Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The draft is less then two weeks away. What are your final guesses?

 

If we trade up, ill go with Brian Burns

 

If we stay at 26, ill go with Darnell Savage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CR91 said:

The draft is less then two weeks away. What are your final guesses?

 

If we trade up, ill go with Brian Burns

 

If we stay at 26, ill go with Darnell Savage

Trade up, Brian Burns.

Pick at 26, Jerry Tillery

Darnell Savage at 26 would make me mad.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade up Brian Burns. Possibly Wilkins 

 

This is a little bit of a fantasy for me

26 wilkins

34 Abrams 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Trade up, Brian Burns.

Pick at 26, Jerry Tillery

Darnell Savage at 26 would make me mad.

 

Why? Savage imo is a first round talent. Im not sure he'll get to 34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am starting to believe that Marquise Brown is the WR the Colts will target, either at 26 or 34.  With Funchess and Ebron, we've got ample possession/red zone presence.  Having another guy like T.Y. can instantly remove the dreaded doubles.  What can Brown do for you?  Draw coverage and blow the top off on any snap.  Problem solved.

 

I think Ballard is so disciplined that the board and draft flow will dictate every pick, making it very difficult to predict what number we will land a guy at.  If there are a lot of safeties available at 34, might as well go BPA (passing over Abram) and see what's happening at 59 (Rapp, Savage, Hooker).  I can't wait to see it unfold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CR91 said:

 

Why? Savage imo is a first round talent. Im not sure he'll get to 34

I would be fine with Savage at 34. The safeties are pretty lumped together in the late 1st/early 2nd (in the same tier). It would be a huge waste of value to take him there IMO. I'd rather grab a solid O-Line/D-Line guy that will definitely be gone by 34. If by chance Savage is gone, you can grab a Safety in the same tier that's still there. JMO anyway.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I would be fine with Savage at 34. The safeties are pretty lumped together in the late 1st/early 2nd (in the same tier). It would be a huge waste of value to take him there IMO. I'd rather grab a solid O-Line/D-Line guy that will definitely be gone by 34. If by chance Savage is gone, you can grab a Safety in the same tier that's still there. JMO anyway.

 

Im not a fan of Tillery. I question his motor and he doesnt get a lot of sacks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Im not a fan of Tillery. I question his motor and he doesnt get a lot of sacks

Doesn't have to be Tillery specifically, but there are a lot of O-Line/D-Lineman that are better options than Savage at 26.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Im not a fan of Tillery. I question his motor and he doesnt get a lot of sacks

Contrary to that, I think he has a great motor and that’s one of the best parts of his game. Check out my Scouting Report on him if you want, might change your mind a bit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, WarGhost21 said:

Contrary to that, I think he has a great motor and that’s one of the best parts of his game. Check out my Scouting Report on him if you want, might change your mind a bit. 

 

Ive seen a few of his tapes and he scares me because you get a mixed bag. You get what at times looks like a top 5 talent and then I see a play he takes off

Share this post


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

Doesn't have to be Tillery specifically, but there are a lot of O-Line/D-Lineman that are better options than Savage at 26.

 

Imo, our options at 26 will be Tillery, Lawrence, or Simmons. I think talent wise, Savage is better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

Im not a fan of Tillery. I question his motor and he doesnt get a lot of sacks

He had 8 sacks last year which is more than any of the other first round DT's other than Williams who also had 8. He was also rated extremely high by PFF in regards to pass rushing. I don't know about the motor though as I don't ever watch ND because I hate them lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Simms in his DT ratings did say the one thing about Tillery is he looks good then next play looks bad. He is very inconsistent he said when he watched tape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mega-trade up: Devin White  (I know.... I know)

 

Pick #26: Jonathan Abram - S

 

Pick #34: Deebo Samuel - WR  (Excellent route-runner and YAC guy)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CR91 said:

The draft is less then two weeks away. What are your final guesses?

 

If we trade up, ill go with Brian Burns

 

If we stay at 26, ill go with Darnell Savage

 

Darnell Savage at 26 would be a huge reach.

 

I agree with you on the trade up possibility for Burns though.

 

If we stay put at 26, I’m picking Simmons at DT for Indy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Boiler_Colt said:

He had 8 sacks last year which is more than any of the other first round DT's other than Williams who also had 8. He was also rated extremely high by PFF in regards to pass rushing. I don't know about the motor though as I don't ever watch ND because I hate them lol.

 

My bad. I was thinking of someone else

24 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

 

Darnell Savage at 26 would be a huge reach.

 

I agree with you on the trade up possibility for Burns though.

 

If we stay put at 26, I’m picking Simmons at DT for Indy. 

 

People thought Leonard was a reach. Ballard will take any player he wants regardless if the consensus thinks its a reach

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CR91 said:

People thought Leonard was a reach. Ballard will take any player he wants regardless if the consensus thinks its a reach

 

Boom goes the dynamite :explode:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s Abram. Colts seem to have shown him the most interest and he is the best fit in terms of what Ballard wants. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dexter Lawrence at 26. 

Savage or Hakeem Butler  at 34. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I think it’s Abram. Colts seem to have shown him the most interest and he is the best fit in terms of what Ballard wants. 

 

Remember...    we hadn’t shown Nelson much love at all when we picked him last year.

 

And we hadn’t shown Hooker much (any?) love the year before when we took him.

 

We might indeed pick Abrams.   I only caution reading too much into what leaks out about visits.    

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade up - Devin Bush

Stay put - De'Andre Baker

Trade back - Jeffery Simmons

34 - Savage

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really believe the Colts want that game changing DT that this defence needs.  This might b the only year that one might b available based on the depth at that position in the draft.  They have an extra 2nd round pick .  I wouldn't b surprised if they make a move.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dexter Lawrence....that's my wish at least. Instantly changes the d-lime like Nelson did for the offense

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i think we are going to stay at 26 and take J.Simmons and D.Samuel early 2nd. Then hope that our docs are confident about their injury history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if we get Simmons, he becomes the difference maker our Dline needs to become dominant.  He’s a   top 10 talent falling to us.  That’s what you have to do when picking at the end of the round

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

Imo, our options at 26 will be Tillery, Lawrence, or Simmons. I think talent wise, Savage is better

Ultimately, you may end up being right, but

 

Savage should probably still be on the board at 34.

 

Almost ALL NFL "Experts" have Tillary, Lawrence, and Simmons well above Savage

 

Savage is listed by NFL.com (My go to) as the 46th best prospect

 

Simmons is top 5

 

Lawrence is 21

 

Tillary is 30

 

I would like us to pick ONE of the three DL mentioned, and then go S with 34.

 

There will be some EXCELLENT SS's or a WR at 34 and at 59

 

I can imagine a draft of

 

26 - Simmons

34 - Lawrence

59 - Thornhill 

 

We would be a top 5 defense

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still not ready for my final guesses. That's why I still haven't posted my predictions in @Dr. T 's contest. But... what I think is that... Ballard likes the secondary and the OLine in addition to the DLine in this draft(those are direct quotes from Ballard). So my preliminary guess would be that we spend

- at least 1 pick on OLine ...

- and at least 2 picks on the secondary(I would even guess relatively early - he said that he likes the 2nd-3d round depth in the secondary in this draft). Picking both a CB and a S in day 2 IMO is very possible. 

-I love the WR group in the first 3 rounds of the draft, especially where we are picking... BUT... I cannot help but notice that there is very little noise about the Colts paying any attention to the WRs in this draft. Maybe they are doing a stealth job of hiding it and will surprise us, but I'm actually not so sure we pick a WR high(even though I personally would if I were picking)... 

 

I will formalize those in some way in Dr.T's game after I hear his and Reich's pre-draft press-conference. Anyone knows when that will be? It usually is the week before the draft but who knows? 

Share this post


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

 

26 - Simmons

34 - Lawrence

59 - Thornhill 

 

We would be a top 5 defense

 

 

 

 

I would literally run down the street screaming for joy if we could snag Simmons and Lawrence. Or Lawrence and Tillery. I just don't see Lawrence getting past NE. Looks like he could be the second coming of Wilfork. I'm not 100% sold. I've read that they haven't seen much improvement from junior I senior year. So hope that's not a case of peaked out. Where on the other hand Tillery has seen constant improvement. Love Tillery size as well. He can still add some weight to that 6'6 frame

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, LockeDown said:

I think if we get Simmons, he becomes the difference maker our Dline needs to become dominant.  He’s a   top 10 talent falling to us.  That’s what you have to do when picking at the end of the round

I think Simmons becomes a difference maker, but not until the 2020 season. Realistically, while you might get him on the field for a few games in 2019, it's going to take a year or so to come back from that ACL tear. If you take him, I think you have to look at it as trading your 2019 first round pick for a Top Five pick in 2020. Will he fall as far as #26? Will Ballard take him if he's there? Guess we'll all have to wait another eleven days to find out!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, HarryTheCat said:

I think Simmons becomes a difference maker, but not until the 2020 season. Realistically, while you might get him on the field for a few games in 2019, it's going to take a year or so to come back from that ACL tear. If you take him, I think you have to look at it as trading your 2019 first round pick for a Top Five pick in 2020. Will he fall as far as #26? Will Ballard take him if he's there? Guess we'll all have to wait another eleven days to find out!

I personally think Ballard would take him.

 

The question becomes will Irsay let Ballard draft him?   Typically the owner wants input to a controversial player, because the owner and GM have to sell the decision to a fan base.   Some fans will not be happy no matter what we say.    But I think we can sell Simmons.   He’s got a very compelling story, that I think most fans will accept.

 

We brought Simmons in for a visit.  I hope that’s a very good sign.   Keeping my fingers crossed.......

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I personally think Ballard would take him.

 

The question becomes will Irsay let Ballard draft him?   Typically the owner wants input to a controversial player, because the owner and GM have to sell the decision to a fan base.   Some fans will not be happy no matter what we say.    But I think we can sell Simmons.   He’s got a very compelling story, that I think most fans will accept.

 

We brought Simmons in for a visit.  I hope that’s a very good sign.   Keeping my fingers crossed.......

 

The thing with Ballard is... so far he has not taken a chance in the draft on either an injured player(that will likely miss the full season) or on a player with red flags high. And Simmons has both. The sample is small and it very well might just be random happenstance so far. I personally would love to have Simmons if Ballard clears him for his off-field thing... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending who is there at 26 I would rather wait and see if Simmons is still there at 34. I want a guy at 26 that can play right away.

 

Just a question. Wasn’t he breaking up a fight that involved his sister. That is a lot different in my opinion then being a bad dude.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simmons would be nice, but is he worth risking a first round pick for a guy who might not play until the playoffs if we even get that far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, CR91 said:

Simmons would be nice, but is he worth risking a first round pick for a guy who might not play until the playoffs if we even get that far?

The Simmons decision isn’t a 1-year decision.    It’s a 10-year decision.

 

It won’t be often that we get a chance to draft a top-10 pick when we’re picking in the mid-20’s or lower.

 

I wouldn’t expect Simmons to play for anyone until 2020.   And I’d be fine with that.. 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NewColtsFan said:

The Simmons decision isn’t a 1-year decision.    It’s a 10-year decision.

 

It won’t be often that we get a chance to draft a top-10 pick when we’re picking in the mid-20’s or lower.

 

I wouldn’t expect Simmons to play for anyone until 2020.   And I’d be fine with that.. 

 

I was reading up on him and nfl comparison was Suh. Now that's very intriguing 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The thing with Ballard is... so far he has not taken a chance in the draft on either an injured player(that will likely miss the full season) or on a player with red flags high. And Simmons has both. The sample is small and it very well might just be random happenstance so far. I personally would love to have Simmons if Ballard clears him for his off-field thing... 

I agree, Ballard has brought in clean players with his early picks.  Let's b honest though, the Colts won't get an opportunity to pick  a DT with Simmons talent at 26 in this or future drafts.  He mayb available at 26 mostly because of his ACL tear. This D needs a game changing DT.  Can u think of anyone else who may equal Simmons talent at 26? Sure, u can get lucky, but great DT's and edge rushers r picked early in the 1st round.  I think we go D line with 2 of our 1st 3 picks and then safety with the other pick. Just a hunch

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I agree, Ballard has brought in clean players with his early picks.  Let's b honest though, the Colts won't get an opportunity to pick  a DT with Simmons talent at 26 in this or future drafts.  He mayb available at 26 mostly because of his ACL tear. This D needs a game changing DT.  Can u think of anyone else who may equal Simmons talent at 26? Sure, u can get lucky, but great DT's and edge rushers r picked early in the 1st round.  I think we go D line with 2 of our 1st 3 picks and then safety with the other pick. Just a hunch

I mean, we say that every draft and every draft there is a guy with some sort of issue- be it injury or off-the field or drugs or something that drops to the 2nd round. It's not always a DT, but players with immense talent fall in the draft almost every year. IMO Tillery is close to Simmons talent-wise, but I'm not sure he will be there at 26.

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.

  • 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

    • Nate!

      Nate! 44

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      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:
    • DaveA1102

      DaveA1102 1,864

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