Shane Ray visiting the colts

[csmopar]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Hughes is a much better athlete...and player.

Now but 98 percent on here were calling him a bust when he was with us and thought we’d fleeced them when we traded him. 

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Sheard is not getting cut. hes our best run defender on the line imo and sets the edge really well

 

4 hours ago, ProblChld32 said:

I don’t think Sheard will be cut , his ability to play the run and set the edge makes him an absolute commodity here.

Who is this edge-setting, non-sack-getting edge stud we praise?  Erik Walden?

[Scott Pennock]

The more I research Ray it looks like it was the injuries that really set him back in the 2017 season.

 

He earned starts in his rookie going into his sophomore season and when Ware retired he had a chance in 2017 to start and he got hurt. Shaq Barrett started that year and then Chubb was drafted and started last year ahead of both Barrett and Ray.

 

This could be a REALLY good pickup IF he can return to 2013-2016 form. Even if he works as just a rotational piece and gets 5-8 sacks, it's worth it.

 

Turay, Lewis, Muhammad, Ray, Phillips, Winbush and whatever draft pick(s) we get this year would make for great competition and a lot of youth to rotate behind Sheard and Houston.

 

 

 

[shasta519]

2 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Now but 98 percent on here were calling him a bust when he was with us and thought we’d fleeced them when we traded him. 

 

Really? For Kelvin Sheppard? 

[r a y s k i]

Doesn't excite me that much, wondering about the price tag. 

[csmopar]

40 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Really? For Kelvin Sheppard? 

Yep. I bet there wasn’t 5 supporters of Hughes in this forum back then. He really had done nothing up to that point in his career. Call it scheme, poor coaching or whatever but that was a rare trade that resulted in a win for pretty much both players, though Hughes obviously ended up being the steal there.

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Yep. I bet there wasn’t 5 supporters of Hughes in this forum back then. He really had done nothing up to that point in his career. Call it scheme, poor coaching or whatever but that was a rare trade that resulted in a win for pretty much both players, though Hughes obviously ended up being the steal there.

Yeah.  There was no reason not to trade Hughes at that point.  He showed very little.  Not that Sheppard was very good, but a reasonable person would've traded Hughes for a ham sandwich at that point and Sheppard was at least better than a ham sandwich.

 

Then after the trade, Hughes figured out how to play football.

[shasta519]

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Yeah.  There was no reason not to trade Hughes at that point.  He showed very little.  Not that Sheppard was very good, but a reasonable person would've traded Hughes for a ham sandwich at that point and Sheppard was at least better than a ham sandwich.

 

Then after the trade, Hughes figured out how to play football.

 

No...a reasonable person keeps Hughes. He was cheap pass rushing depth on a team that desperately needed pass rushing. He showed flashes in his first year in the 3-4 (which he fit better than the 4-3)...and with Freeney leaving...he was going to have a much bigger role. And then Grigs drafted a truly awful player in Werner and decided he could dump Hughes him for a fat, slow ILB. A bad move is a bad move...and there was no upside to that move.

 

 

[shasta519]

38 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Yep. I bet there wasn’t 5 supporters of Hughes in this forum back then. He really had done nothing up to that point in his career. Call it scheme, poor coaching or whatever but that was a rare trade that resulted in a win for pretty much both players, though Hughes obviously ended up being the steal there.

 

If you think about it...most trades are a win for the players involved.

[DougDew]

49 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

No...a reasonable person keeps Hughes. He was cheap pass rushing depth on a team that desperately needed pass rushing. He showed flashes in his first year in the 3-4 (which he fit better than the 4-3)...and with Freeney leaving...he was going to have a much bigger role. And then Grigs drafted a truly awful player in Werner and decided he could dump Hughes him for a fat, slow ILB. A bad move is a bad move...and there was no upside to that move.

 

 

My ham sandwich comment was obviously sarcasm. 

 

Seriously, I think GMs have their theories, plans, and boxes and if players don't fit them, especially if they were drafted by the previous GM, they get put on the back burner for the new GMs vision.

 

There weren't too many around who made that observation about whether Hughes could be a successful 34 OLB.  He was drafted by Polian for a different scheme and Werner was probably thought of as more of a scheme fit.  Bad player though.  I also think we were looking for a different type of ILB than what we had, so Sheppard was valued over whomever we had.

 

And here Henry Anderson had 7 sacks last year while still maintaining his run defense, and was traded for a 7th rounder the year before.  And Ridgeway probably will be gone despite being a decent player on our old defense and seemingly not given much of a chance on the new one.  Team FOs have their vision, and if existing players don't fit into them they aren't given much of a shot and don't last long.  Not enough fairness is applied as to whether or not they are simply a good football player or not and can contribute in the new scheme.  Its just the way it works a lot regardless of team or GM. 

[Colts1324]

8 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Sheard is not getting cut. hes our best run defender on the line imo and sets the edge really well

Look at the most recent report. 

[CR91]

9 minutes ago, Colts1324 said:

Look at the most recent report. 

 

That report seems suspect to me. Theres no point extending Kelly or Sanchez now. Kelly still has a fifth year option we can excerise and Sanchez is a RFA after this year

[csmopar]

8 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

If you think about it...most trades are a win for the players involved.

 

8 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

No...a reasonable person keeps Hughes. He was cheap pass rushing depth on a team that desperately needed pass rushing. He showed flashes in his first year in the 3-4 (which he fit better than the 4-3)...and with Freeney leaving...he was going to have a much bigger role. And then Grigs drafted a truly awful player in Werner and decided he could dump Hughes him for a fat, slow ILB. A bad move is a bad move...and there was no upside to that move.

 

 

Not entirely true. Hughes at the time was playing like crap. That was obvious. In hindsight, I think he just wanted out of Indy. I don’t think he liked the switch, I don’t think he liked the personnel we had at the time. 

[MikeCurtis]

11 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

 

This could be a REALLY good pickup IF he can return to 2013-2016 form. Even if he works as just a rotational piece and gets 5-8 sacks, it's worth it.

 

Agree 1000% 

 

Rotational pass rushers, that can be had for less than 8 Mil are hard to find.

 

I HOPE they make the pickup ........ Im guessing a 1 year deal........ 6 Mil

 

When you have a large cap space, you take one year chances..........

[MikeCurtis]

8 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

That report seems suspect to me. Theres no point extending Kelly or Sanchez now. Kelly still has a fifth year option we can excerise and Sanchez is a RFA after this year

I would agree on Sanchez.......  

 

However, Kelly is a keeper.

 

His big question is health...... but......We play better when he is on the field.

 

He may actually go for a 4 or 5 year type deal, now, with a good signing bonus

 

I would offer $8 Mil per year, with $15M signing bonus

 

He is averaging 2.5M right now

 

He will cost MUCH more in the future

 

 

 

[richard pallo]

20 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

Agree 1000% 

 

Rotational pass rushers, that can be had for less than 8 Mil are hard to find.

 

I HOPE they make the pickup ........ Im guessing a 1 year deal........ 6 Mil

 

When you have a large cap space, you take one year chances..........

I hope Ballard moves quickly on this.  I can see the Patriots being interested as well.  

[Rally5]

14 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

By the start of the season, Ballard’s remodel will be 3-years old,  not two.

 

17, 18, and 19...    three free agency periods...    three drafts...

 

Details, details.... 

[Scott Pennock]

24 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

Agree 1000% 

 

Rotational pass rushers, that can be had for less than 8 Mil are hard to find.

 

I HOPE they make the pickup ........ Im guessing a 1 year deal........ 6 Mil

 

When you have a large cap space, you take one year chances..........

With his youth and pedigree I'd almost do a 2 year with a 3rd year team option deal with a ton of incentives built into it. That way he'll be 29 when reentering free agency.

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

 

Not entirely true. Hughes at the time was playing like crap. That was obvious. In hindsight, I think he just wanted out of Indy. I don’t think he liked the switch, I don’t think he liked the personnel we had at the time. 

Correct.  He didn't want to play for the Colts by then.  At least that was the rumor at the time.

[Jeremy Waldon]

http://www.nfl.com/player/shaneray/2552451/profile

 

Little info on Shane

[csmopar]

3 hours ago, Jeremy Waldon said:

http://www.nfl.com/player/shaneray/2552451/profile

 

Little info on Shane

The more I read in this guy, the more I get nervous. At first, I liked the sounds of this concept but this guy has been extremely injury prone. I would feel really nervous about offering anymore than a 1 year prove it deal

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

The more I read in this guy, the more I get nervous. At first, I liked the sounds of this concept but this guy has been extremely injury prone. I would feel really nervous about offering anymore than a 1 year prove it deal

With his injuries that will probably be all he gets from anti team. Or a two year where only first year is guaranteed.

[shasta519]

10 hours ago, csmopar said:

 

Not entirely true. Hughes at the time was playing like crap. That was obvious. In hindsight, I think he just wanted out of Indy. I don’t think he liked the switch, I don’t think he liked the personnel we had at the time. 

 

He wasn't really playing like crap though...this is the part of the Hughes narrative that isn't entirely accurate. Colts fans (and this is a general statement...not directed at you)...have a tendency to remember one singular thing, play, etc...and Hughes' case...it was his awful effort on STs a couple of time.

 

The reality is that he was a much better fit for a 3-4...the same scheme he would thrive in in BUF. The year they traded him he had pressures on a very high percentage of his snaps. And there was little reason from a football standpoint to dump him. If he wanted out...that's different of course.

 

 

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, csmopar said:

The more I read in this guy, the more I get nervous. At first, I liked the sounds of this concept but this guy has been extremely injury prone. I would feel really nervous about offering anymore than a 1 year prove it deal

to me, it's kind of beneficial. i'm not saying i'm glad he's hurt or anything, but we really don't want a long term contract anyway. give him a one year with health riders and bonus conditions, or a two year with the same with no guarantee for year 2. 

 

i really wish we knew more about the injury, and why it required multiple fixes. 

[#12.]

23 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

to me, it's kind of beneficial. i'm not saying i'm glad he's hurt or anything, but we really don't want a long term contract anyway. give him a one year with health riders and bonus conditions, or a two year with the same with no guarantee for year 2. 

 

i really wish we knew more about the injury, and why it required multiple fixes. 

 

It's true with any player like Ray - they're available because of injuries or problems with their former team.  Yeah, you're taking a chance on a reclamation project.  Calculate your odds and take a chance on the best option. 

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

It's true with any player like Ray - they're available because of injuries or problems with their former team.  Yeah, you're taking a chance on a reclamation project.  Calculate your odds and take a chance on the best option. 

cap rich years are good years to roll the dice with small wagers lol

[crazycolt1]

On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 4:46 PM, Mr. Irrelevant said:

Uhm, what is up with Ballard bringing in OLB’s from 3-4 to our 4-3 when he shipped Simon out last year.... 

The Colts defense does not use a 4-3 on every play. With the signing of Houston (who has the ability to pass rush from any spot) the Colts will mix it up.

Simon just didn't have the speed needed to do what was wanted of him.

[jimmy g]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

He wasn't really playing like crap though...this is the part of the Hughes narrative that isn't entirely accurate. Colts fans (and this is a general statement...not directed at you)...have a tendency to remember one singular thing, play, etc...and Hughes' case...it was his awful effort on STs a couple of time.

 

The reality is that he was a much better fit for a 3-4...the same scheme he would thrive in in BUF. The year they traded him he had pressures on a very high percentage of his snaps. And there was little reason from a football standpoint to dump him. If he wanted out...that's different of course.

 

 

I thought he had outplayed Mathis in training camp.

[#12.]

28 minutes ago, jimmy g said:

I thought he had outplayed Mathis in training camp.

 

Wut?

[crazycolt1]

23 hours ago, shastamasta said:

No thanks. Never been a huge fan of Missouri pass rushers.

If he can get the job done I don't care if he is from Oz.

[Jason_]

On 3/22/2019 at 4:46 PM, Mr. Irrelevant said:

Uhm, what is up with Ballard bringing in OLB’s from 3-4 to our 4-3 when he shipped Simon out last year.... 

 

It's not nearly that black and white. You can't simply look at a player and say "well he played in a 34 so we can't use him in our 43". You have to look at height, weight, length, athletic traits, how technically sound are they in various areas etc. In order to determine if a player can play in multiple fronts. 

[ojsglove]

I think he would be a great pickup for us at the right price.  He wasn't given the opportunity to shine in Denver

[shasta519]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

If he can get the job done I don't care if he is from Oz.

 

Something about Mizzou pass rushers that just never seem to live up to the hype.

 

Regardless of his alma mater...I would be pretty indifferent to Ray.

[shasta519]

30 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

It's not nearly that black and white. You can't simply look at a player and say "well he played in a 34 so we can't use him in our 43". You have to look at height, weight, length, athletic traits, how technically sound are they in various areas etc. In order to determine if a player can play in multiple fronts. 

 

Or...maybe is that "black and white." 

 

 

[CoachLite]

12 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

If he can get the job done I don't care if he is from Oz.

 

9 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

Something about Mizzou pass rushers that just never seem to live up to the hype.

 

Regardless of his alma mater...I would be pretty indifferent to Ray.

Now, if he was from the University of Mars (like Oakland DL Otis Sistrunk), that would be another story.

[jimmy g]

21 hours ago, #12. said:

 

Wut?

I didnt stutter.

 

I dont have the backroom info others on here do, so if he was a bad attitude, yes, he needed to go.  And I can't watch every day of training like others on here do. But many on here are saying Hughes was no good as a 3-4 linebacker here, and, in preseason games that year it  wasnt true.  Mathis is/was an AllPro as a 4-3 DE and Hughes was a bench sitter. But in the first preseason games as 3-4 LBs, Mathis looked lost and too slow to cover running backs in pass coverage.  Hughes looked like he was ready for a breakout season.  Then they traded him, and later scrapped the idea of Mathis in pass coverage and just let him go back to his Specialty of Strip-Sacks.  It's no big deal. Just my interpretation of what I watched.

[jimmy g]

9 hours ago, CoachLite said:

 

Now, if he was from the University of Mars (like Oakland DL Otis Sistrunk), that would be another story.

Denzelle Good played at Mars Hill. Maybe he should have switched to DE???

[Dark Superman]

This is the one under the radar signing I want along with Ajayi. 

[Dark Superman]

Every day I wake up to hoping there will be a notification on my phone that Ray signed with Indy.