Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
stitches

[Evan Silva and Josh Norris] Colts Draft Analysis and 7-Round Mock Draft

Recommended Posts

One of the best mocks I've seen out there for the Colts. 

 

https://www.rotoworld.com/article/draft-analysis/nfl-draft-needs-colts


 

Quote

 

NFL DRAFT NEEDS: COLTS

 

Notable Pre-Draft Additions: DE Justin Houston, WR Devin Funchess.

 

Starting Offense

QB: Andrew Luck
RB: Marlon Mack
WR1: T.Y. Hilton
WR2: Devin Funchess
SLWR: Chester Rogers
TE: Jack Doyle
TE: Eric Ebron
LT: Anthony Castonzo
LG: Quenton Nelson
C: Ryan Kelly
RG: Mark Glowinski
RT: Braden Smith

 

Starting Defense

RE: Justin Houston
LE: Jabaal Sheard
DT: Margus Hunt
DT: Denico Autry
MLB: Anthony Walker
WLB: Darius Leonard
SLB: Matthew Adams
LCB: Pierre Desir
RCB: Quincy Wilson
SCB: Kenny Moore
FS: Malik Hooker
SS: Clayton Geathers

 

TEAM NEEDS

Silva's Analysis

 

Pass Rusher: Having built one of the NFL’s five strongest rosters in only 26 months on the job, GM Chris Ballard will enter April’s draft with immense flexibility. Talent injections remain necessary at a few positions, beginning with interior and exterior defensive line play. Starters Houston, Sheard and Hunt are on the wrong side of 30, and 2018 second-round DE Turay didn’t show much as a rookie. Last year’s Colts finished 21st in sacks (38) and 28th in QB hits (78). Houston can’t fix their pass rush on his own.

 

Pass Catcher: Ballard is one of the league’s foremost forward-thinking GMs, so the fact that Ebron, Doyle, Funchess and Rogers are all in contract seasons won’t be lost on him. Hilton has two years left. Doyle has battled chronic hip problems and is coming off surgery, while Hilton and Ebron’s bodies broke down as last year progressed. Don’t be shocked if Ballard uses one of his four top-90 picks at tight end. The Colts’ GM is a proponent of attacking defenses on high-percentage passes in the middle of the field.

 

Secondary: Unwilling to match the Redskins’ offer for Landon Collins, the Colts settled for re-signing injury-riddled SS Clayton Geathers. Wilson hasn’t played well enough to be guaranteed a full-time job entering his third season, while groin and knee injuries cost Hooker 11 games in his first two years.

 

COLTS 2019 DRAFT PICKS

Norris' Options

 

1 (26). iDL Jerry Tillery, Notre Dame - Chris Ballard is into athleticism along his defensive front. That was true during his time in Kansas City, and it was clear in his first year with the Colts. Look at the additions of Margus Hunt and the drafting of Tyquan Lewis and Kemoko Turay. Enter Tillery, who is an outstanding interior disruptor from a variety of alignments and posted an athletic profile in the 84th percentile. Tillery is a top 15 prospect in my book.

2 (34). Acquired from Jets in Sam Darnold trade - WR Hakeem Butler, Iowa State - Devin Funchessmight perform well in 2019, but he is on a one-year deal. I know Deion Cain generated hype during training camp, but keep in mind he’s done nothing in the NFL … yet. Chris Ballard talks about the difficulties in evaluating receivers out of college, mainly due to them not facing physical press coverage. That is not Butler, as he has had plenty of snaps face up against corners and displays a variety of releases versus press. He actually led this class in receiving yards off 20-plus yard throws. He can make the difficult look easy.

2 (59). CB Amani Oruwariye, Penn State - A physical corner at the line and when in phase to disrupt the catch point. He lacks consistency, but that’s what NFL coaching is for. Plus, he’s an above average athlete in the 73rd percentile.

3 (89). TE Jace Sternberger, Texas A&M - As Evan mentioned, it would not be a surprise to see the Colts continue to invest in tight end. Why not make a strength stronger? Sternberger is a comfortable receiver who only needs to be willing and adequate as a blocker to stay on the field.

4 (129). EDGE Ben Banogu, TCU - I mentioned Ballard’s love of athletes along his front. Banogu is the perfect developmental Day 3 edge with an athletic profile in the 97th percentile and a single fast ball move. Hopefully he develops further.

4 (135). S Malik Gant, Marshall - A powerful, hard-hitting safety who can line up in three different spots in the first three snaps of the game: single high, box safety, slot corner.

5 (164). DL John Cominsky, Charleston - Tiny program, big potential. Cominsky looked a bit lost during Senior Bowl week, but that is expected. He offers an intriguing outside to inside profile.

6 (199). CB Derrek Thomas, Baylor - Reminds me of Deiondre Hall in terms of a wiry long defensive back who always wants his hands on the receiver when playing corner.

7 (240). OL Trey Pipkins, Sioux Falls - Athletic, late round, developmental offensive lineman that likely lands on the practice squad.


 

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t follow college ball much, outside ND maybe but it strikes me as odd that many of these players are from smaller program colleges and nothing inside the larger, more prominent programs. Now, maybe these kids are graded pretty high, idk, but it just seems odd to me that not one player out of Alabama or Clemson etc... Does this guy just follow smaller programs or is it just coincidence? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the Pipkins pick. I've been hoping we snag him toward the end of the draft as a developmental tackle.

Butler's a solid pick too. And I like Sternberger quite a bit, especially as a possible Doyle replacement. Oruwariye and Tillery fit Ballard's type so they make sense. Kinda skeptical about how they pan out but I do like Tillery, regardless of the consistency concerns. Not to mention I'm confident in Eberflus/position guys to coach them up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Mock...... 

 

Except

2nd round pick, Pick 3 needs to be a SS, not a CB

AND

THERE WILL BE AN OL PICK IN ROUNDS 1-4

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we will pick a safety before a WR. There is way more need for a S then a WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jdubu said:

I don’t follow college ball much, outside ND maybe but it strikes me as odd that many of these players are from smaller program colleges and nothing inside the larger, more prominent programs. Now, maybe these kids are graded pretty high, idk, but it just seems odd to me that not one player out of Alabama or Clemson etc... Does this guy just follow smaller programs or is it just coincidence? 

 

I guess it depends on what your definition on "smaller program colleges" is, but I only see 2 of the 9 picks as coming from small programs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think we will pick a safety before a WR. There is way more need for a S then a WR.

 

Yeah, that is not how Ballard bases his draft decisions.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jskinnz said:

 

Yeah, that is not how Ballard bases his draft decisions.

Well this safety class is very good. It’s not like we would be taking a bad safety over a good WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

Well this safety class is very good. It’s not like we would be taking a bad safety over a good WR.

 

The point appears to have flown right over your head yet again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/29/2019 at 2:58 PM, Chloe6124 said:

Well this safety class is very good. It’s not like we would be taking a bad safety over a good WR.

I would not call it very good. A lot of big boards don't have a S in the top 32. Even NFL.com only has one in the category of "instant starter", and even that S they say may be limited as a box safety. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we are going to skip any S in the first 2 rounds. Since Eberfluss is here we have used only the minimal amount of capital, money wise and draft wise, on the backfield. The impact of early draftees on the lines is bigger than that of DBs in Ballards eyes i guess. I expect D- and O-line being the first 3 picks. I would be pretty happy with a haul of Wilkins, Lindstrom and Z.Allen.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Safety is a genuine need and a key position in the modern NFL. Playing 3 safeties rather than 3 linebackers is very common anymore. And Geathers is a crap shoot when it comes to his health. The Colts need some new blood there. I expect a safety to be picked in Day 2. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a huge fan. Love the first 3 picks. Still not 100% sure on butler I need to sit a watch him but I like tillery and Amani

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a bad pick but I’d take a safety earlier. Gant is slow (4.63) 40 and doesn’t have a ton of man coverage rants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind picking up two wide receivers in this draft, one at #34 and another one in the mid rounds. Aside from TY and possibly Funchess, there isn't another WR on the roster who would be missed if he suddenly decided to quit football and take up mushroom farming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   By the way,  I didn't want this post to end without addressing one of your main points.   Your paragraph that starts with this:   My Point:  There are always good candidates...   same is true for head coaches and coordinators.    I'm sorry,  but I'm going to STRONGLY disagree with that argument.  And I think you'll retract that.    Every so often you'll see an article about how did the class of GM's from a previous year turn out?   Or head coach hires?    I used to tell posters here who hated Pagano that the class of head coaches that included Chuck,  that all of the other coaches got fired before Chuck.    That Chuck was the best of his class.   And that happens with GM's too.   A class gets hired,  and quite often most of them, sometimes all of them don't work out.   I believe my position has far more facts to back that up.    There isn't always a Sean McVey.  There isn't always a Kyle Shannahan.   There isn't always a Josh McDaniels.   There aren't 32 good GM's, or 32 good head coaches,  or 32 good offensive or defensive coordinators.   That's why so many teams struggle for years to get those spots right.   So, no, I absolutely reject the idea that there are always good candidates.    Sorry.   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishing.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.  
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

    • SOMDColtsfan

      SOMDColtsfan 420

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Franklin County

      Franklin County 452

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 7,668

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Smonroe

      Smonroe 9,354

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...