Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts trade out of first round


CR91

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 531
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

Exactly... And we focus too often on the chart in this regard. We are adding an extra second round pick, when we are possibly and ideally getting the same player at 34 we were getting at 26. That's invaluable on a draft chart, in my opinion. I'm sure Ballard feels the same. We moved down 20 spots, added a 2020 second and had the 2nd pick of the draft as luxury from a similar move done last year. The value chart for today's 2nd pick says it's twice as high as everyone was saying it was last year. It gives us flexibility in this draft to maneuver without fear of missing something. That too is invaluable. 

I know I've made my point, but I'll make it again.  He SHOULD have done all of this AND gotten an extra pick this year or next.

 

Since he didn't, I'd describe the situation as Ballard getting all of the things you mentioned by SETTLING FOR the compensation he got.  Maybe he had no choice and no better offer, or WASH played hard ball.  Maybe all he could do was to settle, but I wouldn't describe it today as a great trade or great value.  That sounds like spin to me.

 

And in fairness, Ballard hasn't talked about getting fully compensated.  He's saying he likes getting the future second rounder.

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

 

 

That was the word yesterday. It is most likely official today.

 

Josh Allen, Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen all in AFC East. Grandpa Brady is still running circles around them :) 

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

I know I've made my point, but I'll make it again.  He SHOULD have done all of this AND gotten an extra pick this year or next.

 

Since he didn't, I'd describe the situation as Ballard getting all of the things you mentioned by SETTLING FOR the compensation he got.  Maybe he had no choice and no better offer, or WASH played hard ball.  Maybe all he could do was to settle, but I wouldn't describe it today as a great trade or great value.  That sounds like spin to me.

 

And in fairness, Ballard hasn't talked about getting fully compensated.  He's saying he likes getting the future second rounder.

 

In the end we all have to settle at some point.  Ballard could have settled to not make the trade and stick with the 26th pick.  Instead he settled for a 2nd round pick today and a 2nd round pick next year.

 

So we can decide whether we find this to be a good trade or not.  Some like it and some don't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I'm curious about tonight? 

Whether a team moves up to the top of the 2nd for Drew Lock. I'm kinda surprised that he fell into the 2nd round (but that kinda thing seems to happens every other year with a QB or two) and wouldn't be surprised to see Denver do that. 

 

But then again with Miami getting Rosen, that might mean that there are less teams looking for a QB so less chance of a trade up? 

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

I know I've made my point, but I'll make it again.  He SHOULD have done all of this AND gotten an extra pick this year or next.

 

Since he didn't, I'd describe the situation as Ballard getting all of the things you mentioned by SETTLING FOR the compensation he got.  Maybe he had no choice and no better offer, or WASH played hard ball.  Maybe all he could do was to settle, but I wouldn't describe it today as a great trade or great value.  That sounds like spin to me.

 

And in fairness, Ballard hasn't talked about getting fully compensated.  He's saying he likes getting the future second rounder.

I agree because how much did the Steelers give Denver to get LB Bush? they moved up 10 spots (giving Denver the 20th pick, their second rounder and a 2020 third-round pick)

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

You know what I'm curious about tonight? 

Whether a team moves up to the top of the 2nd for Drew Lock. I'm kinda surprised that he fell into the 2nd round (but that kinda thing seems to happens every other year with a QB or two) and wouldn't be surprised to see Denver do that. 

 

But then again with Miami getting Rosen, that might mean that there are less teams looking for a QB so less chance of a trade up? 

 

Denver passed on Lock at No.10 and No.20, maybe they are taking their chances with the much better 2020 QB class. Besides, Elway has Brock Osweiler nightmares from early round 2 QB drafting and Paxton Lynch nightmares of moving back into Round 1 for a QB. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

I agree because how much did the Steelers give Denver to get LB Bush? they moved up 10 spots (giving Denver the 20th pick, their second rounder and a 2020 third-round pick)

 

The value at the top of the 1st was MUCH higher than the value at the end of the 1st, big difference, IMO. That is why the trade back was even entertained. 

 

It is apples and oranges, using number of spots as a metric in the 2 situations.

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

 

In the end we all have to settle at some point.  Ballard could have settled to not make the trade and stick with the 26th pick.  Instead he settled for a 2nd round pick today and a 2nd round pick next year.

 

So we can decide whether we find this to be a good trade or not.  Some like it and some don't. 

How about this.  Has anybody said they wouldn't have made the trade if they were GM?

 

I'll say, I probably would have, since I did not like Sweat or Abram at all, or Tillery that much.  But I wouldn't say I got great value.  I would say I settled for less than market value to make the trade.  People do that a lot with business decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

The value at the top of the 1st was MUCH higher than the value at the end of the 1st, big difference, IMO. That is why the trade back was even entertained. 

 

It is apples and oranges, using number of spots as a metric in the 2 situations.

 

I agree. In any normal draft that would still be the case. But in this draft, that is ESPECIALLY the case. The difference between the 10th pick and 20th pick this year is probably MUCH greater in terms of talent than 10th vs 20th pick in any normal draft year. And thats not just me saying this, I'm sure many knowledgeable draft people (including our GM) would agree with that. 

 

Not a good comparison at all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

The value at the top of the 1st was MUCH higher than the value at the end of the 1st, big difference, IMO. That is why the trade back was even entertained. 

 

It is apples and oranges, using number of spots as a metric in the 2 situations.

I gotcha but remember, Redskins were out of the 1st round totally. They did not have a 1st for Colts to have at all. Unlike with the STL and DEN trade which Denver had a 1st round pick to be had.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rackeen305 said:

I gotcha but remember, Redskins were out of the 1st round totally. They did not have a 1st for Colts to have at all. Unlike with the STL and DEN trade which Denver had a 1st round pick to be had.

 

Personally, yeah, I would have loved to have an extra 4th at least this year. But hey, that is why I said it was a fair trade, one possibly not done from a position of advantage, it seems like that on the outside, at least compared to the Jets trade. It was good value, but not great value like the Jets trade.

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

How about this.  Has anybody said they wouldn't have made the trade if they were GM?

 

I'll say, I probably would have.  But I wouldn't say I got great value.  I would say I settled for less than market value to make the trade.  People do that a lot with business decisions.

 

I think this is a fair assessment. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, a06cc said:

I’m proud of our GM. He wasn’t the only one looking to move out of round 1.  The draft is deep this year.  We again next may have 3 premium picks. 

 

Yeah, Seahawks actually lost value trading out with the Giants, according to this article:

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2019/4/25/18517296/2019-nfl-draft-seattle-seahawks-trade-pick-30-new-york-giants-gettleman-37-132-142

 

Just goes to show you, quantity on Day 2, IN THIS DRAFT, is akin to quality, according to other teams and GMs too. 

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

How about this.  Has anybody said they wouldn't have made the trade if they were GM?

 

I'll say, I probably would have.  But I wouldn't say I got great value.  I would say I settled for less than market value to make the trade.  People do that a lot given certain circumstances.

I can see your point there. 

 

But listening to what Ballard said about this years draft and that there board had 16-70 rated about the same I think he feels he can get virtually the same value out of the 3 second round picks today that he would have gotten if he kept the 26th pick.  Which makes a 2nd next year a good value.  Not great - but good.

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

I can see your point there. 

 

But listening to what Ballard said about this years draft and that there board had 16-70 rated about the same I think he feels he can get virtually the same value out of the 3 second round picks today that he would have gotten if he kept the 26th pick.  Which makes a 2nd next year a good value.  Not great - but good.

 

Here is an article that quantifies a little bit further, one of the good articles on StampedeBlue lately:

 

https://www.stampedeblue.com/2019/4/26/18517416/did-chris-ballard-make-a-good-trade-av-value-massey-thaler-draft

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, stitches said:

The thing is... if his injury is just short-term issue and not long-term concern... we don't really need him to play right away and even more - even if he was healthy he might still not play to start the season. That's the reason I think I would be still good with Taylor unless his injury is long-term concern. 

 

Hush hush concerns about knee injuries always make me wonder about cartilage damage. 

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

Yea I considered  watching and chatting but decided to wait til today. Ballard  will  prob trade back one more time at 34. Seems like the type of move he'd  make.

Yes....agreed.  I think he is looking to trade back again tonight from 34.  Should be interesting.  

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

Anyone here be mad if we took Metcalf? I get hes not skilled in any particular trait, but t.y speed at his size would be scary. 

I absolutely would be.  I don't like Metcalf as a prospect at all

 

3 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

What would be good compensation to slide back 4-5 spots?

I don't like all the draft pick value charts because I think they're very subjective and don't really hold much weight.  Just to go with how it feels/if it passes the eye test, I'd be very happy to slide back 4 or 5 spots and gain a 4th this year or 3rd next year.  Getting both 2nd round picks from Denver would be a dream come true, but I don't think that happens

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

 

Why do you think we passed on him?

 

We passed on him, as did the other 25 teams because of his medical issue.    Our doctors did not clear him.    Nor did they on the other teams.     Washington's team doctors clearly did clear him.   But most teams didn't.  

 

That's why Sweat, a top-12 player,  fell to pick 26.

 

I read in the news that his heart condition was misdiagnosed. But OK. 

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

I read in the news that his heart condition was misdiagnosed. But OK. 

 

It was misdiagnosed according to some other doctors.   

 

But you saw how he fell all the way to 26.    Perhaps not every doctor is in agreement with this?

 

Ballard liked the kid.   (What's not to like?)    But I don't think he had a choice.    I think Irsay and the team doctors had the final vote.

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

 

At face-value, Ballard could seem frustrating to fans as Polian did, sometimes.  When you analyze what he's doing, I think he's brilliant. 

I don't like the value we got in the trade, but I think Ballard definitely has the benefit of the doubt.  Also doesn't hurt to accumulate draft capital.

 

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

 

I'd love to see Ballard use some jedi mind tricks here and get a scenario where Indy could trade 34 to Miami for 48 and 116 or a future mid round pick, then Miami select Drew Lock at 34?

 

Or if Miami inquires about 34 for Drew Lock, he lets Elway know and Elway sends both 2nd round picks to Indy for 34?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last night Mayock said he had already received two inquiries on pick 35.  Have to believe Chris did as well.  I can easily see a trade back coming again.  Maybe we receive a player as part of the deal this time.  That would be different.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rackeen305 said:

I agree because how much did the Steelers give Denver to get LB Bush? they moved up 10 spots (giving Denver the 20th pick, their second rounder and a 2020 third-round pick)

 

Apples and oranges. 26 is not a premium pick by any means. Top 10 generally is, and the Steelers viewed it as such... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 21isSuperman said:

I don't like all the draft pick value charts because I think they're very subjective and don't really hold much weight.  Just to go with how it feels/if it passes the eye test, I'd be very happy to slide back 4 or 5 spots and gain a 4th this year or 3rd next year.  Getting both 2nd round picks from Denver would be a dream come true, but I don't think that happens

 

I could see it happening if Ballard makes pick 34 available & Oakland/Denver get into a bidding war to move up. But yeah, Denver giving up both 2nds from this year to move up a few spots is highly unlikely.

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

 

It was misdiagnosed according to some other doctors.   

 

But you saw how he fell all the way to 26.    Perhaps not every doctor is in agreement with this?

 

Ballard liked the kid.   (What's not to like?)    But I don't think he had a choice.    I think Irsay and the team doctors had the final vote.

Don't mean to interject myself into your conversation, but the other factor mentioned by more than one source is Sweat has issues reacting to some styles of coaching.  Mortensen said it last night - that Sweat's coaches even cautioned 'you can't yell at this guy'.  So I think there were issues besides the medical.  I think there were serious concerns about his ability to be coached up, or maybe his maturity, or sensitivity, or whatever you'd call that.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

 

Apples and oranges. 26 is not a premium pick by any means. Top 10 generally is, and the Steelers viewed it as such... 

 

Good post.    

 

You pay a premium for moving to the top 10.   You pay a premium when you’re moving a long distance up and asking the other team to move a long way back. 

 

Not as much when when you’re moving around in the 20’s.    It also friends on how many trade partners and options you have.   If you only have one partner, one option then you may not get your full asking price. 

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

Don't mean to interject myself into your conversation, but the other factor mentioned by more than one source is Sweat has issues reacting to some styles of coaching.  Mortensen said it last night - that Sweat's coaches even cautioned 'you can't yell at this guy'.  So I think there were issues besides the medical.  I think there were serious concerns about his ability to be coached up, or maybe his maturity, or sensitivity, or whatever you'd call that.  

 

 

I don’t yhink we have a yelling and screaming coaching staff.   We only had one screamer last year that I know of — the OL coach.   He did a good job and still got fired.

 

So I don’t think that Sweat doesn’t like to be yelled at was a factor.   Honestly, not at all.    I don’t think our team doctors and the owner would let us draft the kid. 

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

How about this.  Has anybody said they wouldn't have made the trade if they were GM?

 

I'll say, I probably would have, since I did not like Sweat or Abram at all, or Tillery that much.  But I wouldn't say I got great value.  I would say I settled for less than market value to make the trade.  People do that a lot with business decisions.

 

First report from ESPN Analytics is the Colts received 57 percent MORE VALUE than we gave up.   That does not factor in that part of that value comes next year, so the final number will likely be less.   But the big picture says we did well and got more value than we gave up.   The only question is how much and that won’t be known until next year.  

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

I don’t yhink we have a yelling and screaming coaching staff.   We only had one screamer last year that I know of — the OL coach.   He did a good job and still got fired.

 

So I don’t think that Sweat doesn’t like to be yelled at was a factor.   Honestly, not at all.    I don’t think our team doctors and the owner would let us draft the kid. 

All coaches yell.    Especially position coaches

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

 

First report from ESPN Analytics is the Colts received 57 percent MORE VALUE than we gave up.   That does not factor in that part of that value comes next year, so the final number will likely be less.   But the big picture says we did well and got more value than we gave up.   The only question is how much and that won’t be known until next year.  

And isn't ESPN analytics the one that came up with the QBR, where rushing yards factor into QB performance?   LOL.

 

I don't know if they are transparent like the Jimmy Johnson value chart or if they simply leak out the parts of the analytics that fit their narratives, which it what analytics is mainly used for.  

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

And isn't ESPN analytics the one that came up with the QBR, where rushing yards factor into QB performance?   LOL.

 

I don't know if they are transparent like the Jimmy Johnson value chart or if they simply leak out the parts of the analytics that fit their narratives, which it what analytics is mainly used for.  

Why shouldn't rushing yards factor in to a QBs performance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • The covid IR rules are helping this team a ton. Imagine if they were the old IR rules. We would of had to cut some players because guys like Burton would not of went on IR. I hope they keep some of these rules because teams can keep more of their players instead of having to cut them.
    • Yep. He was loved by every analyst too as a single high FS, and looked good his first year with the Colts. He'll be a bargain for someone IMO if he can stay healthy.    What's also weird though, is that Flus hinted that he wanted to play more man last year. Aside from the KC game, didn't seem like it happened much. And we drafted both Rock and Blackmon from heavy man systems. I think Willis was too. I just don't understand to be honest what Flus is really all about yes. Was he waiting to get a 3T and pressure up front to go more man? He has that now. And if not, not sure I understand Ballard's draft choices as they seem to be converse to Flus's scheme.
    • With his injury history, I doubt there are going to be many teams out there offering to dish out money like he'd be a guaranteed starter, and I would doubt many teams are going to be throwing long-term deals at him.  He has to prove he can stay healthy for a 16 game season, something he hasn't done in 4 years (7 games, 14 games, 13 games, <2 games).     So, it wouldn't be too surprising (IMO) if Ballard offered him a 1 year deal with a low guarantee and some incentives built in... but he probably knows he's a better fit in a different scheme and can get a similar deal elsewhere where he's more suited to play.     It will be interesting... if JT/Wilkins/Hines prove they're a formidable trio, where would Mack fit in the puzzle if he came back to Indy next year... I'd think he'd be able to go elsewhere, get offered more $ and have a better chance to get more carries.  I could be wrong, but my sense is that JT is going to establish himself a true #1 RB in this league before this year ends.  I understand his wear may be an issue considering how many miles he put on in college, but so far (in limited time) Wilkins has shown he can be a solid supplement to him.  Mack has already shown the league he can be an upper-level back in the NFL, so I don't think he'll have too much trouble finding $ if he is passing all his physicals and looking good in his workouts.     TJ Green or Laron Landry... I don't think Hooker is even close to either of those guys.  Hooker produced in college, he was producing very well (being talked about DROY) as a rookie before he got hurt.  He hasn't been a bad football player here.  He doesn't get thrown at much.  He's playing a scheme that isn't entirely suited to his skill set... but he has shown he can play.  TJ Green was a raw guy who didn't produce near the level as Hooker did in college and never showed anything in the NFL (another Grigs bust) and Landry was a roided out freak who was shown the door by the league because he couldn't pass PED tests.   Hooker, if he can stay healthy, can play in this league.  That is his major concern, is his health... he is an above average football player who could be very good if he's in the right system.     Yes, that was a weird scenario all around.  Ballard, keep in mind, didn't get to choose his coach.  He was basically stuck with Pagano.  Ballard knew what scheme he wanted to run on D, which was different than Pagano.  Pagano was talking about Hooker as 'the next Ed Reed' (who played under Pagano when he was a DC in Baltimore).  Hooker really fit the Pagano mold.  I would not be shocked, if Pagano is still in a defensive coordinator position going into next year that Hooker went to whatever team Pagano was affiliated with, TBH.  
    • Agreed.  He came to the Colts to play with Luck, make a lot of stats, win a lot of games, and make a lot of money.  When Luck quit, and he had to play with Brissett, none of those things were going to happen anymore, and he knew it.  The light just went out of his eyes, and he didn't really care to be here anymore.
    • I can absolutely see the loss costing us positioning in the playoffs. Hopefully it was just rust (execution and game plan) and we'll start to roll. There really is no making up for a loss to a team ranked 32nd (at the time). It is what it is, and you just got to move on. Perhaps beating TN on the road might make up for, but honestly TN doesn't look all that great right now, and I already thought we'd fair well against them.   As far as the whole O vs D thing, simply put, they are symbiotic. A good D helps the offense by giving them opportunity and field position. A good O helps the D by keeping them off the field.
  • Members

    • TheBlueAndWhite

      TheBlueAndWhite 131

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PuntersArePeopleToo

      PuntersArePeopleToo 871

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • w87r

      w87r 2,110

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • EastStreet

      EastStreet 6,246

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Moe

      Moe 49

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • K-148

      K-148 213

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • tate

      tate 2

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NFLfan

      NFLfan 10,055

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • John Hammonds

      John Hammonds 1,024

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DarkSuperman

      DarkSuperman 3,789

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