I owe Quentin Nelson an apology

[Matthew Gilbert]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

Fleener and Allen were good for us, Hilton still is, Ballard was good and got hurt, and even 6th rounder LaVon Brazill caught a game winner for us.

I think Luck makes every skill position player he plays with better. It's one of the biggest reasons that I don't have a problem with the Colts not selecting RBs and WRs in the first couple rounds of drafts lately. 

[shasta519]

49 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

McGlinchey went at #9, so that would have been tough, but James went at #17 (and I thought he was a top ten guy). I think Buffalo said they weren't giving up both firsts in one deal, but they did give up #53 and #56 to come up to #7 for Josh Allen.

 

That would have been insane for the Colts -- #12 (James), #36, #37, #52, #53, #56, plus #36 (I think?) in 2019? Phew.

 

But probably no Nelson. Tampa most likely takes him at #7 if we trade back.

 

Could have traded up for McGlinchey with one of those extra 2nd rounders. Or perhaps even Nelson if TB passed. Doubt he makes it past CHI or TB though...but you never know.

 

Lots of very good scenarios could have played out...which is why I would have easily made the trade...and taken the risk

 

Colts move back to #12...with Allen, Rosen, Nelson, Smith, McGlinchey, James, Edmunds, Fitzpatrick and LVE all still on the board...all great prospects (even moreso now). You know Allen and (likely) Rosen are both going in the #6-11 range...so that leaves (at most) five picks and (possibly even) only four pick for those 7 very good prospects...so you are guaranteed one of those guys.

 

Now Ballard probably liked guys more than others...but the value was there in the trade back...even in hindsight. My preference was James and then LVE...but it could have played out in other ways as well.

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

I think Luck makes every skill position player he plays with better.

 

Hakeem Nicks, Andre Johnson, Ryan Grant (and others) did not played better with him; they all played worse.

 

In general, yeah, Luck is good enough to produce without elite skill guys. I wouldn't draft a RB first round regardless, and I want shifty receivers at this point, not the top of the draft wanna-be Calvin Johnsons that seem to bust every year, so I'm fine with later round skill guys also.

[DougDew]

52 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

If the "thought " was to trade down twice and draft  Derwin James was stated at draft time , then it's not "hindsight." If one is looking at the draft now and saying trade down and take James at 12 , that is hindsight ... no ?

At the time, James would have been the pick at 12 if we were going BPA combined with a thought towards need, so I don't see where that would be hindsight at this point to say we would have picked him.

 

Edit: More text deleted

 

[Jay Kirk]

22 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

Jay Kirk in the house!!! What's up boss!? 

Lol loving what I'm seeing Brother , got a full plate at home and work . Not on as much , the Colts are winning the battles in the trenches , refreshing to see.

[Matthew Gilbert]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Hakeem Nicks, Andre Johnson, Ryan Grant (and others) did not played better with him; they all played worse.

Nicks was a shell of his former self post injury and Johnson was certainly on the downside of his career. I can't make any excuses for Grant though. That one is a mystery to me. I thought he had a chance to really flourish with Luck. 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

Nicks was a shell of his former self post injury and Johnson was certainly on the downside of his career. I can't make any excuses for Grant though. That one is a mystery to me. I thought he had a chance to really flourish with Luck. 

 

Ehh... Nicks injury was in 2012, and while he was never the same after, he still had a productive 2013, 16 yards/catch, almost 900 yards, on a bad offense. Then he got to Indy and his production basically cut in half. 

 

Johnson was done, definitely. Grant fell off a cliff, though.

[Matthew Gilbert]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

Ehh... Nicks injury was in 2012, and while he was never the same after, he still had a productive 2013, 16 yards/catch, almost 900 yards, on a bad offense.

Zero touchdowns in 2013 but I'll agree that 56 rec and 896 yards is productive atleast. Not really trying to give you a hard time here. I've agreed with most of your comments in this thread.

[Superman]

47 minutes ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

Zero touchdowns in 2013 but I'll agree that 56 rec and 896 yards is productive atleast. Not really trying to give you a hard time here. I've agreed with most of your comments in this thread.

 

Yeah, same. I'm just saying we can't throw weak skill guys out there and expect Luck to turn them into big producers. I still want good receivers and backs. But like you, I don't think we should spend premium picks for them.

[Surge89]

8 hours ago, shastamasta said:

Regarding Leonard, I think he was available because of the ILB depth more than anything. FCS players don't get drafted in the 1st round over similar guys from bigger schools. Maybe that will change in the future...but I think Leonard is the highest-drafted FCS player in a very long time. Ballard taking him where he did was even surprising to many (given that context).

 

Good post.  I disagree with this part but only because I have a personal opinion on it and I'm pretty sure regardless you are correct that GMs do have bias according to school/conference. 

 

I just don't see players that way.  Number one, most of the time you don't get players drafted from the FCS because simply they don't recruit as well as the other conferences. Two rarely do you ever have a player with the type of ability Leonard had period.  There wasn't a similar player to him in any conference.  Before the draft I had no doubt he was a first round player based simply on the fact he had so much potential at rushing the passer. I honestly thought he'd be transitioned to an OLB somewhere and he'd be a rush specialist.  Either way the fact he was drafted that high (based on talent not school) shouldn't have surprised anyone.  In fact I think it's more surprising someone with his ability to rush the passer slipped out if the first round when someone like Davenport was drafted in the middle of it. 

 

Again though strictly my opinion and most likely not correct. 

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, Surge89 said:

 

Good post.  I disagree with this part but only because I have a personal opinion on it and I'm pretty sure regardless you are correct that GMs do have bias according to school/conference. 

 

I just don't see players that way.  Number one, most of the time you don't get players drafted from the FCS because simply they don't recruit as well as the other conferences. Two rarely do you ever have a player with the type of ability Leonard had period.  There wasn't a similar player to him in any conference.  Before the draft I had no doubt he was a first round player based simply on the fact he had so much potential at rushing the passer. I honestly thought he'd be transitioned to an OLB somewhere and he'd be a rush specialist.  Either way the fact he was drafted that high (based on talent not school) shouldn't have surprised anyone.  In fact I think it's more surprising someone with his ability to rush the passer slipped out if the first round when someone like Davenport was drafted in the middle of it. 

 

Again though strictly my opinion and most likely not correct. 

 

I think if this draft class didn't have Roquan Smith, Tremaine Edmunds, LVE and Rashaan Evans...Leonard probably gets 1st round consideration by LB-needy teams. I think if teams liked him as a 3-4 OLB...it would have been more a Day Two flyer. Leonard is basically a big, athletic WR in a LBs body (which is why he is perfect for the WILL position)...but there would have been a good amount of development at a position like 3-4 OLB. 

 

Ultimately, I think it was just such a deep group. Evans didn't have much of a rookie year...so we will see how he does going forward...but he was very highly graded and obviously had pedigree. The other three (Smith, Edmunds, LVE) were all graded very highly and look like legit NFL LBs...and will possibly all make the Pro Bowl some day.

 

I love that the Colts got Leonard...but I can't fault those other teams for drafting those other guys...and wouldn't have faulted Ballard either. And I don't think it was a slight to Leonard...considering he was the highest FCS player in a very long time (which is actually quite the compliment). 

 

I think an interesting scenario would be what IF it was between one of those players AND Leonard. Does Ballard still take Leonard? We will never know...but I am almost certain he would have taken Roquan Smith. 

 

Would be cool if Leonard paves the path for other FCS players...but it will probably take some time before teams get comfortable with it.

 

 

[dw49]

7 hours ago, DougDew said:

At the time, James would have been the pick at 12 if we were going BPA combined with a thought towards need, so I don't see where that would be hindsight at this point to say we would have picked him.

 

Edit: More text deleted

 

 

 

As long as Ballard's draft board matched yours... correct ?

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I think if this draft class didn't have Roquan Smith, Tremaine Edmunds, LVE and Rashaan Evans...Leonard probably gets 1st round consideration by LB-needy teams. I think if teams liked him as a 3-4 OLB...it would have been more a Day Two flyer. Leonard is basically a big, athletic WR in a LBs body (which is why he is perfect for the WILL position)...but there would have been a good amount of development at a position like 3-4 OLB. 

 

Ultimately, I think it was just such a deep group. Evans didn't have much of a rookie year...so we will see how he does going forward...but he was very highly graded and obviously had pedigree. The other three (Smith, Edmunds, LVE) were all graded very highly and look like legit NFL LBs...and will possibly all make the Pro Bowl some day.

 

I love that the Colts got Leonard...but I can't fault those other teams for drafting those other guys...and wouldn't have faulted Ballard either. And I don't think it was a slight to Leonard...considering he was the highest FCS player in a very long time (which is actually quite the compliment). 

 

I think an interesting scenario would be what IF it was between one of those players AND Leonard. Does Ballard still take Leonard? We will never know...but I am almost certain he would have taken Roquan Smith. 

 

Would be cool if Leonard paves the path for other FCS players...but it will probably take some time before teams get comfortable with it.

 

 

Frankly, I was surprised that so many were surprised by the Leonard pick.  I thought it was fairly obvious considering we've needed a rangy LB for about 10 years.  Here is his write-up from WalterFootball.

 

Height: 6-2. Weight: 229. Arm: 34.13. Hand: 10.38. 
40 Time: 4.70. 
Projected Round (2018): 2-3. 
4/25/18: Scouting sources told me that Leonard really impressed them during the fall. He flew around the field, producing a lot for his defense. Leonard amassed 113 tackles with eight tackles for a loss, eight sacks, one pass batted, two interceptions and one forced fumble in 2017. He has a knack for making plays behind the line of scrimmage, totaling 42 tackles for a loss with 13.5 sacks combined over his freshman, sophomore and junior years. Leonard has NFL size and dominated his level of competition. He was impressive at the Senior Bowl, showing pass-coverage ability while also running sideline-to-sideline in the ground game.

Read more: http://www.walterfootball.com/draft2018ILB.php#ixzz5cLaNAgDG

 

He was ranked the 4th ILB, behind Roquan, Evans, and LVE (WF had Edmunds as an OLB).   Maybe its surprise that he was picked at 36 instead of 49, but LVE was not a slam dunk first rounder either.  Like there was a run on Gs and we took Smith slightly overdrafting, Ballard saw that ILBs were going to and took Leonard at 36 IMO.  I was happy with both picks and I thought they were fairly expected.

[DougDew]

Just now, dw49 said:

 

 

As long as Ballard's draft board matched yours... correct ?

I guess I got in late to your topic because I don't follow.  Many do mock drafts, and at the time, many, including myself, would have had James as the BPA.  I don't think its hindsight to say we would have picked him if we had the 12th pick.  Ballard may not have had him there and wouldn't have, but we'll never know.

[dw49]

Just now, DougDew said:

I guess I got in late to your topic because I don't follow.  Many do mock drafts, and at the time, many, including myself, would have had James as the BPA.  I don't think its hindsight to say we would have picked him if we had the 12th pick.  Ballard may not have had him there and wouldn't have, but we'll never know.

 

10-4 ... I now get what you mean. I think I was talking apples and you were talking oranges.