.

 

Without going through all the options the Colts might have had, I think we can agree that you don't have to hit bottom to rebuild your program. The Eagles traded up for Wentz, the Seahawks scouted well and coached well (at first) to get Russell Wilson, the Niners acquired Jimmy G (we'll see how that works out, but it looked good last year), etc. And that's just the QB.

 

Big picture, this is why I'm always going to push back against the 'we need to get a high pick' narrative. There is value in having a high pick, but competing and getting better during the season is a different currency. It's easy for Colts fans to say we're glad it worked out this way in 2018, but it's a harder calculation when you go 6-10 and have the 12th pick. But I personally think the struggle has value, and can be a stepping stone to sustained contention. 

[Myles]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

In talking about the theory of team building and culture building, yes, there are different steps that can be taken to put together a winning program. I wouldn't say that getting the #1 pick necessarily leads to a winning program, and we have plenty of evidence of that.

 

Specific to the Colts, I think it's a stretch to say that getting the #1 pick was the key in 2012. First, we already had a winning culture, just had one bad season in a decade. Second, we still had Peyton Manning under contract, so while the way things worked out was probably for the best, it's not like we would have had no options otherwise. The Colts also weren't the Browns or the Bills or the Jags, a team that's been stuck at the bottom of the league for a long time.

 

Without going through all the options the Colts might have had, I think we can agree that you don't have to hit bottom to rebuild your program. The Eagles traded up for Wentz, the Seahawks scouted well and coached well (at first) to get Russell Wilson, the Niners acquired Jimmy G (we'll see how that works out, but it looked good last year), etc. And that's just the QB.

 

Big picture, this is why I'm always going to push back against the 'we need to get a high pick' narrative. There is value in having a high pick, but competing and getting better during the season is a different currency. It's easy for Colts fans to say we're glad it worked out this way in 2018, but it's a harder calculation when you go 6-10 and have the 12th pick. But I personally think the struggle has value, and can be a stepping stone to sustained contention. 

I don't think we are going to change each others minds.   Nothing is without exceptions, but what we do know, as fact, is that the better your draft position, the better your chances of getting a great player.  If we drafted #2 in 1998, we probably got Leaf.   The media folks were trying to make the Manning/Leaf decision seem like a tough one, but most football folks I talked to said Manning was the better option.  

Having a great draft spot does not guarantee success, but it certainly helps.   It has certainly helped the Colts.    Minus Manning and Lucks injury, we've had 20 years of great QB play.   Maybe we could have been decent with Leaf and Tannehill, but I'm glad it didn't go that way.  

 

 

I do think a loss and the #1 pick in the draft is more valuable than a win and the 4th pick in the draft.  

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

I do think a loss and the #1 pick in the draft is more valuable than a win and the 4th pick in the draft.  

 

If it's a zero sum game between those two choices, I get it. Either you're 2-14 with the #1 pick, or you're 3-13 with the #4 pick.

 

I think the argument is about the team's focus and competitiveness throughout the season, not just in Week 17. In other words, do you start shutting down the season in Week 7 because you're 1-5?

 

My point about 2012 is if we wind up not picking #1, it doesn't mean we wouldn't have been able to build a good roster. And that's usually the case. Building a roster and a culture isn't about one decision or one player. Even if we took Leaf in 1998, that decision wouldn't have had to define the organization. The Browns aren't bad because they drafted Tim Couch; they're bad because they've made bad decisions one after the other for the last 20 years. The Chargers took Leaf, and three years later got Drew Brees, and three years later got Philip Rivers.

 

I'm just saying, in theory, building your culture isn't about picking higher in the draft. It helps, but there's also value in competing.

 

And you're probably right, we've all thought about it extensively and have feelings on the matter, and probably won't change our minds. I'm just talking about the way that we frame these discussions, particularly the other side of the discussion.

[Myles]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

If it's a zero sum game between those two choices, I get it. Either you're 2-14 with the #1 pick, or you're 3-13 with the #4 pick.

 

I think the argument is about the team's focus and competitiveness throughout the season, not just in Week 17. In other words, do you start shutting down the season in Week 7 because you're 1-5?

 

My point about 2012 is if we wind up not picking #1, it doesn't mean we wouldn't have been able to build a good roster. And that's usually the case. Building a roster and a culture isn't about one decision or one player. Even if we took Leaf in 1998, that decision wouldn't have had to define the organization. The Browns aren't bad because they drafted Tim Couch; they're bad because they've made bad decisions one after the other for the last 20 years. The Chargers took Leaf, and three years later got Drew Brees, and three years later got Philip Rivers.

 

I'm just saying, in theory, building your culture isn't about picking higher in the draft. It helps, but there's also value in competing.

 

And you're probably right, we've all thought about it extensively and have feelings on the matter, and probably won't change our minds. I'm just talking about the way that we frame these discussions, particularly the other side of the discussion.

Oh I don't think you tank in any way until very late in the season.  

I'm just a believer in better draft position.  The few times I can think of the Colts having top 3 draft pick we got Manning, Luck and Nelson (and the load that came with trading down 3 spots).

[DrLuck]

On 1/8/2019 at 6:26 PM, Fluke_33 said:

I think if we can get past the Chiefs this weekend, the Super Bowl is a real possibility in 2019. 

Absolutely. How insane is that lol.

[stitches]

I think this coming game is extremely important for the evaluation of where our defensive roster is. As I've been harping on for the last month or so, the thing that escapes the attention of the fans in the hype of how good our defense has played is that we have only played a single top 15 offense in the league this whole season. Out of 17 games so far, we've played 16 games against bottom half of the league offenses and the one that was good that we met, put 38 points on our defense(Pats... true, Leonard was missing, but still). 

 

I have the feeling we are still not ready to compete against the best of the best, but the performance of the defense lately has been impressive so... I'm leaving the door slightly open. I think either way... whatever happens this weekend, this game will be very important data point for our front office in evaluating our defensive talent. We just haven't met anything close to the absolutely beastly animal that is this Chiefs offense. Every and any outcome is valuable for determining just how far away we are from being able to hang with the best offenses... are we there yet? Or are we completely overmatched? Or is it somewhere in the middle? We will have better idea after that game. 

[MacDee1975]

On 1/9/2019 at 7:10 AM, MikeCurtis said:

I think in the offseason, we will see 3-4 new starters brought in via draft and FA

 

What will be key is the added depth that we should get from this next draft

 

When one of our starters get hurt (It happens) we have a deep hole that the 2nd string guy isnt able to fill........

 

I truly dont think that we will stay with 9 draft picks this year........  There really isnt 9 roster spots to fill  .......  I believe we may add 1-2 FAs that will take up a roster spots as well

 

Horse trading ahead.

 

Sure we do.  Have you seen how many FA this team has?  Not all of them will be resigned.  Not even most of them will be resigned.

[MacDee1975]

17 hours ago, DougDew said:

Just my philosophy here:

 

The o line is the perfect example.  We improved our Oline starter quality AND its depth by pick 6 Nelson and pick 37 Smith.  That relegated Haeg to the bench and Vuj gone.  We didn't improve the oline depth by picking a guy with a late 4th.

 

The same thing can happen with the dline, and the back field where Moore can be your 3rd or 4th guy if he's replaced by a legit starter.  And WR corps, if we get that #2, Inman looks like a solid #3 or 4.   Maybe 5th round pick Cain if not Inman.  We won't find the #2 WR that's any better than what we have beyond pick 50, IMO

  

How should we improve the RB depth through the draft?  Take one in the late 3rd round?  How much better will that guy be than Hines, Mack, or Wilkins?

 

We can also sign mid level free agents.  Vet guys that can fill in once in a while.

 

We don't need picks from the late 2nd back.  We need more before pick 50, and have needed more for a few years.

 

I don't understand.  If we pick a OL in the 4th this draft who is better than Haeg, then we've improved our depth.

[MikeCurtis]

9 minutes ago, MacDee1975 said:

 

Sure we do.  Have you seen how many FA this team has?  Not all of them will be resigned.  Not even most of them will be resigned.

This team has 11 rookies on the current roster 

 

There should be 7-8 of these 11 retained

 

The current roster is better than last years

 

I just dont see us keeping 9 new rookies.

 

I can see 5 or 6 making this roster

 

In my way of thinking, why not get earlier picks, where you can?

 

If your BPA is close, but someone may grab them, why not try to move up (if it doesnt cost you too much)

 

This front office has shown it will trade on draft day....... I expect them to take that approach this draft as well