Spencer Ware visited the colts today

[Valpo2004]

I would prefer Ajayi but Ware would still give us solid depth.  

[EastStreet]

16 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

All you have really done was exchange the words from stats/metrics to fact/history.

What you call sunshine pumps is optimism brought on by being a fan.

You sanitizing things and take out the human factors in the game of football.

There is no such thing as perfection.

Nobody is asking for, or expects perfection.  How someone performs in stats and metrics, is fact, and is history. I always cheer hard, very hard, for my team. A blind optimist I'll never be. That doesn't mean I don't hope for questionable guys, or questionable hires, to succeed. You call it sanitizing, I call it being being informed and realistic. 

[EastStreet]

15 hours ago, PureLuck said:

 

So if Ballard drafts a stud WR in the 4th you are as ecstatic as you are regarding the stud RB he drafted in the 4th 2 years ago?

I'm extremely happy with the value of Mack in the 4th. What's not to like when a 4th round guy is 6th in the league in y/g. He's not Eliott, Gurley, or SB, but he's a good back, gave the team a great boost when he came back game 6, and certainly outperformed expectations. 

 

I'm also happy with Hines in year one. 700+ all purpose yards in his first year is pretty darn good. I look for him to be a bigger part of the passing game in year 2.

 

That's why I've said that all we really need is a complimentary power back in the later rounds like Snell.

[crazycolt1]

2 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

Nobody is asking for, or expects perfection.  How someone performs in stats and metrics, is fact, and is history. I always cheer hard, very hard, for my team. A blind optimist I'll never be. That doesn't mean I don't hope for questionable guys, or questionable hires, to succeed. You call it sanitizing, I call it being being informed and realistic. 

When you use stats and metric to keep you informed it takes the human element out of the equation.

Stats and metrics do not tell the whole story of the game. You keep dragging up those stats with out adding all those stats up to see the whole picture.

Now that is realistic.

When you get over the individual stats and realize team stats are more important you will see a different point of view.

[EastStreet]

15 hours ago, superrep1967 said:

I agree 

While I do think we need an upgrade over Jonathan Williams, I like Mack, Wilkins, and Hines. I think Ballard and company have been doing their jobs and kicking the tires on some guys to see if a good deal falls into their laps. I do really like the thought of a good thunder back (like Snell) for short yardage. I think he'd be great in the 4th as well punishing tired DLs. 

 

While I'm in favor of giving Mack (195 last year) more attempts, I don't want him over 250. What teams like Dallas are doing to guys like Eliott is stupid (304 carries). It's like they are trying to wear him out and shorten his career. 225ish would be a good number. 

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

When you use stats and metric to keep you informed it takes the human element out of the equation.

Stats and metrics do not tell the whole story of the game. You keep dragging up those stats with out adding all those stats up to see the whole picture.

Now that is realistic.

When you get over the individual stats and realize team stats are more important you will see a different point of view.

lol, then Ballard is taking the human element out of things, because he hired a team of stat geeks. Stats are definitely not everything, but they are a critical part in his job, and it's been a big part of fandom for that last 10+ years. It's your prerogative to ignore them. I don't.  

[DerekDiggler]

I was never in the sign Bell camp.   But I will say this.   If he had been a Colt last yr he would have led the league in rushing and given Andrew another target to throw to

 

Everyone is concerned with Funches drops or Ebrons  drops etc.   but for some reason Mack gets a pass on that.  

 

Give me Ajayi he is Mack and can catch the ball.    So that is an upgrade.  Obviously he needs to be healed medically or no way 

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

lol, then Ballard is taking the human element out of things, because he hired a team of stat geeks. Stats are definitely not everything, but they are a critical part in his job, and it's been a big part of fandom for that last 10+ years. It's your prerogative to ignore them. I don't.  

Now you are twisting my intent to suit you.

You completely missed my point of view.

Example: Your own stats listed the Colts stats had stats listed to make a point of how poor the Colts receiving crew was.

But when you add in the stat that Luck used the amount of receivers he did the team stat ended up being 6th in the league.

You see, stats do not tell the whole story of the game of football when you hand pick them to make an argument with.

Just like RBBC. You may not have a RB running for 1,000 yds a season. But if you add the stats of that RBBC as a whole you will see those numbers need to rise. (we are there right now)

Then you have to consider if those RBBC stats rise there is a chance the passing numbers go down.

 >>>>> You just said stats have been a big part of fandom for the last 10+ years. <<<<<

The Steelers had the best WR (Brown) and the best RB(Bell) in the NFL stat wise but how many super bowl titles did they win with those two players on their team? A big fat zero.

Why? Because the team stats sucked.

Yes you are correct,  it is my prerogative to ignore individual stats.

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Now you are twisting my intent to suit you.

You completely missed my point of view.

Example: Your own stats listed the Colts stats had stats listed to make a point of how poor the Colts receiving crew was.

But when you add in the stat that Luck used the amount of receivers he did the team stat ended up being 6th in the league.

You see, stats do not tell the whole story of the game of football when you hand pick them to make an argument with.

Just like RBBC. You may not have a RB running for 1,000 yds a season. But if you add the stats of that RBBC as a whole you will see those numbers need to rise. (we are there right now)

Then you have to consider if those RBBC stats rise there is a chance the passing numbers go down.

 >>>>> You just said stats have been a big part of fandom for the last 10+ years. <<<<<

The Steelers had the best WR (Brown) and the best RB(Bell) in the NFL stat wise but how many super bowl titles did they win with those two players on their team? A big fat zero.

Why? Because the team stats sucked.

Yes you are correct,  it is my prerogative to ignore individual stats.

If you don't see the value in having a legit #2 WR to compliment Hilton, then you would in the minority. If you don't understand a QB, and an offense performs better with better WRs, not sure what to say.

 

A QB having to work twice as hard with a subpar group means tossing to guys with less separation (and less yac ability) and going through more reads than necessary, which result in INTs and a lower yards/attempt. Luck was 2nd in INTs and 23rd in yards per attempt. Both VERY bad stats to have. If you don't think improved WRs would impact those numbers, then you simply are ignoring the obvious. 

 

And don't spin and deflect. Pitt had other issues. Of course having a strong WR group is not the only thing a team needs. Pitt was without Bell last year. Why did they choke at the end of the season last year??? because they couldn't run the ball in losing 4 of the last 6 games. Didn't break 100 yards in those 4 games IIRC.

 

We didn't have a "rbbc" last year. We had a lead RB that was out due to injury early in the season for a quarter of our games. Once he returned, Wilkens averaged less than 2 carries a game the rest of the year. Hines is an APB and is part of the offense in a different way (passing and rushing) different than Mack.

 

Had Mack started all 16 games with his average, he would have been 3rd or 4th in total yards instead of 16th. The team, somewhere between 5th and 8th instead of 20th. That's not RRBC. We did have however have a WR2BC. When you're slot guy has more reps than your X (especially when others are spending time at slot), then that's not typically a good sign unless you have a all pro type slot (which we have far from it).

[crazycolt1]

23 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

If you don't see the value in having a legit #2 WR to compliment Hilton, then you would in the minority. If you don't understand a QB, and an offense performs better with better WRs, not sure what to say.

 

A QB having to work twice as hard with a subpar group means tossing to guys with less separation (and less yac ability) and going through more reads than necessary, which result in INTs and a lower yards/attempt. Luck was 2nd in INTs and 23rd in yards per attempt. Both VERY bad stats to have. If you don't think improved WRs would impact those numbers, then you simply are ignoring the obvious. 

 

And don't spin and deflect. Pitt had other issues. Of course having a strong WR group is not the only thing a team needs. Pitt was without Bell last year. Why did they choke at the end of the season last year??? because they couldn't run the ball in losing 4 of the last 6 games. Didn't break 100 yards in those 4 games IIRC.

 

We didn't have a "rbbc" last year. We had a lead RB that was out due to injury early in the season for a quarter of our games. Once he returned, Wilkens averaged less than 2 carries a game the rest of the year. Hines is an APB and is part of the offense in a different way (passing and rushing) different than Mack.

 

Had Mack started all 16 games with his average, he would have been 3rd or 4th in total yards instead of 16th. The team, somewhere between 5th and 8th instead of 20th. That's not RRBC. We did have however have a WR2BC. When you're slot guy has more reps than your X (especially when others are spending time at slot), then that's not typically a good sign unless you have a all pro type slot (which we have far from it).

Once again you are hand picking and adding your own twist to my comments.

Where did I say the Colts were a RBBC team? I said we needed better numbers to be a RBBC.

Brown and Bell both were with the Steelers more than last year in case you missed it.

Why can't you accept that you are an individual stat guy and I am not. 

I think we both bring good things to the forum but we don't have to agree on things. Thus the purpose of the forum.

[EastStreet]

15 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

Once again you are hand picking and adding your own twist to my comments.

Where did I say the Colts were a RBBC team? I said we needed better numbers to be a RBBC.

Brown and Bell both were with the Steelers more than last year in case you missed it.

Why can't you accept that you are an individual stat guy and I am not. 

I think we both bring good things to the forum but we don't have to agree on things. Thus the purpose of the forum.

you are the one that used the term/acronym RBBC. 

i'm perfectly fine with you not being a stat guy. you don't however seem to be fine that I am a stats guy. every time i bring stats into a conversation, you simply say i'm being negative and discarding someone's ability. stats are stats. they are negative and positive. i'm sorry, i just don't ignore the negative ones and pump the positive ones.

 

[crazycolt1]

58 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

you are the one that used the term/acronym RBBC. 

i'm perfectly fine with you not being a stat guy. you don't however seem to be fine that I am a stats guy. every time i bring stats into a conversation, you simply say i'm being negative and discarding someone's ability. stats are stats. they are negative and positive. i'm sorry, i just don't ignore the negative ones and pump the positive ones.

 

No, you use stats as your measuring stick for talent.

I, in hand don't.

The negative part? No. Discarding someone's ability? Yes.

 

[DerekDiggler]

7 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

you are the one that used the term/acronym RBBC. 

i'm perfectly fine with you not being a stat guy. you don't however seem to be fine that I am a stats guy. every time i bring stats into a conversation, you simply say i'm being negative and discarding someone's ability. stats are stats. they are negative and positive. i'm sorry, i just don't ignore the negative ones and pump the positive ones.

 

Irish you’ll soon understand that the only thing this this guy is on this site for is to argue.   Brings nothing to any conversation. You’re feeding right into him.  I’d suggest not worrying about him     You’ll never reason with him.   

 

 

[lollygagger8]

He probably got injured walking off the plane lol 

[BigQungus]

Ship has probably sailed on Ajayi then

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

On 4/10/2019 at 7:16 PM, Irish YJ said:

I'm extremely happy with the value of Mack in the 4th. What's not to like when a 4th round guy is 6th in the league in y/g. He's not Eliott, Gurley, or SB, but he's a good back, gave the team a great boost when he came back game 6, and certainly outperformed expectations. 

 

I'm also happy with Hines in year one. 700+ all purpose yards in his first year is pretty darn good. I look for him to be a bigger part of the passing game in year 2.

 

That's why I've said that all we really need is a complimentary power back in the later rounds like Snell.

 

Snell isn't a power back. 

[Hoose]

Snell is a bigger back though. A larger running back will save wear and tear on the others and hopefully move the chains better than last year. 

The Colts have 3 solid RBs, but Hines is more of a gadget guy. A 4th, bigger RB, whether a Day 3 draft pick or a late FA like Ware, needs to happen. 

[Four2itus]

I find it interesting when fans use terms that describe the extreme. For clarification, some definition..

 

Negativistic: The practice or habit of being skeptical, critical, or pessimistic, especially toward the views or suggestions of others.

 

Blind Optimism: To be optimistic without any reason.

 

So if a player is drafted/picked up via FA/traded for....etc, the only true REALIST, is one who posts with neither of the above definitions. A realist would state, "It might be good, or it might be bad". Using the stance that one is not a blind optimist...therefore a realist, is simply not true. The opposite is also true. 

[shasta519]

On 4/10/2019 at 11:19 PM, crazycolt1 said:

Now you are twisting my intent to suit you.

You completely missed my point of view.

Example: Your own stats listed the Colts stats had stats listed to make a point of how poor the Colts receiving crew was.

But when you add in the stat that Luck used the amount of receivers he did the team stat ended up being 6th in the league.

You see, stats do not tell the whole story of the game of football when you hand pick them to make an argument with.

Just like RBBC. You may not have a RB running for 1,000 yds a season. But if you add the stats of that RBBC as a whole you will see those numbers need to rise. (we are there right now)

Then you have to consider if those RBBC stats rise there is a chance the passing numbers go down.

 >>>>> You just said stats have been a big part of fandom for the last 10+ years. <<<<<

The Steelers had the best WR (Brown) and the best RB(Bell) in the NFL stat wise but how many super bowl titles did they win with those two players on their team? A big fat zero.

Why? Because the team stats sucked.

Yes you are correct,  it is my prerogative to ignore individual stats.

 

Their team stats didn't suck. According to offense EXP, the past five years they ranked #4, #6, #7, #4 and #6...basically a top 5 offense.

[EastStreet]

6 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

Snell isn't a power back. 

I'm not sure how else you would describe him.

At 5-10 and 225lbs, when NFL.com describes someone as a "downhill grinder with vision and power" and a "touchdown monster", power back is what comes to mind.

 

I watched him play UT, UGA, Vandy, FL, and the bowl vs PSU. He's not elusive, but has plenty of power.

[Hoose]

19 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

I'm not sure how else you would describe him.

At 5-10 and 225lbs, when NFL.com describes someone as a "downhill grinder with vision and power" and a "touchdown monster", power back is what comes to mind.

 

I watched him play UT, UGA, Vandy, FL, and the bowl vs PSU. He's not elusive, but has plenty of power.

Yup. He’d be great on the Colts. 

[EastStreet]

3 hours ago, Hoose said:

Yup. He’d be great on the Colts. 

I love how he wore teams down late. He also seems to just plain love football. 

He'd be a nice short yardage and goal line guy, but what I'd like most is him getting bruiser type snaps late in the game, and keeping Mack fresh.

 

If there is any part of our run game that needs to improve, it's our power success rate.

[Matthew Gilbert]

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 1:00 PM, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

Snell isn't a power back. 

You're about twelve days late on the April Fool's Day joke here. A power back is exactly what Snell is.