Are we well positioned?

[needanoline63]

Negative, we need a number one corner. A safety and another pass rusher

[ColtStrong2013]

I think so. But I also think Ballard is looking longterm with the draft by focusing on players at every position group. He's drafted the entire runningback room. Has a stronghold on the o-line now. He knows he has his quarterback and a strong tight end group. He needs to keep focusing on drafting/developing receivers, which I think we will see this draft, maybe even somewhat early on. 

 

Defensively I think he likes where his core cornerback group is with a developing Wilson, big pickup in Moore, and a new 3 year contract in Desir. He'll keep filling in the depth on the corners. Linebackers is filled with draft picks and developing talent (with one superstar of course). Defensive line will be filled with draft picks and key pickups after this draft. Safety is thin, but another big draft pick early on this year would pair two Ballard picks for the longterm. 

 

I think we are setup well for this draft, but I especially think that after a strong draft of d-line, safety, and receiver, next years draft will be the bread and butter, focusing on truly upgrading positions and building depth, not just to fill positions. We are really getting there... Keep stacking drafts and see where their development takes this team in the next 3-5 years. 

[Stephen]

11 hours ago, cbear said:

CB should be aggressive and move up into the top 15 and get an impact player (assuming he sees one there of course), not just a solid contributor at 26 imo and beyond.  

 

I don't recall us ever being in such a solid position with our current roster.  Now is the time to go get a player, not wait.  Even if we end up with just half the picks we currently have, I'd take it if that meant getting more potential impact players. 

We will be fine. Another impact player will be there at 26

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 hours ago, needanoline63 said:

Negative, we need a number one corner. A safety and another pass rusher

We have three pretty good starting corners. We probably do need some depth.

 

We do need a safety or two. Hooker and Geathers get injured easy.  We need to find ones that can start right away.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

9 hours ago, Rally5 said:

I'm not in for any rude awakenings.  Go tell me about the superstars on the Philly SB offense or the stellar New England wideouts.  If we get a superstar offensive player that's great, I don't expect to see that happen but hey...

 

What happened against that stellar KC defense in the playoffs then? Why does KC routinely score 30+? Because they have playmakers around their stud QB. You can't compare anything to NE, they have the best coach and QB of all-time, during the same dominant timeframe, they're the exception to every rule. 

[Superman]

19 hours ago, Rally5 said:

Very fair assessment,  maybe I'm parsing words but there's a difference for me between glaring needs of a team and opportunities to upgrade.  Given what I think I know about you and our conversations in the past about the draft this team is positioned perfectly for what you believe in terms of philosophy, right?  If there was ever a time where we could BPA a draft and move up and down without 'fear' this is it.   I mean, I'm looking to Superman this draft, I'm in your boat for a change!

 

I'm glad you offered this clarification. In my mind, there are still a lot of question marks. Not necessarily glaring needs, more opportunities to upgrade. I think sometimes fans have a tendency to overrate mediocre players on their own team.

 

For example, I think Desir, Geathers, Walker, Hunt, Sheard are all average to slightly above average. Hooker has had injury issues. Wilson is inconsistent, but has shown flashes; Lewis and Turay are still unknowns. Autry, Moore and Leonard are above average to great, still with room to improve, but rock solid pieces. I think Houston is going to be solid for us. So nine of our core defensive players are question marks, to varying degrees. And this is for a defense that wasn't very good last season (based on certain metrics and with sufficient context).

 

We could have the same discussion for the offense, although it's further along than the defense. 

 

So my thinking is we still need to add a lot of good players, at a lot of positions. Those players who represent opportunity to upgrade either need to get better or be replaced, and I think competition in camp and early in the season will provide answers to a lot of those question marks, positive or negative. We'll know at the end of the 2019 season whether Wilson can be counted on, we'll know whether Walker is good enough to start at Mike for a real contender, we'll have a better idea whether Turay can rush the passer, whether Smith is a good RT, etc. And if the front office continues to draft well and the coaching staff continues to develop players, we'll have fewer opportunities for upgrade going into 2020.

 

So I would still approach the draft with the objective of adding as many good players as possible. I don't know if this is the right time to give up picks to add one player who will still need to prove whether he can play in the NFL. I'd rather move back and add more players right now. Ultimately, it depends on the board, which won't change for me no matter how our roster looks, because I think the draft is more about the roster two years from now than it is about this year.

 

I think I'll always be what people call a BPA guy, but there will be times when I'll be more receptive to trading up for a "special" prospect. And don't get me wrong, if Ballard trades up for a guy I like, I'll be happy about it, but I think it's a little early to get ambitious right now.

[NorthernBlue]

The Colts defense is greater than the sum of its parts. I feel like we've all heard that term used to describe them. It's true though. If you look at each position group on its own, not a single group can truly be called elite. The D-line still needs that dominating 3Tech to truly be special. We could use another Linebacker for depth (and even as an upgrade, depending on how you view Walker). The safeties need depth since our starters can't stay healthy. Our corners are good not great (as a group).

 

So I agree that the Colts should not hesitate to go BPA when addressing the defense, but not because we don't have any holes, it's because we don't have any positions you could truly call a 'strength'. I think Matt Eberflus did an amazing job with the group last season, and if he does it again, he'll likely get scooped up for a HC gig in 2020. 

 

Offensively, I like where they are at, especially with our QB and play calling being what it is. Just got to tinker with a few things, like complimentary running backs, and making sure we find that true 2 behind TY (plus securing the future at LT).

 

The Colts roster is solid. Andrew Luck and the coaching staff may get them to compete with the leagues elite, but in order for them to truly be a SB contender, we just need to keep adding the best talent we can. The rest will work itself out. 

[CurBeatElite]

On 3/21/2019 at 3:40 PM, Smonroe said:

Geathers is signed, but even with Houston our D could use upgrades.  We have a lot of “if’s”.  If Geathers stays healthy, if last years Dline rookies continue to develop, if the corner play improves, etc.

 

The O is looking solid, and if Cain comes back as we hope, there’s another weapon.  I’d like to see a short yardage back.  He may already be on the team. As always, injuries change everything but the depth is pretty solid.  

 

Yes, we’re in better shape than at least 25 teams, if not more, but plenty of room for improvement.  

 

Going to to be a great, fun year!

 

I think what the Houston signing does is potentially allow us to focus elsewhere early in this draft.  It sounds like there is excitement about Lewis and Turay's development and the FO will expect jumps from them next year, but Houston helps as a 'stop gap' and can help them continue with their growth if need be.  The thing about all 3 of those guys are health concerns (Turay from college, Houston hasn't played a full season in 4 years, and Lewis missed half of last year).

 

I still think if a stud rush-end drops to us we have a great chance of drafting him with our 1st or 2nd pick.... but if we have a S, an OL, an interior DL, a WR, or ILB that we have ranked equal, I think the Houston pick gives us an opportunity to say "we feel comfortable letting the rush-end go past us and we'll take the other position which may be a bigger need."

 

This team can use a lot of improvement (and a lot of depth), but it's the best off we've been going into a draft in a very long time, IMO.

 

On 3/22/2019 at 8:42 AM, Superman said:

I don't think Ballard is done, but I do think we're in good position. We'll see how things go over the next few weeks, and how the draft plays out.

 

But at the same time, I think there are several spots on the roster that still need improvement. On offense, RT is a question mark, and while Smith might provide the organic upgrade in his second year, that's not a given. I still think WR2/3 is a question mark, even with Funchess (I'm hoping we come away from the draft with one of these slotty receivers), and TE is a question, depending on Doyle's ability to stay healthy and return to form. Even RB, can Mack stay on the field, and if not, do we have another guy who can fill in for him?

 

On defense, we have questions at CB, which might be okay depending on how well Desir and Wilson play. I think we can do better at safety and while I like Autry and Lewis I would love to have a game-wrecking three tech (two more positions I think the draft will help with). There are questions about the young edge rushers. I think Walker is adequate at Mike, but we could do better. 

 

Long story short, I think the roster still needs a lot of work. I like where it's headed, but we're counting on the development of a lot of young guys, and other positions are manned by average to slightly above average players. I think we're still behind established contenders -- New England, Rams, Saints, Chargers, Eagles... jury's out on the Chiefs, considering the best part of their defense just took two big hits. 

 

Are you thinking we'll move B raden Smith to RG and need to find a replacement RT?  Personally, I thought the weakest link on our OL last year was RG in Glowinski.  I thought Smith did well, but think his best position still may be RG.  Either way, I expect Ballard to address the OL some more this off-season.

 

I fully agree with you in other areas.  I like Cain, but don't think we can put much stock in Cain right now.  I like the Funchess signing, but if he can't fix his drops he won't be a viable #2 option.  Even if we do have TY and Funchess can fix his drops, with the health issues of Doyle we will likely be improved if we add an additional WR (it could be Inman, or it could be Cain if he lives up to his hype, but I won't believe that until I see it) or TE (it could be Mo Alie-Cox, but I think he's got a long ways to go before we should be happy that he's our #2 TE, which he is right now until Doyle proves he is back healthy and performing at pre-injury form).  Luck will be majorly hampered in the post-season if we've got a gimpy TY again and no other truly reliable weapons to take pressure off him.

 

Outside of Luck, Vinny, Rigo, Nelson, Kelly, Costanzo, TY, Ebron and The Maniac -- I don't think there is a player on the team that should feel totally secure about their starting role coming into next year.  I think we can use improvements at 16-of-25 starting positions on this entire roster.  I think Mack and Autry are the next two closest, followed by Braden Smith (though I wouldn't be surprise to see him move inside to RG).

 

I think other guys are pretty much locks to make the roster barring injury like: Wilson, Desir, Glowinski, Geathers, Turay, Lewis, Walker, Moore III, etc.... but I wouldn't consider their jobs as starters or primary role players a lock.

[Rally5]

3 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

What happened against that stellar KC defense in the playoffs then? Why does KC routinely score 30+? Because they have playmakers around their stud QB. You can't compare anything to NE, they have the best coach and QB of all-time, during the same dominant timeframe, they're the exception to every rule. 

First I never said anything about "stellar" so keep your argumentss honest.  Second, I can compare whatever I want and I also included Philly which you ignored.  To pull the KC game out as your shining example is picking the fly crap out of the pepper.  Our offense was top 10 second half of the year and our defense was top one in some metrics in the last third of the season.  So conveniently you also don't point to the win streak or the slaughter of the Cowboys or beat down of the Texans, that's fine, your prerogative.  I happen to disagree.  I also predicted we'd be a playoff team and win 5 in a row when we were 1-5 and that's on record so I feel reasonably confident in my assessment of this team.  The key to this team in 2019 will be winning the south, gaining home field, getting a year older (coaches included), staying healthy and having a bit of Luck. That should be our expectation, there's no way anyone can predict anything beyond that given the volatility this league provides. I'll give you the last word because I sense you mostly just want to argue anyway.

[Rally5]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I'm glad you offered this clarification. In my mind, there are still a lot of question marks. Not necessarily glaring needs, more opportunities to upgrade. I think sometimes fans have a tendency to overrate mediocre players on their own team.

 

For example, I think Desir, Geathers, Walker, Hunt, Sheard are all average to slightly above average. Hooker has had injury issues. Wilson is inconsistent, but has shown flashes; Lewis and Turay are still unknowns. Autry, Moore and Leonard are above average to great, still with room to improve, but rock solid pieces. I think Houston is going to be solid for us. So nine of our core defensive players are question marks, to varying degrees. And this is for a defense that wasn't very good last season (based on certain metrics and with sufficient context).

 

We could have the same discussion for the offense, although it's further along than the defense. 

 

So my thinking is we still need to add a lot of good players, at a lot of positions. Those players who represent opportunity to upgrade either need to get better or be replaced, and I think competition in camp and early in the season will provide answers to a lot of those question marks, positive or negative. We'll know at the end of the 2019 season whether Wilson can be counted on, we'll know whether Walker is good enough to start at Mike for a real contender, we'll have a better idea whether Turay can rush the passer, whether Smith is a good RT, etc. And if the front office continues to draft well and the coaching staff continues to develop players, we'll have fewer opportunities for upgrade going into 2020.

 

So I would still approach the draft with the objective of adding as many good players as possible. I don't know if this is the right time to give up picks to add one player who will still need to prove whether he can play in the NFL. I'd rather move back and add more players right now. Ultimately, it depends on the board, which won't change for me no matter how our roster looks, because I think the draft is more about the roster two years from now than it is about this year.

 

I think I'll always be what people call a BPA guy, but there will be times when I'll be more receptive to trading up for a "special" prospect. And don't get me wrong, if Ballard trades up for a guy I like, I'll be happy about it, but I think it's a little early to get ambitious right now.

Very good, I think there's a lot of nuances lost in translation on the board at times.  My sense is we totally agree I just may be a bit more half full at the moment!  Looking forward to reading your draft analysis again this year!  Go Colts!

[Superman]

34 minutes ago, CurBeatElite said:

Are you thinking we'll move B raden Smith to RG and need to find a replacement RT?  Personally, I thought the weakest link on our OL last year was RG in Glowinski.  I thought Smith did well, but think his best position still may be RG.  Either way, I expect Ballard to address the OL some more this off-season.

 

I fully agree with you in other areas.  I like Cain, but don't think we can put much stock in Cain right now.  I like the Funchess signing, but if he can't fix his drops he won't be a viable #2 option.  Even if we do have TY and Funchess can fix his drops, with the health issues of Doyle we will likely be improved if we add an additional WR (it could be Inman, or it could be Cain if he lives up to his hype, but I won't believe that until I see it) or TE (it could be Mo Alie-Cox, but I think he's got a long ways to go before we should be happy that he's our #2 TE, which he is right now until Doyle proves he is back healthy and performing at pre-injury form).  Luck will be majorly hampered in the post-season if we've got a gimpy TY again and no other truly reliable weapons to take pressure off him.

 

Outside of Luck, Vinny, Rigo, Nelson, Kelly, Costanzo, TY, Ebron and The Maniac -- I don't think there is a player on the team that should feel totally secure about their starting role coming into next year.  I think we can use improvements at 16-of-25 starting positions on this entire roster.  I think Mack and Autry are the next two closest, followed by Braden Smith (though I wouldn't be surprise to see him move inside to RG).

 

I think other guys are pretty much locks to make the roster barring injury like: Wilson, Desir, Glowinski, Geathers, Turay, Lewis, Walker, Moore III, etc.... but I wouldn't consider their jobs as starters or primary role players a lock.

 

I would have preferred moving Smith back to RG and adding competition at RT, but I think re-signing Glowinski signals that he's pretty much penciled in at RG, meaning Smith is going to be at RT. I was hoping for a veteran swing backup, and maybe that still happens. 

 

I agree on most of the rest. I said at the end of the season that they shouldn't allow "good" to be the enemy of "great." Like you, I think a lot of spots on the roster could stand to be improved. That doesn't mean none of the younger players will get better, or be used in more effective ways. Wilson might wind up being great, but I think it would be criminal neglect to rely on him being a solid starter.

[Superman]

25 minutes ago, Rally5 said:

Very good, I think there's a lot of nuances lost in translation on the board at times.  My sense is we totally agree I just may be a bit more half full at the moment!  Looking forward to reading your draft analysis again this year!  Go Colts!

 

I can see that my comments might read as if I'm not optimistic about our young guys. I actually am, I just wouldn't let that optimism influence my draft strategy. Especially not right now.

[EastStreet]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I can see that my comments might read as if I'm not optimistic about our young guys. I actually am, I just wouldn't let that optimism influence my draft strategy. Especially not right now.

 

Personally I think it's refreshing. It's nice to see a realist. 

Sunshine pumping can ruin a roster.

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I will just leave this here.

 

[EastStreet]

10 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I will just leave this here.

 

 

hate when they paint only 1/3 of the pic....

how did he do on short and long lol.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

10 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

hate when they paint only 1/3 of the pic....

how did he do on short and long lol.

I would have to go look but I believe I remember a tweet and he was very good. 

[CurBeatElite]

13 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I would have preferred moving Smith back to RG and adding competition at RT, but I think re-signing Glowinski signals that he's pretty much penciled in at RG, meaning Smith is going to be at RT. I was hoping for a veteran swing backup, and maybe that still happens. 

 

I agree on most of the rest. I said at the end of the season that they shouldn't allow "good" to be the enemy of "great." Like you, I think a lot of spots on the roster could stand to be improved. That doesn't mean none of the younger players will get better, or be used in more effective ways. Wilson might wind up being great, but I think it would be criminal neglect to rely on him being a solid starter.

 

I agree.  We've got a lot of younger guys who have showed greatness (or very good-ness) in spurts, but have not shown the ability to be consistently great all season.

 

Wilson is one example. He's certainly got potential, and at times he has shown how good he 'can possibly be,' but he has still yet to show that he can live up to his potential over a 16 game season and a playoff run.  Hopefully the Mitchell signing last year really did help him learn to improve as a pro and practice to be the best rather than just getting by on natural ability, like he and others have reported on.  Like you, I don't think we can believe he's going to be a stud starter for us until we actually see it.

 

Deon Cain is a guy a lot of people on the board seem to be high about as stepping in and taking over as our #2 WR.  He looked good in practice and pre-season last year.  He's a late round draft pick who has never played a regular season snap and is coming off a major injury.  

 

As you mentioned earlier, Walker has proven that he can be a serviceable starter, but he (as of now) certainly isn't much more than an average ILB in the NFL.  He could be improved.

 

Then guys like Turay, Lewis, Geathers, Mack, etc.... are all young guys who have shown flashes of being able to play very well in this league.  Unfortunately, many of them have had injury issues (of that group - Turay did in college, Lewis missed half of last year, Geathers has missed a lot of time, and Mack has missed a decent amount of time early in his career)... and many of them look great one play and lost the next play.

 

Hopefully our coaching staff develops these young guys well over the off-season and through-out next season.  But, outside of the list I mentioned earlier, I don't feel very confident that we're going into next season with clear cut starters or that every guy who has flashed potential will live up to it.

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

I would have to go look but I believe I remember a tweet and he was very good. 

if you have time, i'd appreciate it. i wouldn't have imagined he was that good at all levels. he is #1 in burn rate (which is great), but just so so on overall catch rate and passer rating. if he's that awesome in the intermediate space, but just so so on average, he's likely bad in short or long. given his burn rate rating, i'd have to guess he's either challenged short, or give up long ones even though he's stayed close. 

 

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/pierre-desir/

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, Irish YJ said:

if you have time, i'd appreciate it. i wouldn't have imagined he was that good at all levels. he is #1 in burn rate (which is great), but just so so on overall catch rate and passer rating. if he's that awesome in the intermediate space, but just so so on average, he's likely bad in short or long. given his burn rate rating, i'd have to guess he's either challenged short, or give up long ones even though he's stayed close. 

 

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/pierre-desir/

I am still looking. I thought I remember his passer rating  was very good. It was awhile ago I saw the tweet so it’s taking me time to find it.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

5 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

if you have time, i'd appreciate it. i wouldn't have imagined he was that good at all levels. he is #1 in burn rate (which is great), but just so so on overall catch rate and passer rating. if he's that awesome in the intermediate space, but just so so on average, he's likely bad in short or long. given his burn rate rating, i'd have to guess he's either challenged short, or give up long ones even though he's stayed close. 

 

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/pierre-desir/

Here is a article about his numbers. Wilson actually had good numbers also if I remember.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-colts-1-75m-investment-in-pierre-desir-is-paying-off-big-time

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Here is a article about his numbers. Wilson actually had good numbers also if I remember.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-colts-1-75m-investment-in-pierre-desir-is-paying-off-big-time

Thank you!!

So the PFF and PP ratings basically disagree. PFF (88.1) has him rated bettere (allowed passer rating) than PP (93.8). 88.1 is good not great, 93.8 is average. PFF basically echoes my thoughts. He's a high floor, decent ceiling kinda guy. And I'll take consistency all day.

[DerekDiggler]

Always have to draft BPA.   Ballard did in 2017 and he did again last yr.

 

The signing of Houston will not keep Ballard from taking a pass rusher if he is BPA.   This team can be upgraded at in this draft at every draft position except QB, LG, WSLB, #1 WR, C and probably FS.

 

So if Ballard has a player at one of those positions  ranked as BPA at 26 or 34 or so on,   He will look for a trade or find the next highest graded player (in his mind, not the talking heads) and take them.

 

Like Superman said you are drafting for the next couple of years not necessarily for this yr, but if it works out and the rook can beat out a vet then that is gravy.

 

Ballard is not going to draft for need, just like he didn't spend for need in the 1st week of FA.    He has already said he is and always will be BPA no matter what.   

 

He seems to always tell us what his plan is.  He alsways stickers to it and yet people don't believe him when he says it.

 

Bad GM's draft for need.   Smart GM's draft BPA