Jump to content
Coltsfan0112

Matt Miller's Final Mock- NFL sources say Colts are really wanting Jonathon Abram

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, csmopar said:

As tight lipped as Ballard and Co are... aint no way, no how this "source" knows anything about who the colts want.  Heck, Ballard has Irsay's tweeting under control even. 

I agree 100%.... My thought on this though is it's just his Mock Draft. He doesn't have to list NFL sources in it. A mock draft is what he thinks will happen. I wouldn't be surprised though. Abram has said before the Colts have been one of the top teams that has spent the most time with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Coltsfan0112 said:

I agree 100%.... My thought on this though is it's just his Mock Draft. He doesn't have to list NFL sources in it. A mock draft is what he thinks will happen. I wouldn't be surprised though. Abram has said before the Colts have been one of the top teams that has spent the most time with him.

Yup.  And Burns and Jacobs have been saying the same thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, richard pallo said:

Yup.  And Burns and Jacobs have been saying the same thing.  

At least we finally find out tonight!!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coltsfan0112 said:

At least we finally find out tonight!!!

the suspense is killing me

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've read Matt Miller doesn't have great sources...but then again I've thought for a while that we'll pick Abram at #26.

Tbh though I wouldn't be a big fan of the pick. I think the guy's gonna be a penalty/fine machine and misses too many tackles.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't buy this yet. Although Ballard brought in Abram for a visit, I don't believe anything was leaked from our side. He's probably one of 8 guys Ballard is interested in at 26. Too early to tell.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's between him and one of the beast IDL I'm going IDL. I don't want to have to rely on my safety to stop the run like we did with Sanders 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say Im not a fan of taking a Safety round 1, but then I saw us getting Sweat at 34 overall so that helped me cope lol. 

 

I would hate it if the Titans got Simmons at 19 though. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Abram and Omenihu talk has the feel of smokescreen to me, though I’m sure we like those prospects at some level...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

I must say Im not a fan of taking a Safety round 1, but then I saw us getting Sweat at 34 overall so that helped me cope lol. 

 

I would hate it if the Titans got Simmons at 19 though. 

 

 

Miller said he would bet anything that Simmons doesn't make it past the Titans. After really watching Simmons, I get why he's so highly rated, and if the medical and character check out, I can make my peace with drafting him if he makes it to us, but he might now.

 

I'm not a fan of Abram at #26 either. He's basically a weakside backer who can't cover. He can't play single high, is a liability in man coverage, etc. I'm passing on Abram, but that's just me. If we draft him, I'll go back and really look at him, but I'm not a fan as of right now. 

 

Sweat at #34 would be intriguing, but if he drops that far, teams must really be concerned about his medical. That's tough to reconcile. And passing on him at #26 would mean we're concerned about his medical, too; I definitely have him ahead of Abram, and feel like there are other safeties who would be available at #34 (in Miller's mock, Gardner-Johnson goes #58). 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

 

Miller said he would bet anything that Simmons doesn't make it past the Titans. After really watching Simmons, I get why he's so highly rated, and if the medical and character check out, I can make my peace with drafting him if he makes it to us, but he might now.

 

I'm not a fan of Abram at #26 either. He's basically a weakside backer who can't cover. He can't play single high, is a liability in man coverage, etc. I'm passing on Abram, but that's just me. If we draft him, I'll go back and really look at him, but I'm not a fan as of right now. 

 

Sweat at #34 would be intriguing, but if he drops that far, teams must really be concerned about his medical. That's tough to reconcile. And passing on him at #26 would mean we're concerned about his medical, too; I definitely have him ahead of Abram, and feel like there are other safeties who would be available at #34 (in Miller's mock, Gardner-Johnson goes #58). 

Agree 100%. However, I don't believe we'll take Abram with the large tier of safeties in the late 1st/early 2nd range. We might at 34 though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that would really be a "meh" at 26 IMO. 

 

anyone remember what the "sources" said last year?

Share this post


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

that would really be a "meh" at 26 IMO. 

 

anyone remember what the "sources" said last year?

 

At #6, Nelson was basically a lock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superman said:

 

At #6, Nelson was basically a lock.

yup, but what were folks saying about 36 and 37. 

i can't remember. thought a lot of the buzz was DE, WR, and OT (I know nonsense is a T now, but I don't think that was our intention) for early second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony Pauline said in his latest podcast that the Colts expect Sweat to be there at 26. He didn't say if they would draft him. This is wild. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A while back, Baldinger said the Eagles and Colts want the same player.  Just now on the NFL Network mock draft Baldy mocked Abram to the Eagles.  If he knows something, Abram might be gone at 26.  

Share this post


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

 

At #6, Nelson was basically a lock.

I am glad we had the key. :number1:

I have no clue who it comes down to. I just remember last year once we got past Nelson there no one who knew who Ballard was going to take. Once the smoke cleared and everyone got to actually check those players out most were OK with them on a wait and see bases.

Naturally there were those that said players were taken at a reach or complained about there was this player that should have been taken. That comes with the territory.

This year at where we pick there are no clear cut players and or what direction Ballard will go.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

I'm not a fan of Abram at #26 either. He's basically a weakside backer who can't cover. He can't play single high, is a liability in man coverage, etc. I'm passing on Abram, but that's just me. If we draft him, I'll go back and really look at him, but I'm not a fan as of right now. 


Yeah, same. Just not a big fan, especially not at #26. I think if we take him it's partly because Ballard's fallen for his character and "tone setter" quality. Just seems like a Ballard guy. 

Share this post


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

 

Sweat at #34 would be intriguing, but if he drops that far, teams must really be concerned about his medical. That's tough to reconcile. 

I agree Sweat falling to 34 would raise concerns & be a risk.  But considering the value already received from that Jets trade, I think you could justify gambling a bit with that pick.  (Just a thought, and FWIW, I don't think he falls to 34).

Share this post


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

I agree Sweat falling to 34 would raise concerns & be a risk.  But considering the value already received from that Jets trade, I think you could justify gambling a bit with that pick.  (Just a thought, and FWIW, I don't think he falls to 34).

 

If the Colts have enough concerns about the medical to pass on him at #26, why gamble on him at #34? Those picks are basically the same.

 

Related, Rapaport is teasing something big right now about Sweat...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hated when the Eagles took Barnett in front of us, even though it worked out for us quite alright. That'd be kinda nice if they took Abram in front of us this time, leave us with a possibly solid DL. Eagles love their linemen too though, I won't be surprised if they take somebody I really like right before us once again.

Share this post


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

yup, but what were folks saying about 36 and 37. 

i can't remember. thought a lot of the buzz was DE, WR, and OT (I know nonsense is a T now, but I don't think that was our intention) for early second.

At #6, you had Nelson, obviously, but people were still hoping Chubb would drop to #6 and many were still looking for another trade down with the Bills at #11.  You also had a lot of Roquan Smith chatter.  Polian was saying Smith, leading up to the draft.

 

Early in the second, many were looking at Will Hernandez and hoping for Harold Landry, after he dropped 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Rapaport is saying teams believe Sweat was initially misdiagnosed, and there's no reason to be concerned about his medical...

 

What a mess. We'll see if this is true. If Josh Allen and Brian Burns go ahead of Sweat, I'll start thinking teams are still not confident in Sweat's medical...

 

Edit: By the way, I still have concerns about Sweat's fit in the defense. I think he's a better stand up rush prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

yup, but what were folks saying about 36 and 37. 

i can't remember. thought a lot of the buzz was DE, WR, and OT (I know nonsense is a T now, but I don't think that was our intention) for early second.

 

I don't remember. I know I wanted Christian Kirk.

Share this post


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

Now Rapaport is saying teams believe Sweat was initially misdiagnosed, and there's no reason to be concerned about his medical...

 

What a mess. We'll see if this is true. If Josh Allen and Brian Burns go ahead of Sweat, I'll start thinking teams are still not confident in Sweat's medical...

Same kind of misdiagnosis they did on Maurice Hurst last year it seems.

Share this post


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

 

Miller said he would bet anything that Simmons doesn't make it past the Titans. After really watching Simmons, I get why he's so highly rated, and if the medical and character check out, I can make my peace with drafting him if he makes it to us, but he might now.

 

I'm not a fan of Abram at #26 either. He's basically a weakside backer who can't cover. He can't play single high, is a liability in man coverage, etc. I'm passing on Abram, but that's just me. If we draft him, I'll go back and really look at him, but I'm not a fan as of right now. 

 

Sweat at #34 would be intriguing, but if he drops that far, teams must really be concerned about his medical. That's tough to reconcile. And passing on him at #26 would mean we're concerned about his medical, too; I definitely have him ahead of Abram, and feel like there are other safeties who would be available at #34 (in Miller's mock, Gardner-Johnson goes #58). 

 

If I'm the GM, I don't care what other teams think. Unless we think the same thing as the other teams, then I'd welcome Sweat in with a cheerleading outfit on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, krunk said:

Same kind of misdiagnosis they did on Maurice Hurst last year it seems.

 

No one ever said Hurst was misdiagnosed. He has a heart condition and has known about it for years.

 

This report about Sweat is indicating there's nothing there at all.

Share this post


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

 

If the Colts have enough concerns about the medical to pass on him at #26, why gamble on him at #34? Those picks are basically the same.

 

Related, Rapaport is teasing something big right now about Sweat...

 

The picks aren't the same because there's less talent to choose from at #34 compared to #26, making the best alternative to not picking Sweat less attractive

Share this post


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

 

If I'm the GM, I don't care what other teams think. Unless we think the same thing as the other teams, then I'd welcome Sweat in with a cheerleading outfit on!

 

Right, as the GM, my team has done all the diligence and has a clear standing on the player. I'm saying from my perspective as a fan, if teams really are concerned about Sweat, enough that he drops from top ten to late 20s, then I don't know how I feel about the Colts taking him.

 

And since then, more conflicting info has come out. As a fan, I don't have any idea what's true and what isn't. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, #12. said:

 

Early in the second, many were looking at Will Hernandez and hoping for Harold Landry, after he dropped 

 

welp, very happy Leonard and Smith

 

Share this post


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

 

The picks aren't the same because there's less talent to choose from at #34 compared to #26, making the best alternative to not picking Sweat less attractive

Huh?

 

Share this post


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

 

The picks aren't the same because there's less talent to choose from at #34 compared to #26, making the best alternative to not picking Sweat less attractive

 

The only real difference between #26 and #34 this year is the fifth year option. The players ranked from 20-ish to 40-ish are going to be very closely ranked.

 

But the point is if you don't like his medical at #26 enough that you won't take the risk, there's not enough difference in value at #34 to take the risk. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

I don't remember. I know I wanted Christian Kirk.

he had a pretty nice rookie season. better than any of our WRs not named TY.

Share this post


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

 

If the Colts have enough concerns about the medical to pass on him at #26, why gamble on him at #34? Those picks are basically the same.

 

Related, Rapaport is teasing something big right now about Sweat...

I get your point, I just kinda see the 34th pick as almost playing with house money.  And yes, with this latest news, it's probably a moot point now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Superman said:

 

The only real difference between #26 and #34 this year is the fifth year option. The players ranked from 20-ish to 40-ish are going to be very closely ranked.

 

But the point is if you don't like his medical at #26 enough that you won't take the risk, there's not enough difference in value at #34 to take the risk. 

i agree, but if you get what you want at 26 and it's a critical need, and sweat is still available at 34, the risk is a bit diminished.

 

if you wanted to roll the dice and take simmons and sweat at 26 and 34, you could win the lottery.... or get fired.

Share this post


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

I get your point, I just kinda see the 34th pick as almost playing with house money.  And yes, with this latest news, it's probably a moot point now.  

 

The bolded is what I don't agree with. I wouldn't take anymore risks with #34 than I would with #26, it's still a very valuable pick and I want to maximize my opportunity to hit on that pick. Not be haphazard with it because it's not our original pick. 

Share this post


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

 

The only real difference between #26 and #34 this year is the fifth year option. The players ranked from 20-ish to 40-ish are going to be very closely ranked.

 

But the point is if you don't like his medical at #26 enough that you won't take the risk, there's not enough difference in value at #34 to take the risk. 

 

If you don't like his medical, then you'll consider him a risk, and depending on how bad you think it is, you'll push him further and further down your draft board, but it doesn't necessarily mean you won't draft him at all.

 

I guess if what you mean by "not liking his medical" is thinking he'll have a heart attack every time he breaks into a sprint, then I see your point.

 

20ish-40ish is closely ranked, but it could still make the difference. It all depends on how bad you really think that medical report is.

 

Anyways, this is kind of irrelevant now with the latest news

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

    • Good point.  I think this has serious merit 
    • My take   1. We overachieved last season. Period 2. We played at KC 3. TY limited the offense because he was so injured.  4. We played a very very good coach with time to prepare and his guys got some rest too and time to scout the team. Remember, Reich is well known to Reid as well by now.  5. Not having Hooker really mattered 6. Play calling was a bit blah 7. How does Vinny automatic miss those kicks? 8. A strip sack for us turns into a strip sack for them a few plays later, that hurt.  9. A young team who wasn’t supposed to be in the playoffs, let alone a second game in the playoffs had some factor here.  10. KC had a pretty good team   my concern from that game would be how poorly our run game was going forward. Kelly better play better than he did this season or I don’t see a 15 million/yr contract coming his way in Indy. I think with a healthy TY, the additions of DF and Cain and Paris and others should really boost that offense. An offense with TY, Paris, Doyle, EE and Mack, now that’s gonna be a tough group to match up with and defend. Run or pass, heck coach, idk what they are doing lol.    Gonna be fun to see this team evolve and have better back ups coming off the bench. I just hope we have enough beef in the middle to stop the run and I just hope that Kelly was hobbled in that KC game because it was one of his worst games that year. 
    • This again boils down to you hanging on to 'this is how it's always been done.' And you don't get that I don't care about that rationale. I think it can be done better. Which is why, in my first post in this thread, I said "to me, it's a no brainer." To me. It should be obvious that this is my stated preference, not me saying that teams that don't do it this way are stupid.   There should be nothing more that I have to say about that, except you continue to rely on that appeal to authority, and I'm telling you that 'how it's always been done' isn't legitimate reason for not examining potential alternatives. Not just in this area, but in everything.      You're missing an important detail, and I think it's because you've put my argument in a box and are unwilling to actually examine it on its merits.   As I said initially, and have said since, my argument is to make this change six months sooner, not six months later. "Imagine if we had fired Grigson in June 2016 instead of January 2017." Did you miss that part, again? What about "if the Texans had waited until January 2020 to fire Gaine..."?    I want him in asap. You want him asap, but not until January.   My statement about it being just one draft is referencing the worst case scenario, which is 'we just blew a draft cycle by letting a lame duck GM stay,' to which I say 'get over it, I'm okay with that if that's what it takes to get the guy I want in the building, with the staff he wants.' And that's where my argument about it potentially being easier to interview candidates in the down season after the draft is critical. The Jets wanted Joe Douglas; he evidently didn't want to entertain a move during draft season, but jumped at it in May/June. (There's the matter of moving his family during the school year, etc.) In theory, this approach could make it easier to interview good candidates. Whether you agree with that or not, whether it's important to you or not, this is mostly an aside. As I said, this was my response to the alarmist reaction of 'they just blew a draft!' Which I think is overstated, especially in the Texans' case.     Not at all. Again, if Ballard started in June 2016, he theoretically could have changed coaches a year sooner.      This is a hindsight fallacy. Go back to the Texans wanting to hire Caserio. I'm not arguing that he's going to be a great GM, I'm arguing that he's the guy they want to hire, and he's available in June. Same for the Jets and Douglas. The Chiefs and Veach.    We know that every person hired doesn't succeed. I never argued that they do. That's true of whoever you rush to hire in January. The point is that there is always a pool of qualified candidates from which to choose. I won't be retracting that, I firmly believe it, and I said it when the Colts were interviewing coaches in 2012, when they interviewed GMs in 2017, and when they interviewed coaches in 2018. You choosing to reject that is pretty ridiculous, to be honest. There are always qualified candidates. Choosing the right one is a different story.   And again, if there's one guy you really, desperately want, why wait until January to get him?     You could give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that if I'm saying it, I mean it. Especially this far into the discussion...    And going back to what I said earlier, this is and always has been my opinion. I'm not offering studies and conclusive evidence to support this opinion because it's a personal preference, it's what I think would be best (although I have offered evidence and rationale to support my opinion, you've just chosen to reject, for reasons I don't agree with).    I'm okay with the disagreement. What I find personally off-putting is the insistence that, because you don't understand my angle, it means I either haven't actually thought it through, or I don't actually believe it. As I said earlier, I understand that general consensus disagrees with my viewpoint, but that doesn't mean I'm just going to conform. The fact that I'm presenting an argument in earnest should be enough.
    • I'm an Iowa fan but I'd kind of like to see Michigan win that game so that it can maybe move back towards the appearance of a real rivalry.     That is unless an Ohio State victory would somehow help Iowa, in that situation I would root for the Buckeyes. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...