Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NewColtsFan

Value of First Round WR's...?

Recommended Posts

WR in round 2,or 3,or 4

 

We need to build the DL

 

There are some very good DL that SHOULD be available at 26

There are some good DL that SHOULD be available in rounds 2,3

 

There are some very good WR that SHOULD be available in round 2,3,4

 

BPA is going to be DL..... IMHO....... It should be a clear cut decision at 26

 

We will find out in a few hours

 

 

Stop picking on NCF.......  He is right 90% of the time, and theres a 50% chance of that

 

:)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a few years ago.  Or a dozen.  Hard to know, at my age.  Anyway, these guys on this show were having a discussion comparing the different positions on a football team to the parts of a car.  This position is like the chassis.  This one is the wheels.  This one is the engine.  All building up to the massive punch line:  You know what a wide receiver is?  The radio.  Seriously.  Just let that sink in.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I wish I could get paid to be wrong.

 

free money GIF

 

There's only so many playoff spots, and only 2 SB teams... So many get paid to be wrong lol.

 

I don't really give GMs a strike if they make a pick (prospect without injury or behavior flags) based on production and sound scouting, and then the guy either has chronic injury issues or some kind of bad behavior issue out of nowhere. That's why flags are so important, both health and behavior. 

 

The real issue I have is when GMs ignore flags, or try to get too cute (prospect has questionable production, or limited to a year of good production). That's why I'm a bit risk averse for someone like Simmons and DK Metcalf in the 1st. 

 

I don't want a WR in R1 this year, but the info provided here doesn't make a great case for not taking one in general.

Share this post


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

In the words of Bill Tobin (who sucked himself), "who is Mel Kiper" lol..... Kiper couldn't even keep his own promise to retire if he was wrong. And he was very wrong....

 

Who is Mel Kiper? I'll tell you who Mel Kiper is. He's the man with the sweetest head of hair at the NFL Draft! That's who Mel Kiper is!

 

maxresdefault.jpg

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mel Kiper's Hair said:

He's the man with the sweetest HELMET of hair at the NFL Draft! That's who Mel Kiper is!

 

Fixed it for ya.  :thmup:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎24‎/‎2019 at 4:08 PM, chad72 said:

 

Again, people miss the fact that the Patriots signed so many WRs in FA - Wes Welker, Chris Hogan, Randy Moss, Brandin Cooks, Philip Dorsett, and now Demaryius Thomas, some of whom were Round 1 WRs plus Gronk and several RBs in round 2 or earlier.

 

Giants got Plaxico Burress in FA (SB 2007), Hakeem Nicks through the draft in round 1 (SB 2011), Steelers got Santonio Holmes in Round 1 (SB 2008), Packers got Jordy Nelson in early round 2 (SB 2010), our Colts had Marvin and Reggie in Round 1, Ravens got Anquan Boldin in FA, drafted in round 2 (2012), Eagles got Alshon Jeffery (2015), drafted in Round 2 by Bears etc.

 

Lots of teams that won SBs have had skill position players drafted within the first 2 rounds. It is the supporting cast they built to go with it that helped them win SBs, but those skilled WRs did contribute. I understand it is "Round 1 WRs" we are talking about but I do think we can get a very good WR we can use well on Day 2. In fact, I think Day 2 is THE sweet spot for skill position players in this draft.

 

Our aversion to early round WRs/RBs primarily comes from Polian spending all that equity on Round 1 skill position talent (Edge, Clark, Wayne, Addai, Brown, Gonzo) and Grigson following it up with Dorsett and a trade for TRich, and only 1 SB to show for it.

 

Yay!!! Call me superstitious or whatever.

 

2005 and onwards, every SB champion has had a skill position player originally drafted in the first 2 rounds, whether they came through FA or the draft to the team that won the SB.

 

2005 (Heath Miller, Antwan Randle El)

2006 (Marvin, Reggie, Clark, Addai)

2007 (Plaxico Burress)

2008 (Santonio Holmes)

2009 (Jeremy Shockey, Deuce McCallister)

2010 (Jordy Nelson)

2011 (Hakeem Nicks)

2012 (Anquan Boldin)

2013 (Percy Harvin)

2014 (Gronk, Vereen)

2015 (Demaryius Thomas)

2016 (Gronk, Bennett)

2017 (Alshon Jeffery, Ertz)

2018 (Gronk, Michel, Dorsett)

 

Now, the Colts have a skill position player drafted in the Top 2 rounds, and got another one via FA in Ebron that was originally drafted in Round 1. :) 

 

SB here we come!!! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the smartest GM/Coach in the league for a long time (if not the GOAT) just took a WR in the 1st.

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

    • Nadine

      Nadine 7,321

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SOMDColtsfan

      SOMDColtsfan 420

      Senior Member
      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:
    • DaveA1102

      DaveA1102 1,864

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