Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Superman

"Colts Productions"

Recommended Posts

 

The latest edition of Colts Productions...   entitled...  "You don't want to be cluttered on draft day" might be the best one yet.  

 

Some really intricate and sophisticated editing giving a very high level of production quality.

 

Some really good interviews that explain how they use analystics to help drive their decisions.

 

Ballard,  Hogan,  Dodds,  and the head of their analytics department, a guy named Park are all really outstanding.    It's 6:30 minutes long and it flies by.    You'll likely want to watch it again and again.

 

Major props to the production department.    This is quality for all of us.

 

Hope you're enjoying!

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The latest edition of Colts Productions...   entitled...  "You don't want to be cluttered on draft day" might be the best one yet.  

 

Some really intricate and sophisticated editing giving a very high level of production quality.

 

Some really good interviews that explain how they use analystics to help drive their decisions.

 

Ballard,  Hogan,  Dodds,  and the head of their analytics department, a guy named Park are all really outstanding.    It's 6:30 minutes long and it flies by.    You'll likely want to watch it again and again.

 

Major props to the production department.    This is quality for all of us.

 

Hope you're enjoying!

 

You have a link? Definitely want to see part 3!

Share this post


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

You have a link? Definitely want to see part 3!

 

As with the other two,  it's right on the front page of the website as the top story.

 

You can't miss it!     

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressive. Nice info on Kenny Moore and George Odum, as well as the breakdown on how they pick players. I'd rather have a smaller board of 170 guys that fit my criteria as well as it work. Definitely will watch again @NewColtsFan:thmup: These are very enjoyable to watch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really answers the “nightmare scenario”  thread. They are too organized and too prepared to have a nightmare.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The latest edition of Colts Productions...   entitled...  "You don't want to be cluttered on draft day" might be the best one yet.  

 

Some really intricate and sophisticated editing giving a very high level of production quality.

 

Some really good interviews that explain how they use analystics to help drive their decisions.

 

Ballard,  Hogan,  Dodds,  and the head of their analytics department, a guy named Park are all really outstanding.    It's 6:30 minutes long and it flies by.    You'll likely want to watch it again and again.

 

Major props to the production department.    This is quality for all of us.

 

Hope you're enjoying!

 

I agree with you it's very compelling. I've been a draft junkie anyways I watch every draft show and listen to every draft podcast and this might be the best one. I can't wait until the draft I think Ballard and company are going to nail it. I liked it when Ballard said will move back or move up whatever we think is going to help us the most which to me means he's flexible and I like that. I have a lot of faith in Ballard and truly believe he'll do the right thing which makes me excited more than any other.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked it for what it was. And that's a fan vid. Better than most. I'm glad at the "who" was involved, more than the content itself.

 

Anything goes on draft day. No secrets in that vid. Film is important. Analytics are important. Having a succinct plan is important. Being flexible is important. 

 

I'd be disappointed if they said anything else.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also liked when looking how their board was set with WR1, DT1 at the top and underneath were WR2 and DR2.  So when it’s tome to choose we don’t get confused we just look at the top.  Haha.  That reminded me of Spinal Tap.  These all have 11.....11,11,11,11. Is it louder than 10?  It’s 1 louder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those videos are almost like teasers or trailers. I would love to see them be like 30 minute long episodes. There is so much more I want to see of their process but I understand that they are trying to keep secrets and institutional knowledge within the organization out of public eye. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LockeDown said:

I also liked when looking how their board was set with WR1, DT1 at the top and underneath were WR2 and DR2.  So when it’s tome to choose we don’t get confused we just look at the top.

 

That was a really good visual, IMO. To reach for a lesser rated player would require a blatant disregard for the board that you've worked on for months, stacking, re-stacking, and finalizing. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This latest episode was outstanding!  I knew there was a lot of work to prep for the draft, but had no idea how many people are involved and how extensive the process is to prepare.

 

Will make watching the draft even more enjoyable.  I don't think I'll ever have a reaction of "why did they draft that guy?" as long as Ballard is at the helm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LockeDown said:

I also liked when looking how their board was set with WR1, DT1 at the top and underneath were WR2 and DR2.  So when it’s tome to choose we don’t get confused we just look at the top.

 

42 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

That was a really good visual, IMO. To reach for a lesser rated player would require a blatant disregard for the board that you've worked on for months, stacking, re-stacking, and finalizing. 

 

Exactly.  And listening to P. Kirwan and C. Landry, what is going on now is tweaking/finalizing  the 'stacking'.  They are still getting information in, and that may or may not move a guy up or down a small amount.  But know that there are no 'rocketing' up or down the board by a round or two at this point unless a major scandal or medical issue acutely arises at the last minute. Even then, it might not be that much. Laremy Tunsil fell out of one of the top pick slots to #13.  That's major just because of the steep slope of round 1 players talent/value.  A top player suffering major season cancelling injury might drop 1/2 to full round.  By and large, most moves are minute though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

Exactly.  And listening to P. Kirwan and C. Landry, what is going on now is tweaking/finalizing  the 'stacking'.  They are still getting information in, and that may or may not move a guy up or down a small amount.  But know that there are no 'rocketing' up or down the board by a round or two at this point unless a major scandal or medical issue acutely arises at the last minute. Even then, it might not be that much. Laremy Tunsil fell out of one of the top pick slots to #13.  That's major just because of the steep slope of round 1 players talent/value.  A top player suffering major season cancelling injury might drop 1/2 to full round.  By and large, most moves are minute though.

 

Yeah, we always hear talking heads discussing players who are rising and falling on boards, and that's probably a misnomer. What that probably means is that these people are starting to recognize that teams don't have players rated where the media thought they were rated. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, we always hear talking heads discussing players who are rising and falling on boards, and that's probably a misnomer. What that probably means is that these people are starting to recognize that teams don't have players rated where the media thought they were rated

:thmup:

 

And they get info to realize that 10 teams have 'a guy' rated at 10 different (sometime wildely different) places on their boards, and that confuses them as well.

 

The Colts videos just give  a little hint of all the factor that go into board stacking : Psych assessment, medical exams, character evaluations, etc...

 

All teams do this. Some are just more thorough, less biased, and do it better.  I like to think we are at the forefront here at this time with this group.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

:thmup:

 

And they get info to realize that 10 teams have 'a guy' rated at 10 different (sometime wildely different) places on their boards, and that confuses them as well.

 

The Colts videos just give  a little hint of all the factor that go into board stacking : Psych assessment, medical exams, character evaluations, etc...

 

All teams do this. Some are just more thorough, less biased, and do it better.  I like to think we are at the forefront here at this time with this group.

 

I appreciate the video's insights on outliers. Nothing revolutionary, but it was nice to hear that concept expressed and exemplified by the team, with reference to Kenny Moore. They're basically saying they would like to have all these boxes checked with regard to physical traits, but when there's a box or two that isn't checked, they look to see if something else might offset that deficiency. 

 

So even though Moore is two inches shorter than the average corner, his length/wingspan and vertical leap can offset his lack of height. 

 

This gives me confidence that the personnel guys are being thoughtful and thorough as they evaluate players. And in the case of Moore, they got a good player that other teams might have overlooked because he's not tall enough to fit their criteria. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That was a really good visual, IMO. To reach for a lesser rated player would require a blatant disregard for the board that you've worked on for months, stacking, re-stacking, and finalizing. 

 

Indeed. It’s never clicked for me before seeing that image. Especially with what Ballard has said about a tiered system in the past. 

 

Is it possible then that CB might have a WR1, for example, at that top tier (row), then have the WR2 a few rows down based on talent/value if he thinks there is a big drop off after that in a certain position?? It’s a great way to check yourself to make sure you aren’t reaching for a guy based on need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascinating about getting the board to 170 and there is probably 250+ draft picks.  In theory our 6th and 7th round draft picks aren't on the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

So even though Moore is two inches shorter than the average corner, his length/wingspan and vertical leap can offset his lack of height. 

That jumped out at me too.  Is 'wingspan' a football thing? I just recall anyone ever talking about a players wingspan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Farns01 said:

Fascinating about getting the board to 170 and there is probably 250+ draft picks.  In theory our 6th and 7th round draft picks aren't on the board.

 

I think if you could count every player that's on at least one team's draft board, the collective total would be over 300. Remember Ryan Grigson drafting Denzelle Good from Mars Hill, and everyone in the world said "Who?" No one knew who he was. It's possible the Colts were the only team in the league who had him on their draft board.

 

So while it's theoretically possible that by the end of the 6th round, the Colts have no players remaining on their board, I think it's unlikely. Especially once you adjust for team fits, etc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I think if you could count every player that's on at least one team's draft board, the collective total would be over 300. Remember Ryan Grigson drafting Denzelle Good from Mars Hill, and everyone in the world said "Who?" No one knew who he was. It's possible the Colts were the only team in the league who had him on their draft board.

 

So while it's theoretically possible that by the end of the 6th round, the Colts have no players remaining on their board, I think it's unlikely. Especially once you adjust for team fits, etc. 

True, but I think there are more players the Colts have there eye on but the 170 is the ones they believe have a chance to make the team.  The other players are probably are considered Free Agent picks after the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nadine said:

That jumped out at me too.  Is 'wingspan' a football thing? I just recall anyone ever talking about a players wingspan

 

I usually hear about wingspan with basketball players, not football players. In football it's usually arm length. The measure wingspan, but don't usually mention it unless it's exceptional.

 

Moore is 5'9, Desir is 6'1, but Moore's wingspan is greater by a half inch.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Farns01 said:

True, but I think there are more players the Colts have there eye on but the 170 is the ones they believe have a chance to make the team.  The other players are probably are considered Free Agent picks after the draft.

 

Remember, not every team has the same 170 players either.  I heard it is routine for teams to ha ve only 130 - 190 on the board, and never had run out of players to choose from when their time came.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Nadine said:

That jumped out at me too.  Is 'wingspan' a football thing? I just recall anyone ever talking about a players wingspan

 

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I usually hear about wingspan with basketball players, not football players. In football it's usually arm length. The measure wingspan, but don't usually mention it unless it's exceptional.

 

Moore is 5'9, Desir is 6'1, but Moore's wingspan is greater by a half inch.

Are these thoughts anywhere close to the mark?:

 

Sometimes I have heard the term "long" used. They'll say is guy is long. meaning perhaps... if a DL for instance is attacking a particular gap, can shed and leap, perhaps deflecting a pass not directly over his head.

 

There is height, arm length, and the two can combine for freakish catching/deflecting ability.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Four2itus said:

 

Are these thoughts anywhere close to the mark?:

 

Sometimes I have heard the term "long" used. They'll say is guy is long. meaning perhaps... if a DL for instance is attacking a particular gap, can shed and leap, perhaps deflecting a pass not directly over his head.

 

There is height, arm length, and the two can combine for freakish catching/deflecting ability.

 

I think they're all combined to refer to a player's length, but they are different measurements. Add in vertical leap and broad jump (two areas where Moore also excelled), and you have a good idea of a player's radius, which is a composite of length and range. It's something Moncrief had to an elite degree.

 

But that's an example of why the film work has to be the foundation. Moncrief had an elite radius, but sometimes played with T-rex arms, so he didn't get the most out of his radius (usually; he has some highlight reel catches, even with the Colts). 

 

The video showed a clip of Moore tipping a pass at the LOS, and other deflections. His ability to close on blitzes might also be a byproduct of his radius.

 

I'm kind of enthralled by this at the moment. Thinking about Seattle's reported criteria that any CB has to fit specific criteria (height / arm length) to be drafted by them, and comparing it with the Colts' comments on outliers, it makes me wonder if this is an area where the Colts might be ahead of other teams on. For them to claim Moore like they did is intriguing to me.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Superman said:

I'm kind of enthralled by this at the moment. Thinking about Seattle's reported criteria that any CB has to fit specific criteria (height / arm length) to be drafted by them, and comparing it with the Colts' comments on outliers, it makes me wonder if this is an area where the Colts might be ahead of other teams on. For them to claim Moore like they did is intriguing to me.

 

And illustrates how different teams only have 170 guys on their draft board and stiil not come up short of picks on draft day. Every team has their own criteria of who 'fits, and who doesn't.  They can be quite varied.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

I'm kind of enthralled by this at the moment. Thinking about Seattle's reported criteria that any CB has to fit specific criteria (height / arm length) to be drafted by them, and comparing it with the Colts' comments on outliers, it makes me wonder if this is an area where the Colts might be ahead of other teams on. For them to claim Moore like they did is intriguing to me.

 

I wonder if the thing they shared about Moore's length is more of a post-hoc rationalization or was part of their decision-making process? Or has it become part of their process after they saw Moore succeed and searched for reason why he's succeeding? The reason I wonder is because I remember Ballard talking about Moore before but he stated other reasons for why they took a chance on him an didn't mention his length(at least as far as I remember). Sometimes you stumble on something unexpected and it makes you tweak your process a bit... 

 

Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things... it seems that right now they are looking for things that might off-set certain physical limitation in outlier cases. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if I understood it properly, moving from left to right (or right to left, I wasn't clear on that) is positional value and then moving up and down is player value for each position.

 

So let's say the far left(or right) is DE and a few spots down is WR, if the top spot for DE is gone then they go to the WR. Not to toot my own horn but that is kind of what I've been saying the whole time, each position has a weight or value based on their season review and current personnel scouting.  That is how teams factor need into BPA.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does Ballard ever have his heart set on a player and doesn’t get him?  I never hear him say that.  And we know he is pretty honest. It seems like he sets his board and gets his guys. He had even calculated that Hooker might fall to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been very impressed with the Colts' production team. The videos are awesome and provide great insight into the inner workings of the team. I've enjoyed watching the videos and can't wait for the draft next week.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stitches said:

 

I wonder if the thing they shared about Moore's length is more of a post-hoc rationalization or was part of their decision-making process? Or has it become part of their process after they saw Moore succeed and searched for reason why he's succeeding? The reason I wonder is because I remember Ballard talking about Moore before but he stated other reasons for why they took a chance on him an didn't mention his length(at least as far as I remember). Sometimes you stumble on something unexpected and it makes you tweak your process a bit... 

 

Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things... it seems that right now they are looking for things that might off-set certain physical limitation in outlier cases. 

 

I don't remember what Ballard had to say about Moore, other than saying they liked him (which is obvious). It could be that they realized after the fact that Moore had offsetting traits, and that helped them evaluate their evaluations, but that they claimed him on waivers at the cut down is evidence that they at least had their eyes on him pre-draft.

 

Like you said, though, whether they realized this before or after the fact, deconstructing the process to identify good prospects is critical. Especially when you're not picking in the top ten every year. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

So, if I understood it properly, moving from left to right (or right to left, I wasn't clear on that) is positional value and then moving up and down is player value for each position.

 

So let's say the far left(or right) is DE and a few spots down is WR, if the top spot for DE is gone then they go to the WR. Not to toot my own horn but that is kind of what I've been saying the whole time, each position has a weight or value based on their season review and current personnel scouting.  That is how teams factor need into BPA.

 

 

I went back and watched. I don't think the horizontal board they showed reflected positional value. It was just traditional positions for offense, defense and special teams. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, CamMo said:

Is it possible then that CB might have a WR1, for example, at that top tier (row), then have the WR2 a few rows down based on talent/value if he thinks there is a big drop off after that in a certain position?? It’s a great way to check yourself to make sure you aren’t reaching for a guy based on need.

 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they were being overly simplistic in their explanation. Because the 6th OL isn't necessarily equal to the 6th WR, so it's not necessarily a straight across comparison from position to position. There's still an overall grading system they use to stack their board.

 

So you might have 10 players in the top tier of your ranking system, at various positions, and they're all above a certain line on your board. All but one of them might come off the board before your pick, but when you look at the board, that one player is standing out above the rest of the remaining players, and the pick kind of makes itself. All the grading and positional value has already been determined, all the team has to do is hand in the card.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

It could be that they realized after the fact that Moore had offsetting traits, and that helped them evaluate their evaluations, but that they claimed him on waivers at the cut down is evidence that they at least had their eyes on him pre-draft.

 

This is a product (at least in part) of the Pro scouting team... under the direction/edicts of Chris Ballard. From numerous meetings we are never privy to. But CB has always preached 'special attributes in a player getting a good look.'.

 

From there, does the tape show the attributes negate/overcome cited deficiencies, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I went back and watched. I don't think the horizontal board they showed reflected positional value. It was just traditional positions for offense, defense and special teams. 

 

I think the board they truly use is kept secret from cameras..  I'm confidant that one used was for clarification with simplification.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, we always hear talking heads discussing players who are rising and falling on boards, and that's probably a misnomer. What that probably means is that these people are starting to recognize that teams don't have players rated where the media thought they were rated. 

 

I think the bolded is spot on. the talking heads for the most part aren't doing the work. they're relying on other talking heads, the "buzz", surface stats, etc.. Teams are digging into the nitty gritty. A few sites, mostly fantasy and year around groups, do some good work too, but it's more pure data than fit for scheme, fit for team, fit for need, outlier manipulation, etc..

12 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I appreciate the video's insights on outliers. Nothing revolutionary, but it was nice to hear that concept expressed and exemplified by the team, with reference to Kenny Moore. They're basically saying they would like to have all these boxes checked with regard to physical traits, but when there's a box or two that isn't checked, they look to see if something else might offset that deficiency. 

 

So even though Moore is two inches shorter than the average corner, his length/wingspan and vertical leap can offset his lack of height. 

 

This gives me confidence that the personnel guys are being thoughtful and thorough as they evaluate players. And in the case of Moore, they got a good player that other teams might have overlooked because he's not tall enough to fit their criteria. 

 

Being  a ND fan, I hated one of the DCs we had who always had a very rigid measurement fit/requirement for positions. ND passed on several kids that wanted to be Irish, that went on to be elite players somewhere else...., all because they were an inch too short, their arms not quite long enough, or didn't have certain characteristic. Drove me nuts. Glad he's gone.

 

7 hours ago, LockeDown said:

So does Ballard ever have his heart set on a player and doesn’t get him?  I never hear him say that.  And we know he is pretty honest. It seems like he sets his board and gets his guys. He had even calculated that Hooker might fall to them.

 

To have favorites is human. I'm sure most in that room have their heart set on one guy or another. Their all paid to do a job though, and that's why they have their board and decision matrix lined out. I just wonder how many situations arise that they haven't thought of, or planned for, and how they react to those.

2 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

I think the board they truly use is kept secret from cameras..  I'm confidant that one used was for clarification with simplification.

I guarantee they're not giving away the secret sauce in any fan video. Ballard hired several data geeks, and I'm sure they have SQL database with all kinds of data points and weights built in. I don't think Ballard is "machine" driven, but I think he has a method of evaluation, and uses his tools to make things as clear and simple as possible to help keep him and his team stay on mission. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to be able to trust the numbers. The addition of John Park and George Li in the quantitative and qualitative analysis for the Colts cannot be understated. In creating a draft board, it's not just the numbers, but what those numbers actually mean in relation to the team, overall. When it all comes together, that's where the magic happens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Irish YJ said:

 

I guarantee they're not giving away the secret sauce in any fan video. Ballard hired several data geeks, and I'm sure they have SQL database with all kinds of data points and weights built in. I don't think Ballard is "machine" driven, but I think he has a method of evaluation, and uses his tools to make things as clear and simple as possible to help keep him and his team stay on mission. 

 

It's probably not a SQL database. That's sooo last century. It's much more sophisticated than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 1:14 PM, CamMo said:

 

Indeed. It’s never clicked for me before seeing that image. Especially with what Ballard has said about a tiered system in the past. 

 

Is it possible then that CB might have a WR1, for example, at that top tier (row), then have the WR2 a few rows down based on talent/value if he thinks there is a big drop off after that in a certain position?? It’s a great way to check yourself to make sure you aren’t reaching for a guy based on need.

 

 

Look in on the background in this shot from 2015-

 

1080_231f1fcc-9551-4273-bd6f-ee7a5e08497

 

Top level starts at A, sometimes I see a B (no A rated). Goes down in rating vertically. Amount in each section varies, but are in preferential order. There are more (different layout) boards around the room too.

 

Now this was a Grigson board from 2015.  Others may label theirs different, add color (for flags, etc.)  but they all let you see top players left on the list in every position, and those that stick out above the rest as the names peel off. The name that sticks out above the others is BPA and must be taken even if that selection doesn't fulfill a 'hole' in the roster with 'that pick'.

 

If players left are (very near) equal in grade, then they go toward position of perceived need.

  • Thanks 2

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...