Colts sign Devin Funchess (Merge)

[NewColtsFan]

24 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I'm following simple logic without twisting.

My opinion on the value of the signing is also in the majority of what folks graded (poll) and what the talking heads said.

 

If you'd like me to take you're assertions apart piece by piece, I can do that. I've looked at his performance at a game level and have watched him since college. His simple and advanced stats are both concerning. To say they are not is intellectually dishonest. 

 

Again,  I hope the staff uses him in a way to maximize his talents. I'm just not going to sunshine pump and act like he's a no brainer answer to our WR2 need. I'll be cheering for him regardless. 

 

I think you're overstating your case a bit...

 

You no doubt saw the graphic in this thread that said Funchess had a 100 % catch rate when in the slot....    and even his drop rate was roughly 10 percent when split out.  Those are not numbers you've been quoting.    So, clearly there were numbers you were not aware of that the Colts front office was.    Otherwise,  you're accusing the Colts front office of being intellectually dishonst.    Let's not go there.     I appreciate that they have to sell the decisions they've made,  but those stats put out today should offer some modest level of encouragement to those who still question the signing...

 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

I'm following simple logic without twisting.

My opinion on the value of the signing is also in the majority of what folks graded (poll) and what the talking heads said.

 

If you'd like me to take you're assertions apart piece by piece, I can do that. I've looked at his performance at a game level and have watched him since college. His simple and advanced stats are both concerning. To say they are not is intellectually dishonest. 

 

Again,  I hope the staff uses him in a way to maximize his talents. I'm just not going to sunshine pump and act like he's a no brainer answer to our WR2 need. I'll be cheering for him regardless. 

A WR #2?  Exactly what is that?

A good QB will use his weapons according to what coverage the defense he faces. It might be a WR? It might be a TE. It could also be a RB.

When Manning played you never knew who was #2. He found the open receiver and it made no difference who was #2, #3 or #99.

Same thing with Luck. If he is finding the open receiver it makes no difference what number you want to call a receiver. Our TE position could be considered #2 if he is used in that capacity.

Just because #2 is put on a receiver does mean his numbers have to be the 2nd best on the team.

 

[Superman]

On 3/28/2019 at 9:48 AM, Irish YJ said:

wouldn't put too much into this. there are some huge disconnects too. especially in the TD category. what would make the data much better, is to split out what snaps were out of the slot, and if outside, L or R.

 

I hear everything you're saying about Funchess, and I have similar concerns. 

 

But this analysis is incredibly enlightening to me. We have plenty of evidence that players can be misused by one staff, then used in a more ideal way by another staff. Jared Goff and Todd Gurley are good examples; I just listened to Kevin Demoff sing Robert Woods praises also. Three examples of players who are being used ideally by the Rams new staff, but were misused to varying degrees by different coaches.

 

One that hits closer to home is Ebron, and we witnessed that firsthand last year. Every situation is different, and it's unrealistic to suggest that just putting a guy with Luck and Reich will automatically make him a better player. But there is evidence and proof of concept here.

 

So with this particular analysis -- not the slot production, the specific route production -- it shows that the routes that Funchess is most successful with are the same routes that Luck throws the most, and with pretty good success. Those routes -- outs and curls -- are routes where size and body control are considerable factors; those two traits are right in Funchess' wheelhouse. They don't rely greatly on straight line speed, which is not one of Funchess' best traits. Those routes don't lend themselves to yards after catch, which is something that Funchess doesn't do well anyway.

 

And then the sluggo production, in a small sample size, might give Luck and Reich a new weapon that they can use effectively. The slant production is something that might improve because of Funchess' size.

 

This speaks to the idea that Reich and Ballard saw a guy that could be used effectively in the Colts offense. It suggests that they are going to ask Funchess to do the things at which he's shown he can excel, just like they did with Ebron. They probably won't ask him to be a downfield threat, because he's not effective in that role. Ballard talks about wanting the coaching staff to have a plan for a player, and that analysis helped me to see clearly what the plan for Funchess will likely be.

 

And hopefully, they have a plan for a guy who will take shorter passes -- whip, stick, flat, dig -- and then get yards after the catch. And based on the strength of the draft, I think that player can be found and acquired at some point in the middle of the draft.

 

Long story short, this breakdown shows me specifically that Funchess can be used in a way that will help him produce and add a new element to the offense. That's without expecting him to do something that he has never been good at.

[Mr.ZapRowsdower]

Are we still talking about Fun Fun? 

[Old Colt]

On 3/27/2019 at 11:43 PM, DarkSuperman said:

Didn't care much for this signing at first, but it's growing on me more and more each and every day.

Should always trust your gut feelings, I see Bleacher report list this signing as the Worst FA signing by the Colts thus far.  Interesting take by them and comparison with John Brown.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

11 minutes ago, Old Colt said:

Should always trust your gut feelings, I see Bleacher report list this signing as the Worst FA signing by the Colts thus far.  Interesting take by them and comparison with John Brown.

Well I will bet they will be eating crow.

[EastStreet]

15 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think you're overstating your case a bit...

 

You no doubt saw the graphic in this thread that said Funchess had a 100 % catch rate when in the slot....    and even his drop rate was roughly 10 percent when split out.  Those are not numbers you've been quoting.    So, clearly there were numbers you were not aware of that the Colts front office was.    Otherwise,  you're accusing the Colts front office of being intellectually dishonst.    Let's not go there.     I appreciate that they have to sell the decisions they've made,  but those stats put out today should offer some modest level of encouragement to those who still question the signing...

 

 

I've been pretty consistent that he would be best at slot, not X or WR2. Fill free to review my posts. Additional down below...

 

14 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

A WR #2?  Exactly what is that?

A good QB will use his weapons according to what coverage the defense he faces. It might be a WR? It might be a TE. It could also be a RB.

When Manning played you never knew who was #2. He found the open receiver and it made no difference who was #2, #3 or #99.

Same thing with Luck. If he is finding the open receiver it makes no difference what number you want to call a receiver. Our TE position could be considered #2 if he is used in that capacity.

Just because #2 is put on a receiver does mean his numbers have to be the 2nd best on the team.

 

Note - the first section is to ensure we are on the same page in terms of terminology. 

 

Instead of WR1 or 2, I'll use basic football 101 terms X and Z. You can have your best WR at either X or Z (or even slot). TY is our Z typically (generally lines up off the LOS, motions). When I say WR2, In the Colt's line up, I'd be talking about the X, which typically lines up on the LOS, and opposite side of TY. 

 

My criticism has been 1) about the value/$, and 2) his history playing both the primary/lead and secondary WR in Carolina. 

 

On the value. We are paying TY at WR1/Z the 13th highest WR (general) salary at 13M/year. In general, you would expect to pay your top guy top 36 money. Funchess is making 10M which is the 21st highest WR (general) contract. If he makes his bonus (which I hope he does), he'll be top 15 at 13M like TY. 

 

In terms of general production, a top 15 WR, regardless of X or Z or slot is at around 1200 yards or more. A top 20, 1000. If you want to normalize his contract because it's one year, correct it by 20%, and say it's 8M which would rank 29th. 29th in production is 800+. 

 

I've been clear that I'll be happy if he hits 800, unhappy if not.....

 

Back to production, he's been both the lead and secondary WR for Carolina. He really never met the standard of primary WR, and was demoted to second when they brought in DJ Moore. 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 If we're in sync now (on terms, not agreement), then I'll say the following.

 

If he's been signed to be the primary X, then I have a lot of doubts. A typical X is a well rounded WR that work all 3 levels. He doesn't have to be "the speed guy", but he should have enough speed to challenge the CBs deep, and have good to great hands. Based on his history at both UM and Carolina, he's not been reliable at that position.

 

Now if we have signed him to work primarily out of the slot, then I'm all for it, and have said several times it would be his best position. If that's the case, there's several head scratching questions. 

 

1) you'd be more or less replacing Rogers, who took a big step forward last year (improved yards by 200) and catches the ball at 73.6.

2) If he's primary slot, who's got X? Are they assuming Cain will be ready? Are they drafting?

3) It's not unheard of to pay a slot like that, but high paid slot guys are normally good to high YAC kind of guys, not necessarily possession guys. And, unless he's targeted a ton at slot, it will be pretty hard to hit 800. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I think we are going to see our receivers move all over the field. We have so many options to confuse defenses. I don’t think your going to eee any of them line up in the same spot most of the time.

[crazycolt1]

20 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

 

I've been pretty consistent that he would be best at slot, not X or WR2. Fill free to review my posts. Additional down below...

 

Note - the first section is to ensure we are on the same page in terms of terminology. 

 

Instead of WR1 or 2, I'll use basic football 101 terms X and Z. You can have your best WR at either X or Z (or even slot). TY is our Z typically (generally lines up off the LOS, motions). When I say WR2, In the Colt's line up, I'd be talking about the X, which typically lines up on the LOS, and opposite side of TY. 

 

My criticism has been 1) about the value/$, and 2) his history playing both the primary/lead and secondary WR in Carolina. 

 

On the value. We are paying TY at WR1/Z the 13th highest WR (general) salary at 13M/year. In general, you would expect to pay your top guy top 36 money. Funchess is making 10M which is the 21st highest WR (general) contract. If he makes his bonus (which I hope he does), he'll be top 15 at 13M like TY. 

 

In terms of general production, a top 15 WR, regardless of X or Z or slot is at around 1200 yards or more. A top 20, 1000. If you want to normalize his contract because it's one year, correct it by 20%, and say it's 8M which would rank 29th. 29th in production is 800+. 

 

I've been clear that I'll be happy if he hits 800, unhappy if not.....

 

Back to production, he's been both the lead and secondary WR for Carolina. He really never met the standard of primary WR, and was demoted to second when they brought in DJ Moore. 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 If we're in sync now (on terms, not agreement), then I'll say the following.

 

If he's been signed to be the primary X, then I have a lot of doubts. A typical X is a well rounded WR that work all 3 levels. He doesn't have to be "the speed guy", but he should have enough speed to challenge the CBs deep, and have good to great hands. Based on his history at both UM and Carolina, he's not been reliable at that position.

 

Now if we have signed him to work primarily out of the slot, then I'm all for it, and have said several times it would be his best position. If that's the case, there's several head scratching questions. 

 

1) you'd be more or less replacing Rogers, who took a big step forward last year (improved yards by 200) and catches the ball at 73.6.

2) If he's primary slot, who's got X? Are they assuming Cain will be ready? Are they drafting?

3) It's not unheard of to pay a slot like that, but high paid slot guys are normally good to high YAC kind of guys, not necessarily possession guys. And, unless he's targeted a ton at slot, it will be pretty hard to hit 800. 

With all do respect I do not need a lesson in football 101. I have been watching football longer than you have been born.

 

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

With all do respect I do not need a lesson in football 101. I have been watching football longer than you have been born.

 

I was translating WR2, which you specifically asked in your first sentence. 

I'm 50, and have been watching a long time too.

 

No comment on the rest?

[crazycolt1]

30 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

 

I've been pretty consistent that he would be best at slot, not X or WR2. Fill free to review my posts. Additional down below...

 

Note - the first section is to ensure we are on the same page in terms of terminology. 

 

Instead of WR1 or 2, I'll use basic football 101 terms X and Z. You can have your best WR at either X or Z (or even slot). TY is our Z typically (generally lines up off the LOS, motions). When I say WR2, In the Colt's line up, I'd be talking about the X, which typically lines up on the LOS, and opposite side of TY. 

 

My criticism has been 1) about the value/$, and 2) his history playing both the primary/lead and secondary WR in Carolina. 

 

On the value. We are paying TY at WR1/Z the 13th highest WR (general) salary at 13M/year. In general, you would expect to pay your top guy top 36 money. Funchess is making 10M which is the 21st highest WR (general) contract. If he makes his bonus (which I hope he does), he'll be top 15 at 13M like TY. 

 

In terms of general production, a top 15 WR, regardless of X or Z or slot is at around 1200 yards or more. A top 20, 1000. If you want to normalize his contract because it's one year, correct it by 20%, and say it's 8M which would rank 29th. 29th in production is 800+. 

 

I've been clear that I'll be happy if he hits 800, unhappy if not.....

 

Back to production, he's been both the lead and secondary WR for Carolina. He really never met the standard of primary WR, and was demoted to second when they brought in DJ Moore. 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

 

 If we're in sync now (on terms, not agreement), then I'll say the following.

 

If he's been signed to be the primary X, then I have a lot of doubts. A typical X is a well rounded WR that work all 3 levels. He doesn't have to be "the speed guy", but he should have enough speed to challenge the CBs deep, and have good to great hands. Based on his history at both UM and Carolina, he's not been reliable at that position.

 

Now if we have signed him to work primarily out of the slot, then I'm all for it, and have said several times it would be his best position. If that's the case, there's several head scratching questions. 

 

1) you'd be more or less replacing Rogers, who took a big step forward last year (improved yards by 200) and catches the ball at 73.6.

2) If he's primary slot, who's got X? Are they assuming Cain will be ready? Are they drafting?

3) It's not unheard of to pay a slot like that, but high paid slot guys are normally good to high YAC kind of guys, not necessarily possession guys. And, unless he's targeted a ton at slot, it will be pretty hard to hit 800. 

Being what you call a #2 receiver is not all about numbers. Is the so called #2 getting enough attention to help other receivers get open?  Is so called #2 making his blocking assignments? Football is a team game and all you are doing is using numbers to judge a player.

Numbers do not tell the whole story of any one player on a team.

The so called #1, #2 and so on changes from game to game depending on what the defenses do. You take out the team aspect of the game when you use numbers to judge.

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I don’t care who is Wr1 2 or 3. As long as we win and they all contribute to the team. Way to much focus on that.

[crazycolt1]

19 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I was translating WR2, which you specifically asked in your first sentence. 

I'm 50, and have been watching a long time too.

 

No comment on the rest?

I was playing football in high school when you were born.

Look, in an earlier statement I said we would have to agree to disagree. You couldn't just leave it at that could you?  Do you know the meaning of harping?

I am pretty sure the others are tired of this back and forth so I will ask once again. Can we just agree to disagree and let time show the answers?

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Being what you call a #2 receiver is not all about numbers. Is the so called #2 getting enough attention to help other receivers get open?  Is so called #2 making his blocking assignments? Football is a team game and all you are doing is using numbers to judge a player.

Numbers do not tell the whole story of any one player on a team.

The so called #1, #2 and so on changes from game to game depending on what the defenses do. You take out the team aspect of the game when you use numbers to judge.

 

Then don't talk #1 or 2. I was attempting to be specific talking X, Z, slot, because you didn't want to talk 1 and 2. Please feel free to give me your take on best use using those terms. 

 

Again, I hope he succeeds, but I'm not ignoring past performance. At least I have given opinion on specifically how I think he can be a success in our system. Help change my mind using specifics instead of all the extraneous stuff. 

[EastStreet]

5 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I hear everything you're saying about Funchess, and I have similar concerns. 

 

But this analysis is incredibly enlightening to me. We have plenty of evidence that players can be misused by one staff, then used in a more ideal way by another staff. Jared Goff and Todd Gurley are good examples; I just listened to Kevin Demoff sing Robert Woods praises also. Three examples of players who are being used ideally by the Rams new staff, but were misused to varying degrees by different coaches.

 

One that hits closer to home is Ebron, and we witnessed that firsthand last year. Every situation is different, and it's unrealistic to suggest that just putting a guy with Luck and Reich will automatically make him a better player. But there is evidence and proof of concept here.

 

So with this particular analysis -- not the slot production, the specific route production -- it shows that the routes that Funchess is most successful with are the same routes that Luck throws the most, and with pretty good success. Those routes -- outs and curls -- are routes where size and body control are considerable factors; those two traits are right in Funchess' wheelhouse. They don't rely greatly on straight line speed, which is not one of Funchess' best traits. Those routes don't lend themselves to yards after catch, which is something that Funchess doesn't do well anyway.

 

And then the sluggo production, in a small sample size, might give Luck and Reich a new weapon that they can use effectively. The slant production is something that might improve because of Funchess' size.

 

This speaks to the idea that Reich and Ballard saw a guy that could be used effectively in the Colts offense. It suggests that they are going to ask Funchess to do the things at which he's shown he can excel, just like they did with Ebron. They probably won't ask him to be a downfield threat, because he's not effective in that role. Ballard talks about wanting the coaching staff to have a plan for a player, and that analysis helped me to see clearly what the plan for Funchess will likely be.

 

And hopefully, they have a plan for a guy who will take shorter passes -- whip, stick, flat, dig -- and then get yards after the catch. And based on the strength of the draft, I think that player can be found and acquired at some point in the middle of the draft.

 

Long story short, this breakdown shows me specifically that Funchess can be used in a way that will help him produce and add a new element to the offense. That's without expecting him to do something that he has never been good at.

 

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I'm a little less comforted by the graphic. To me, yes, there are some good connections between DF and AL, but there are also bad. The curl and out are great. The dig and drag not good. I'd love to see a larger sample size on DF. On a positive note, there are areas where Luck has struggled (for whatever reason) where DF is good at. Perhaps those numbers improve for AL with the addition of DF.

 

Overall, what the graphic says to me, is that DF is erratic and an incomplete WR. I do think being paired with Luck will help him though, I just don't think it's going to make him a complete WR. I know that "use" matters, but having to limit "use" is a factor in itself. The fact that his use might be highly "crafted", could mean limited snap count, or limited play calling when he is in. 

 

On the Ebron comparison. High level, sure you can say some players improve in different situations. But Ebron really didn't improve per say. His y/r was about the same, and his catch rate actually declined a bit. What changed was where they used him. The Colts did increase his targets, and more than doubled (may have been tripled) his average RZ targets. His production didn't really improve (avgs and %), they just were maximized in the RZ. Brilliant job by the coaches, but the situation (performance) is different from Funchess. 

 

As I said in the other replies above, if he's primarily used out of X, then I'm not optimistic. If we're using him out of the slot, I'm more optimistic. If he's in the X, I think Ds will be able blanket TY and we're limited. If he's in the slot, and we have a legit X, they I think that line up is legit on fire. 

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I was playing football in high school when you were born.

Look, in an earlier statement I said we would have to agree to disagree. You couldn't just leave it at that could you?  Do you know the meaning of harping?

I am pretty sure the others are tired of this back and forth so I will ask once again. Can we just agree to disagree and let time show the answers?

If you look back at our back and forth, I replied to Chloe2164, not you. You're the one that felt the need to disagree, and reply to my post to Chloe. As I said earlier, I'm happy to agree to disagree. Feel free to ignore my posts on the topic.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I have faith Reich will put DF in a situation that plays up to his strengths and where he can succeed. Until I see DF fail I totally trust Reich with his “new toy”. I think you will see TY and DF play all over the field not just on the outside.

[Superman]

6 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I'm a little less comforted by the graphic. To me, yes, there are some good connections between DF and AL, but there are also bad. The curl and out are great. The dig and drag not good. I'd love to see a larger sample size on DF. On a positive note, there are areas where Luck has struggled (for whatever reason) where DF is good at. Perhaps those numbers improve for AL with the addition of DF.

 

Overall, what the graphic says to me, is that DF is erratic and an incomplete WR. I do think being paired with Luck will help him though, I just don't think it's going to make him a complete WR. I know that "use" matters, but having to limit "use" is a factor in itself. The fact that his use might be highly "crafted", could mean limited snap count, or limited play calling when he is in. 

 

On the Ebron comparison. High level, sure you can say some players improve in different situations. But Ebron really didn't improve per say. His y/r was about the same, and his catch rate actually declined a bit. What changed was where they used him. The Colts did increase his targets, and more than doubled (may have been tripled) his average RZ targets. His production didn't really improve (avgs and %), they just were maximized in the RZ. Brilliant job by the coaches, but the situation (performance) is different from Funchess. 

 

As I said in the other replies above, if he's primarily used out of X, then I'm not optimistic. If we're using him out of the slot, I'm more optimistic. If he's in the X, I think Ds will be able blanket TY and we're limited. If he's in the slot, and we have a legit X, they I think that line up is legit on fire. 

 

I think you're just kind of glass half empty on this one. I'm talking about ideal usage. So if the Colts have figured out where Funchess excels, and where he struggles, and they play to his strengths, then we're pursuing and hopefully achieving ideal usage for him.

 

And that's what they did with Ebron. They didn't necessarily make him a better player, but he had a career highs in catches, yards, and more TDs in one season than he had in his entire career to that point. The situation is different, but I mentioned Ebron because it's proof of concept, with this staff and this QB. They didn't make Ebron a complete TE, they just figured out ideal usage.

 

Regarding the dig and drag routes, the lesser production on those routes lines up with the other stat showing that Funchess was less effective from the outside than in the slot. 

 

The question is who plays X?

[Myles]

He's only 24 years old.   A change of scenery could be just what he needs.    I think it is an improvement at WR from last season, so that's all that count to me.   

I also like his size.   I think we get 70+ reception for 700+ yards from him.   

[Four2itus]

15 hours ago, Superman said:

The question is who plays X?

Please let us find Reggie 2.0

[EastStreet]

16 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think you're just kind of glass half empty on this one. I'm talking about ideal usage. So if the Colts have figured out where Funchess excels, and where he struggles, and they play to his strengths, then we're pursuing and hopefully achieving ideal usage for him.

 

And that's what they did with Ebron. They didn't necessarily make him a better player, but he had a career highs in catches, yards, and more TDs in one season than he had in his entire career to that point. The situation is different, but I mentioned Ebron because it's proof of concept, with this staff and this QB. They didn't make Ebron a complete TE, they just figured out ideal usage.

 

Regarding the dig and drag routes, the lesser production on those routes lines up with the other stat showing that Funchess was less effective from the outside than in the slot. 

 

The question is who plays X?

The glass isn't half full or empty, it's at 50% :-).

 

Like I've said, I'd love it if their plan is to use him at slot. My biggest issue with DF is I didn't see him as a legit X. 

 

And...If that's the case though, do you really see a possession type slot getting 800+ yards?

Like you said, who plays X. That's been my biggest concern on O.

 

I'd assume they're not assuming Cain will be 100% able to fulfill X this year, and if that's the case, leads me back to taking a WR in the first 3 picks.

[Superman]

On 3/30/2019 at 3:58 PM, Irish YJ said:

The glass isn't half full or empty, it's at 50% :-).

 

Like I've said, I'd love it if their plan is to use him at slot. My biggest issue with DF is I didn't see him as a legit X. 

 

And...If that's the case though, do you really see a possession type slot getting 800+ yards?

Like you said, who plays X. That's been my biggest concern on O.

 

I'd assume they're not assuming Cain will be 100% able to fulfill X this year, and if that's the case, leads me back to taking a WR in the first 3 picks.

 

I saw the slot as the YAC guy. I think/hope they see the X as the YAC guy, and that guy should come from the draft. I think it would be a mistake to rely on Cain to do anything, especially since he got hurt so late in the year. Even if he's ready to go full speed at camp, he still has never played a real NFL game. 

 

Rogers and Grant combined for 124 targets last season. I could see Funchess getting 75% of those targets, so somewhere around 90 for the year. And if they use him right, I think a reasonable expectation is 60 catches, 800 yards. And that doesn't exactly blow me away, which is why I have a problem with the value on the deal, but that's decent production for a big slot who will be competing with two TEs in the middle of the field.

[Hoose]

This has been an excellent discussion. Much appreciated. I look forward to seeing if the Colts coaches can mix a little of their Ebron magic into Mr. Funchess. I'm more hopeful after reading this thread. 

[Matabix]

Value on the 1st contract will happen if 2nd contract is handed to him. Think 1st contract was getting him here.

[DerekDiggler]

On 3/29/2019 at 4:38 PM, Irish YJ said:

Then don't talk #1 or 2. I was attempting to be specific talking X, Z, slot, because you didn't want to talk 1 and 2. Please feel free to give me your take on best use using those terms. 

 

Again, I hope he succeeds, but I'm not ignoring past performance. At least I have given opinion on specifically how I think he can be a success in our system. Help change my mind using specifics instead of all the extraneous stuff. 

Too much logic for some folks on here.   Keep posting.  I may not agree with everything you say but it is intelligent conversation. 

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

On 3/12/2019 at 10:20 AM, Superman said:

 

It's as much of a WR draft as it is a DL draft, and I actually like the WR value on Day 2 better than the DL value on Day 1.

 

 

 

I think you're going to regret this comment.    Seriously regret.

 

[Superman]

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think you're going to regret this comment.    Seriously regret.

 

 

Why? And when?

[shasta519]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I saw the slot as the YAC guy. I think/hope they see the X as the YAC guy, and that guy should come from the draft. I think it would be a mistake to rely on Cain to do anything, especially since he got hurt so late in the year. Even if he's ready to go full speed at camp, he still has never played a real NFL game. 

 

Rogers and Grant combined for 124 targets last season. I could see Funchess getting 75% of those targets, so somewhere around 90 for the year. And if they use him right, I think a reasonable expectation is 60 catches, 800 yards. And that doesn't exactly blow me away, which is why I have a problem with the value on the deal, but that's decent production for a big slot who will be competing with two TEs in the middle of the field.

 

My take...I will be blown away if he gets 60 catches and 800 yards. Colts haven't had a WR outside of TY accomplish that in a long time. It would take Funchess a lot more than 90 targets to get there too...if they aren't putting him outside...especially if he is running outs and curls. 

 

[dw49]

On 3/29/2019 at 10:38 AM, Superman said:

 

I hear everything you're saying about Funchess, and I have similar concerns. 

 

But this analysis is incredibly enlightening to me. We have plenty of evidence that players can be misused by one staff, then used in a more ideal way by another staff. Jared Goff and Todd Gurley are good examples; I just listened to Kevin Demoff sing Robert Woods praises also. Three examples of players who are being used ideally by the Rams new staff, but were misused to varying degrees by different coaches.

 

One that hits closer to home is Ebron, and we witnessed that firsthand last year. Every situation is different, and it's unrealistic to suggest that just putting a guy with Luck and Reich will automatically make him a better player. But there is evidence and proof of concept here.

 

So with this particular analysis -- not the slot production, the specific route production -- it shows that the routes that Funchess is most successful with are the same routes that Luck throws the most, and with pretty good success. Those routes -- outs and curls -- are routes where size and body control are considerable factors; those two traits are right in Funchess' wheelhouse. They don't rely greatly on straight line speed, which is not one of Funchess' best traits. Those routes don't lend themselves to yards after catch, which is something that Funchess doesn't do well anyway.

 

And then the sluggo production, in a small sample size, might give Luck and Reich a new weapon that they can use effectively. The slant production is something that might improve because of Funchess' size.

 

This speaks to the idea that Reich and Ballard saw a guy that could be used effectively in the Colts offense. It suggests that they are going to ask Funchess to do the things at which he's shown he can excel, just like they did with Ebron. They probably won't ask him to be a downfield threat, because he's not effective in that role. Ballard talks about wanting the coaching staff to have a plan for a player, and that analysis helped me to see clearly what the plan for Funchess will likely be.

 

And hopefully, they have a plan for a guy who will take shorter passes -- whip, stick, flat, dig -- and then get yards after the catch. And based on the strength of the draft, I think that player can be found and acquired at some point in the middle of the draft.

 

Long story short, this breakdown shows me specifically that Funchess can be used in a way that will help him produce and add a new element to the offense. That's without expecting him to do something that he has never been good at.

 

Other words , he's the perfect target when you go for it in overtime on 4th and 4 from your  own 42 ?

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I saw the slot as the YAC guy. I think/hope they see the X as the YAC guy, and that guy should come from the draft. I think it would be a mistake to rely on Cain to do anything, especially since he got hurt so late in the year. Even if he's ready to go full speed at camp, he still has never played a real NFL game. 

 

Rogers and Grant combined for 124 targets last season. I could see Funchess getting 75% of those targets, so somewhere around 90 for the year. And if they use him right, I think a reasonable expectation is 60 catches, 800 yards. And that doesn't exactly blow me away, which is why I have a problem with the value on the deal, but that's decent production for a big slot who will be competing with two TEs in the middle of the field.

Ideally, I'd like to see X, Z, and slot as YAC guys, and the TEs as big possession guys. I don't mind at all having a TE-lite guy like DF moved around as a situational WR. 

 

Rogers took a nice step forward last year with Luck back, and had a pretty good catch rate. Not bad for an UDFA. Don't think he's a long term answer, and only one year left under contract. 

 

On Cain, yup, can't rely on him, or assume anything this year. Anything you can get out of him is just gravy. 

 

Agreed on the production numbers and value. I just hope he's a compliment to, not a productivity thief from guys like Ebron or Doyle. 

 

I think it was you that said you liked WR depth and value above. I think it's pretty strong too. 

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, DerekDiggler said:

Too much logic for some folks on here.   Keep posting.  I may not agree with everything you say but it is intelligent conversation. 

 

 

Thanks double D. I don't mind disagreement at all. I just like thoughtful opinion and chat. It's going to very interesting to see DF play this year. He's an enigma to me as to where he's going to play, and how they'll use him relative to the other WRs and TEs. Production and value aside, I just want to win, and hope he kills it. 

[DerekDiggler]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

Thanks double D. I don't mind disagreement at all. I just like thoughtful opinion and chat. It's going to very interesting to see DF play this year. He's an enigma to me as to where he's going to play, and how they'll use him relative to the other WRs and TEs. Production and value aside, I just want to win, and hope he kills it. 

People can watch football for a hundred yrs and still know nothing about it.  

 

Bring some Xs and Os to the conversation you have my attention 

 

my theory is never watch the ball at the snap.  You watch the oline vs dline .   It determines everything.  You’ll see why a play is a success or fails    You can always find the ball afterward. 

 

IMO the best seats are endzone you see everything.    Bad part is you miss a lot at the other end of the field 

 

i remeber they they did a Colts (I believe) game from behind the QB.   it was awesome 

 

also why I like the All 22’s. 

 

I may may not know as much as a few on here but I am a student trying to learn and not a ball watching casual fan 

 

so appreciate the input 

[EastStreet]

18 minutes ago, DerekDiggler said:

People can watch football for a hundred yrs and still know nothing about.  

 

Bring some Xs and Os to the conversation you have my attention 

 

my theory is never watch the ball at the snap.  You watch the oline vs dline .   It determines everything.  You’ll see why a play is a success or fails    You can always find the ball afterward. 

 

IMO the best seats are endzone you see everything.    Bad part is you miss a lot at the other end of the field 

 

i remeber they they did a Colts (I believe) game from behind the QB.   it was awesome 

 

also why I like the All 22’s. 

 

I may may not know as much as a few on here but I am a student trying to learn and not a ball watching casual fan 

 

so appreciate the input 

yup, I like the "high endzone" view myself. i don't like sitting there lol, but i like the play views, both from the O and D perspectives. i'm sure the NFL at some point will you a choice of All 22s, High Endzone, and standard via TV or stream. i think the NCAA did a bit in the championship games. ESPN gave you 3 or 4 options. I watched a little of the "Coaches Room", but the screen shot of the game was too small to stay.

 

agree on the lines. while not sexy, they generally dictate the game more times than not. was so pumped when they took Q. i'm and ND fan too, so that helped. very happy about picking up Houston. i think the addition of a good iDL will make the entire front 4 one of the best in the NFL. 

 

on the debate and discussion topic, agree. give me stats and Xs and Os any day. 

[DerekDiggler]

3 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

yup, I like the "high endzone" view myself. i don't like sitting there lol, but i like the play views, both from the O and D perspectives. i'm sure the NFL at some point will you a choice of All 22s, High Endzone, and standard via TV or stream. i think the NCAA did a bit in the championship games. ESPN gave you 3 or 4 options. I watched a little of the "Coaches Room", but the screen shot of the game was too small to stay.

 

agree on the lines. while not sexy, they generally dictate the game more times than not. was so pumped when they took Q. i'm and ND fan too, so that helped. very happy about picking up Houston. i think the addition of a good iDL will make the entire front 4 one of the best in the NFL. 

 

on the debate and discussion topic, agree. give me stats and Xs and Os any day. 

I have always had end zone  seats and love them.     This yr though.  We upgraded to 310 so I won’t complain.   My opinion level 3 is the best seats in the house 

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, DerekDiggler said:

I have always had end zone  seats and love them.     This yr though.  We upgraded to 310 so I won’t complain.   My opinion level 3 is the best seats in the house 

Since I moved to the South, my big screen is my best friend during football season. Besides family, I really miss going to sports games. When I was in Indy, sat in a variety of places in the old Hoosier/RCA dome. I really love the Lucas. 

[DerekDiggler]

Just now, Irish YJ said:

Since I moved to the South, my big screen is my best friend during football season. Besides family, I really miss going to sports games. When I was in Indy, sat in a variety of places in the old Hoosier/RCA dome. I really love the Lucas. 

Completely understand. Have the 120 in basement too.  

 

Comvinced my wife for this yr though.    I’ve sold all but the 3 conference games 

[DerekDiggler]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

I think you're going to regret this comment.    Seriously regret.

 

As much as I detest the idea of drafting a WR that early.  I may have to agree white him when considering where we pick.   

 

With that hat said I certainly hope we don’t get stuck taking a WR and can trade back in that case 

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, DerekDiggler said:

As much as I detest the idea of drafting a WR that early.  I may have to agree white him when considering where we pick.   

 

With that hat said I certainly hope we don’t get stuck taking a WR and can trade back in that case 

 

Derek.....

 

Read my exchange with Superman again.     We're not talking about whether the Colts should take a WR in the first round.

 

We're talking about comparing the over DL class with the overall WR class.    Totally different issue.

 

Take another look.....  

[Superman]

7 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

We're talking about comparing the over DL class with the overall WR class.    Totally different issue.

 

That's why I asked why you disagree with me. I think the DL class is better than the WR class, for sure. But I think the best DL are going in the top 20, and I think only 2 receivers are likely to go that high. So when we're on the clock at #26, the DL that are available aren't that exciting to me. 

 

I like to take in big boards at this time. I like mocks, but their value is limited because people have competing priorities when doing mocks, and I think they're picks wind up being influenced by at lot of nonsense. But the big boards are just meant to be a ranking of prospects, not tied to teams. 

 

So it seems like consensus suggests the best DL available at #26 will be maybe Clelin Ferrell and Christian Wilkins (but maybe not), Dexter Lawrence, Jerry Tillery, Jeffrey Simmons, Jaylon Ferguson, Dre'Mont Jones, Jachai Polite, Zach Allen, Charles Omenihu... I think we can assume Simmons and Ferguson aren't on the Colts board, especially in the first. I think Ferrell and Wilkins are both gone, whether I like them or not.

 

Out of them all, only Tillery seems like a good pick, and I'm not necessarily over the moon about him at this point. Lawrence doesn't move me, and I think the rest are second rounders, or later. I might have left someone out, but I don't think so...

 

On the other hand, I like most of the receivers that are most likely available in the second and third round. And I think there will be a ton of them still there, because most likely only three receivers go in the first round (and I could be wrong about that, but that seems to be consensus). I think we could potentially get someone like Parris Campbell or Riley Ridley even at the end of the third. To me, that's value.

 

So I think the DL with first round value are going to be gone by #26, and I'm not super excited about any of the rest of them. 

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That's why I asked why you disagree with me. I think the DL class is better than the WR class, for sure. But I think the best DL are going in the top 20, and I think only 2 receivers are likely to go that high. So when we're on the clock at #26, the DL that are available aren't that exciting to me. 

 

I like to take in big boards at this time. I like mocks, but their value is limited because people have competing priorities when doing mocks, and I think they're picks wind up being influenced by at lot of nonsense. But the big boards are just meant to be a ranking of prospects, not tied to teams. 

 

So it seems like consensus suggests the best DL available at #26 will be maybe Clelin Ferrell and Christian Wilkins (but maybe not), Dexter Lawrence, Jerry Tillery, Jeffrey Simmons, Jaylon Ferguson, Dre'Mont Jones, Jachai Polite, Zach Allen, Charles Omenihu... I think we can assume Simmons and Ferguson aren't on the Colts board, especially in the first. I think Ferrell and Wilkins are both gone, whether I like them or not.

 

Out of them all, only Tillery seems like a good pick, and I'm not necessarily over the moon about him at this point. Lawrence doesn't move me, and I think the rest are second rounders, or later. I might have left someone out, but I don't think so...

 

On the other hand, I like most of the receivers that are most likely available in the second and third round. And I think there will be a ton of them still there, because most likely only three receivers go in the first round (and I could be wrong about that, but that seems to be consensus). I think we could potentially get someone like Parris Campbell or Riley Ridley even at the end of the third. To me, that's value.

 

So I think the DL with first round value are going to be gone by #26, and I'm not super excited about any of the rest of them. 

 

That is why I feel the secondary is where our best value will be found at #26, still hoping there is 1 or 2 bone headed team that lets a DL slide by.