Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts trade out of first round


CR91

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Matthew Gilbert said:

Ballard wanted to move down and it's likely the best offer he got. 

IDK.  He said some of the 8 guys he wanted were still available and that WASH called at the last minute.  He made it sound like the compensation of getting next year's second rounder enticed him to move off of one of his players.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope we stay at #34 unless we get a really good offer. I think a lot of names that people are hoping for in this 2nd round will come off the board before #46. And I was totally pro-trade back.

Guys like Murphy, CGJ, AJ Brown, Greedy, Cody Ford, gotta come out of this round with one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DougDew said:

IDK.  He said some of the 8 guys he wanted were still available and that WASH called at the last minute.  He made it sound like the compensation of getting next year's second rounder enticed him to move off of one of his players.

 

If it was last minute, we could have pressed for an extra 4th rounder, maybe it happened, maybe it did not. 

 

I have a feeling we are not done trading down yet. We could very well get a 2nd and 3rd from a team wanting to move to No.34, I would not discount that. 

 

By doing a fair trade, unlike last year's Jets trade where we heavily fleeced the Jets, he may have sent a signal that he is very amenable to another fair one.  But my gut tells me that after seeing Sweat, Abrams, Tillery go back-to-back-to-back, possibly 2 out of those 3 guys might be in his 8 guys he wanted, he probably stands pat now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GwinnettColt said:

The only thing I'm really mad about is that I stayed up so late and didn't get to see the Colts pick a player.  I think it's a good move.  The three picks in the second round will be nice.

 

 

 

Yeah that's annoying but Ballard's trying to maximize value and put a team together that wins games.  So your decision (and mine) to stay up a little late to watch the draft as opposed to just go to bed and check the draft results the next morning is kind of meaningless.

 

I think this is a good move just because I don't think the talent level of the draft gave much greater advantage to picking at 26 over 46.  I think I saw someplace that they estimated that only 20 players in the draft had true first round grades and that a lot of the players would be 2nd rounders in other drafts.  

 

So to me Ballard just maximized the value here.  I think a lot of people are unhappy because they are impatient.  We don't get to see the returns on Ballard's trade for another year.  

 

Also as far as I'm concerned Ballard has a pretty good batting average when it comes to trades.  

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If it was last minute, we could have pressed for an extra 4th rounder, maybe it happened, maybe it did not. 

 

I have a feeling we are not done trading down yet. We could very well get a 2nd and 3rd from a team wanting to move to No.34, I would not discount that. 

 

By doing a fair trade, unlike last year's Jets trade where we heavily fleeced the Jets, he may have sent a signal that he is very amenable to another fair one.  But my gut tells me that after seeing Sweat, Abrams, Tillery go back-to-back-to-back, possibly 2 out of those 3 guys might be in his 8 guys he wanted, he probably stands pat now. 

 

Denver is the only team I see that could use a future QB because we all know Flacco is a really short term situation. I would gladly take their 2nd and at least their 3rd, but I would ultimately try to get them to come off both 2nd's if they want Lock, whom Elway is rumored to be highly interested in. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys. 

 

Let's all take a breath, let the man work. 

 

Ballard is not playing for this year, for next year or any one single year in a vacuum. Consistency and longevity are key.

 

"But a 2nd rounder next year isnt as valuable as a pick this year!"

 

In 12 months, those same people are going to say "Wow! 2 2nd rounders! Thanks Ballard!" Or something less cheesy. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Denver is the only team I see that could use a future QB because we all know Flacco is a really short term situation. I would gladly take their 2nd and at least their 3rd, but I would ultimately try to get them to come off both 2nd's if they want Lock, whom Elway is rumored to be highly interested in. 

 

I'd take Denver's 2nd and 3rd over Miami's 2nd and 3rd for sure. :) 

 

Every year, good players drop out of Round 1, happens all the time!!! So, having more 2nd and 3rd rounders on Day 2 is a consistent luxury, IMO, to cash in on those 1st and 2nd rounders that drop on Day 2.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If it was last minute, we could have pressed for an extra 4th rounder, maybe it happened, maybe it did not. 

 

I have a feeling we are not done trading down yet. We could very well get a 2nd and 3rd from a team wanting to move to No.34, I would not discount that. 

 

By doing a fair trade, unlike last year's Jets trade where we heavily fleeced the Jets, he may have sent a signal that he is very amenable to another fair one. 

 

I don't know that we fleeced the Jets.  If you ask their front office or their fans they are extremely happy with that deal.  

 

Teams have surrendered multiple firsts to get their quarterback.  They got theirs for 3 2nds.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

 

I'd take Denver's 2nd and 3rd over Miami's 2nd and 3rd for sure. :) 

 

Every year, good players drop out of Round 1, happens all the time!!! So, having more 2nd and 3rd rounders on Day 2 is a consistent luxury, IMO.

5 picks today would be fantastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, 21isSuperman said:

 

Could happen again.  I'm definitely not against trading down as long as we get good value

 

I think Ballard is usually open to trading down for the right price.  

 

The only time I think that wasn't true was last year he seemed adamant that he wasn't going to trade down from 6 after making the first trade with the Jets.  He was going to leave that draft with either Chubb or Nelson.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, GwinnettColt said:

That would be some Round 2 draft drama. 

 

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if that trade didn't happen with the Cards and the Bronco's while the Dolphins trade their #2 and next years #2 for Rosen. The Cards hold all the....well, you know..

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

If it was last minute, we could have pressed for an extra 4th rounder, maybe it happened, maybe it did not. 

 

I have a feeling we are not done trading down yet. We could very well get a 2nd and 3rd from a team wanting to move to No.34, I would not discount that. 

 

By doing a fair trade, unlike last year's Jets trade where we heavily fleeced the Jets, he may have sent a signal that he is very amenable to another fair one.  But my gut tells me that after seeing Sweat, Abrams, Tillery go back-to-back-to-back, possibly 2 out of those 3 guys might be in his 8 guys he wanted, he probably stands pat now. 

But it wasn't a fair trade.  By all accounts and precedent, a pick next year is worth a pick that's one round lower this year.  If we traded with the Redskins, they would have had to given us their 3rd AND their 4th rounder this year to make up for our draft value points we lost moving from 26 to 46.

 

http://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

 

 

The problem is they don't have a 4th rounder (the extra 50 pts).  They would have had to given us their two 5th rounders....which are mid to late.

 

So I suspect that Ballard accepted the 2nd rounder next year (instead of the 3rd this year plus 2 5ths) because WASH didn't have the quality of ammo this year to give him a fair trade.  But we still could have gotten at least one extra 5th out of it, IMO.

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Denver is the only team I see that could use a future QB because we all know Flacco is a really short term situation. I would gladly take their 2nd and at least their 3rd, but I would ultimately try to get them to come off both 2nd's if they want Lock, whom Elway is rumored to be highly interested in. 

I don't think there's any chance Denver trades 41 and 52 for 34.  I'd be super stoked if it did happen though. I think that would be great value

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, masterlock said:

I was thinking the same thing. If there's one thing the Colts need, it's pass rush. And here you have a player whose pre-draft measurables were off the charts, who shined at the Senior Bowl, who put up good stats in the regular college football season, and who fits the mold to-a-tee of what you're looking for in a 4-3 defensive end, and yet you pass on him?

 

There's a point at which 'more' (picks) isn't always better. Quality matters too. I understand it's a crap shoot when it comes to drafting any player, even high first-rounders. But the same is true of second-rounders. So all things equal, why not take a chance on a defensive end who's arguably the very embodiment of what you're looking for in a 4-3 defense predicated on speed and athleticism?

 

Stand in front of a mirror and repeat the following, "Ballard did not value Sweat as much as I did"

 

rinse and repeat until it sets in.  Thanks :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Just looking at the chart.  In order for the Colts to trade down from 34 and stay above pick 54, they need to get a third rounder.

I know you keep referring to this, but there have been several big analysts on twitter that thoroughly disagree with you. They say it is Colts advantage regardless of where Redskins are picking next draft. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I know you keep referring to this, but there have been several big analysts on twitter that thoroughly disagree with you. They say it is Colts advantage regardless of where Redskins are picking next draft. 

Pick 34 has nothing to do with the 26 trade.  You may have meant to quote a different comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, stitches said:

Yes, but 34 is already at the very top of a 2nd round picks. It makes sense to value it at least as a low-level 1st. Although... again.. if someone offers a future 1st for 34 I will always take that deal(unless of course someone really really high on my board is there at 34 and I don't think it's likely a future 1st will return better player. This is because 1-32 is better than 34 generally. 

 

In 2007, the Colts traded their 2008 first rounder to come back up to #42 in the second round. They drafted Tony Ugoh. Just one example off the top of my head. It's not just top of the second round that brings back that value. 

 

I'll get back to the future/present value later.

 

Quote

I know there is a precedent. This is the type of trades the Pats have been feasting on and robbing other teams off. Because they understand that there is nothing inherent about picking in the current draft that is more valuable than picking in next year's draft. Pick X in 2019 is about the same value as pick X in 2020 as it is for pick X in 2021, etc.

 

Not really. The Pats have been on both ends of this trade. They've given up future seconds for present thirds, etc. (See 2010, R2/P47.) 

 

Quote

And if you can get 30 places expected value improvement in for future pick over current pick you always do it. ALWAYS! 

 

Where's the 30 places expected value improvement in this deal? Aren't you arguing my point, that a future first gets you a present second?

 

Quote

This is another one of those old time inefficiencies in the draft that smart GMs abuse the old timers at. This is another one of the "jumpshooting teams can't win championships" mantras that I'm glad our GM actually seems to understand are nonsense. 

 

No it isn't. IMO, you're either overvaluing future picks or undervaluing present picks. An asset secured today is better than an asset promised tomorrow, with respect to the quality/value of that asset. The precedent is to offset the greater value of the present asset with a higher valued future asset (or by combining it with other assets, present or future).

 

Quote

 

The value of having a player this year is offset by the value of having the player you pick with the next year's draft pick you got for the last year of his contract. Also... worth pointing out... we didn't lose a player - we still got a pick in the top 50 with this trade. We lost 20 spots in the draft. 

 

 

Again, having a player on your team in 2019 has a value that cannot be replaced by having a nice pick in the 2020 draft. Draft picks don't win games, and that's what this is all about, which is why teams trade picks for veterans when the fit/value makes sense to them. It's also why the precedent is set that trading a present pick for a future pick (with no other considerations) will require a one round downgrade of the future pick. A 2020 first will only get you a 2019 second, straight up. 

 

And having a player under contract in 2019 has a value that cannot be replaced by having a player under contract in 2023. Play this out to the absurd: You wouldn't have done this trade for a 2022 second rounder. The further out the pick is, the lesser its value.

 

Quote

In essence the value proposition here is: 4+1 years of the player you would have picked at 26 vs 4 years of the player you will pick at 46 + 4 years of the player you will pick with next year's pick. Pure value wise... if you trust your process, this is a CLEARCUT win. 

 

This is crazy talk. By that logic, any two picks are more valuable than one pick, because you get eight cumulative years of contract control. But years of contract control isn't nearly as valuable a commodity as a first round draft pick, which is why no one would ever trade #26 for two fourths, and then say 'but we get two players, and eight years of contract control!' 

 

If your process is sound and your board is telling you 26 = 46 in this year's draft, then the 20 spots isn't a big deal. And based on what Ballard and others have said, it's very possible that they see 26 and 46 as equal (or close), so the added value of the future second makes it an automatic win for them. I'm fine with that. The logic of trading back, even to 46, isn't hard to comprehend, nor is it lost on me.

 

But we're talking about the value of a future pick vs the value of a present pick, not the value of 26 vs the value of 46.

 

Quote

Now ... the thing that makes things a bit more murky is that Ballard missed on taking players that I personally had ranked in the top 10(Tillery)... So the trade in my case istop 10 value for 46 and future 2nd, which is not great... but I cannot evaluate the trade like this because Ballard is not making this trade based on MY board, but rather on HIS board and I will allow for reasonable difference in evaluation of players. 

 

That's not murky to me, at all. If Ballard had a top ten grade on Tillery (or anyone else), he wouldn't have traded out to begin with. We can easily conclude that him going back 20 spots is a reflection of his draft board, and he signaled this all along.

 

I'm fine with this trade. I just resist the idea that it represents great value, especially on the basis of valuing a future second as if it's a high 30s pick. We don't know where that future second will check in, and there's a big value difference between 33 and 64, and that has to be acknowledged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

Where did I mention 34th pick. I meant to quote your post. There are analysts that disagree with your interpretation of the draft chart. 

You didn't.  I mentioned the 34th pick and what it would take this draft to move down.  Then you started talking about the Redskins and next year. Why I don't know.

 

The chart is not my interpretation.  Its math.  How the values were set in the first place was based on judgment established long ago by professionals.   

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
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

    • Rashee Rice is honestly very good. He's their no1 receiver and a lot of the time outperformed Kelce last year as a rookie. They also have two elite CBs (we don't have one) so that allows them to shut down the passing game (as evident by their defense last year and their run in the playoffs). Mahomes is elite, but Ballard didn't even try to get a QB in the draft until 2023 after Luck left. We can blame it on Reich and all that, but it's a fact. 
    • Nice mock. Most of the players you took, end up with the colts in my mocks,too. Really like it!
    • Does anyone really think that Chief roster is good enough to make the playoffs minus Mahomes? I don't. If it weren't for mahomes, their running backs would scare no one. They would have one reliable pass catcher who be be able to make plays(Kelce). And there defense would suddenly look very ordinary and wear down from an offense that would go three and out way to often(think our offense with Matt Ryan and his ability to not throw the ball downfield). When you have a qb the caliber of Mahomes you can do things differently because Mahomes makes everyone else on the team look better. Question, how many superbowls did Reid win in his career before Mahomes became his qb?
    • Nice mock.  Don't have anything negative to say about it.  Would be happy if Colts got these players.
    • In this mock, I drafted defense early, then went with best fit / BPA approach.  Mitchell helps solidify the CB room.  Cooper is compared to The Maniac (that would be awesome if true).  Jenkins for depth on DL.  OC from Wisc to replace Kelly in a year or 2.  I'm a fan of UofL Cardinals, so had to pick Guerendo.  And Ford would replace MAC while on a rookie contract.  What do you guys think?   15. Quinyon Mitchell, CB Toledo Height: 6 - 0 |Weight: 195 lbs |RAS: 9.84 Strengths - Can click and close and undercut passes in an instant with his elite recovery speed - Proven ball-hawk with six interceptions and 37 pass breakups over past two years - Energized short-area mover with torrid foot speed and effervescent corrective twitch - Adept processor in off-man and zone, who can instantly trigger on route breaks - Has the frame, targeted physicality, agility, and fluidity to dictate reps in press-man - Has the versatility to play the boundary or the slot in man, off-man, or zone coverage Weaknesses - Doesn’t quite have elite fluidity and sink when bending to close ground on hitches - Can be baited into making premature hip transitions by nuanced WRs at stems - Relatively inexperienced in press-man, and can improve upper-lower synergy - Can keep shoring up his tackling form as a support defender   51. Edgerrin Cooper, LB Texas A&M Height: 6 - 2 |Weight: 230 lbs |RAS: 9.34 Linebackers who naturally, and consistently, make plays, are impossible to replicate. They can run a 4.7 40-yard dash and still be valuable because they process information at lightning speed and are innate playmakers. Edgerrin Cooper is that player, but with outstanding athleticism and length. That length allows him to wrangle ball carriers with an incredibly high hit rate. He knifes through blockers and consistently makes plays around the line of scrimmage, while also providing a bump as a pass rusher. Dalton Miller   82. Kris Jenkins, DT Michigan Height: 6 - 2 |Weight: 299 lbs |RAS: 8.92 Being the son of a former NFL All-Pro, it’s no surprise that Jenkins has some of the most enthralling tools in the class. He’s an incredibly explosive athlete off the snap, both laterally and vertically, and has suffocating strength at the point of attack. Going further, with his burst, twitch, and mass, Jenkins can levy impressive amounts of power into his attacks, and as he trends up with his hand usage and energy efficiency, it’s exciting to think about the potential that remains unearthed. -Ian Cummings   103. Jermaine Burton, WR Alabama Height: 6 - 0 |Weight: 196 lbs |RAS: 9.54   117. Dadrion Taylor-Demerson, S Texas Tech Height: 5 - 10 |Weight: 197 lbs |RAS: 8.87   151. Tanor Bortolini, OC Wisconsin Height: 6 - 4 |Weight: 303 lbs |RAS: 9.79   158. Javion Cohen, OG Miami (FL) Height: 6 - 4 |Weight: 324 lbs |RAS: N/A   202. Isaac Guerendo, RB Louisville Height: 6 - 0 |Weight: 221 lbs |RAS: 9.98   219. Brevyn Spann-Ford, TE Minnesota Height: 6 - 6 |Weight: 260 lbs |RAS: 7.58  
  • Members

    • lollygagger8

      lollygagger8 5,454

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kc77

      Kc77 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jm956713

      jm956713 3

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • krunk

      krunk 8,187

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • lincolndefan

      lincolndefan 92

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 13,329

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 5,055

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 18,669

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 1,759

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CoachLite

      CoachLite 1,165

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