Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Southside Hoosier Fan

Colts had 3 things they could have addressed at trade deadline..

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, esmort said:

 

Regardless of what the Ballard/Reich were saying publicly they knew we weren't SB contenders without Luck

its this, they were getting some presesaon super bowl talk if we had Luck.  the back up QBs are not likely to lift the team that far though 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!! 

 

Ballard didn't get Von Miller, Andre Hopkins, and Tunsil for 4th, 5th, and 6th round picks!! 

 

Ribble Rabble, grrrr, throw stuff! 

 

giphy.gif

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CoachSmok3 said:

I hardly ever post... I'm not too good at it. I mostly just give reactions to posts I find funny...

 

But this one still has me... Like, why? Lol

 

And some people are acting like they might have sipped the kool-aid that tastes of the OPs ludicrous premise...

 

I really wish I knew how to properly embed videos in a post...

 

My reply would have included the Billy Madison clip. You know which one.

 

Team needs to make moves? Sure that's a valid position to take... But please at least make it a half rational (realistic) attempt to justify

 

IMO it'd be pretty hard to have an actually valid argument for some sort of trade/transaction that which the Colts should have made.

 

Some of the same people- across threads- that argued AGAINST JB saying that he's middle of the road and a mid round draft pick is BAD, hinting that without Luck the Colts need just pull a Miami and shoot for a low/early round pick, are some of the same people now saying the Colts needed to make moves at the deadline. Their explanation? The Colts needed to make moves to make noise...

 

What? Lol

 

IMO the Colts did what they should have done, which is what they have shown themselves to do, and that's manage this team the RIGHT way. This other noise is nonsense. I'd rather hear we need to look at kickers than to hear about x-missed trade opportunity 

 

I'm sorry for ranting... I'll go stand in the corner 

Good rare post.  Finding consistency of thought of some posters is very difficult.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

Looks like you're pretty darn good at posting.  :^)

 

Ah it was just some hot air escaping me... Don't mind me lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I thought it was a joke and I was having a bad dream the simpsons GIF - wake me up, wake me up!

:)  Please don't ever post that again.  That is a very disturbing meme.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

Good rare post.  Finding consistency of thought of some posters is very difficult.  

 

Thank you. The lack of consistency is what drew me out. I'm all for opinions and desires... But these arguments smh, come one y'all lol

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CoachSmok3 said:

 

 

IMO it'd be pretty hard to have an actually valid argument for some sort of trade/transaction that which the Colts should have made.

Except that we could have matched what the Patriots paid for Mohammed Sanu.  I was anxious to see us go for Sanu because he is very talented and would be here beyond this year.

 

We also had multiple chances to pick up Demayrius Thomas, who would have cost little more than a 5th or 6th rounder and represented an upgrade over some of our depth guys.

 

I don't think a big trade was there on the defensive end.  I also don't think we necessarily needed a big splash on defense.  Our D has been adequate for the most part and I would prefer to let them mature in place and learn on the job, at least until it becomes an issue.  IMHO the D has been carrying its weight.

 

The unit I was and still am most concerned about is WR.  We don't have good depth there and a lot of what we do have is either out or playing hurt.  If Pascal didn't step up we'd be on the edge of disaster right now.

 

The standard for what would constitute a trade that would improve the team are low enough that there's not a lot of valid excuses for sitting tight there.  Especially because WR is an area where drafting talent is anything but settled science.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Except that we could have matched what the Patriots paid for Mohammed Sanu.  I was anxious to see us go for Sanu because he is very talented and would be here beyond this year.

 

We also had multiple chances to pick up Demayrius Thomas, who would have cost little more than a 5th or 6th rounder and represented an upgrade over some of our depth guys.

 

I don't think a big trade was there on the defensive end.  I also don't think we necessarily needed a big splash on defense.  Our D has been adequate for the most part and I would prefer to let them mature in place and learn on the job, at least until it becomes an issue.  IMHO the D has been carrying its weight.

 

The unit I was and still am most concerned about is WR.  We don't have good depth there and a lot of what we do have is either out or playing hurt.  If Pascal didn't step up we'd be on the edge of disaster right now.

 

The standard for what would constitute a trade that would improve the team are low enough that there's not a lot of valid excuses for sitting tight there.  Especially because WR is an area where drafting talent is anything but settled science.

D. Thomas has 4 more catches than Campbell and fewer TDs.  Why give up any picks for him when he's not an improvement on the roster?

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Except that we could have matched what the Patriots paid for Mohammed Sanu.  I was anxious to see us go for Sanu because he is very talented and would be here beyond this year.

 

We also had multiple chances to pick up Demayrius Thomas, who would have cost little more than a 5th or 6th rounder and represented an upgrade over some of our depth guys.

 

I don't think a big trade was there on the defensive end.  I also don't think we necessarily needed a big splash on defense.  Our D has been adequate for the most part and I would prefer to let them mature in place and learn on the job, at least until it becomes an issue.  IMHO the D has been carrying its weight.

 

The unit I was and still am most concerned about is WR.  We don't have good depth there and a lot of what we do have is either out or playing hurt.  If Pascal didn't step up we'd be on the edge of disaster right now.

 

The standard for what would constitute a trade that would improve the team are low enough that there's not a lot of valid excuses for sitting tight there.  Especially because WR is an area where drafting talent is anything but settled science.

I completely agree that our WR group is under performing. ZP is the Inmen this year for us. That's nice with TY hurt. I had Cain in FFB for 4 weeks. Silly me...

 

But I still really disagree with the two proposed additions...

 

DT is done. 100% would have been AJ 2.0

 

I really love Sanu. But not for a 2nd at his age at our team at this stage. Our team should still absolutely value a 2nd over an aging WR. Good move for the Pats, would NOT have been for us

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A note to anyone saying we should've done a trade for Player X...

 

Please stop saying we made a mistake trading for someone who wasn't traded. If they weren't traded, you have absolutely no idea what they wanted and whether that would be a good trade.

 

I'm fine with people saying we should've traded for Sanu, or whoever they want that was traded. But please stop saying we should've traded for Ryan Kerrigan, or AJ Green, or whoever, when we have no idea how reasonable the offers were.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

WR - nah... - people expecting high flying WRs and TEs with a non-vertical QB and a conservative offense are fooling themselves. Most receiver's production is down (including TY/Ebron/Doyle), and it's not hard to figure out why.

 

Jackpot here.

 

C'mon people, our WR is kinda fine. It could've a upgrade, but it's nothing so serious right now. Most of the problems with our receivers are tied with how our QB is reading the field and progressions.

 

So please, stop talking a little about how we should go find a awesome WR or things like that.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Shafty138 said:

I don't see 10 new draftees Maki g the team next year, so maybe time to consolidate some draft assets this spring.  

 

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, EastStreet said:

 

WR - nah... - people expecting high flying WRs and TEs with a non-vertical QB and a conservative offense are fooling themselves. Most receiver's production is down (including TY/Ebron/Doyle), and it's not hard to figure out why.

 

Jackpot here.

 

C'mon people, our WR is kinda fine. It could've a upgrade, but it's nothing so serious right now. Most of the problems with our receivers are tied with how our QB is reading the field and progressions.

 

So please, stop talking a little about how we should go find a awesome WR or things like that.

 

Share this post


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

A note to anyone saying we should've done a trade for Player X...

 

Please stop saying we made a mistake trading for someone who wasn't traded. If they weren't traded, you have absolutely no idea what they wanted and whether that would be a good trade.

 

I'm fine with people saying we should've traded for Sanu, or whoever they want that was traded. But please stop saying we should've traded for Ryan Kerrigan, or AJ Green, or whoever, when we have no idea how reasonable the offers were.

 

 

you stated more clearly what i could not. thank you

 

*bold emphasis added by me to your quote

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Agreed.

 

Question, would you have preferred to use the draft capital to trade for a player, or would you prefer to use it to move up in the draft to go for a guy (rider of he's someone high on your board and the value is there even with a move up)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Question, would you have preferred to use the draft capital to trade for a player, or would you prefer to use it to move up in the draft to go for a guy (rider of he's someone high on your board and the value is there even with a move up)?

 

Since Luck retired, I've been leaning toward stacking capital for a potential move up, in case they feel like they need to grab a QB. Before that, I would have been more open to trading for a player.

 

So not doing anything at the deadline doesn't bother me. Would have been nice to have Sanu or Sanders, but Hilton wasn't hurt, Funchess was on the way, and we want to run the ball anyway. Never expected Ballard to take a huge swing for someone like Jamal Adams or Minkah Fitzpatrick, or anything on that level.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to laugh when I read Ballard's comment yesterday on some radio show when asked about the trade deadline.  He actually said we had "some lines in the water".  I guess he was referring to fishing.  So the next question is what were you using for bait?   It's hard not to believe one player might have been Quincy.  But beyond him are you talking draft picks?  I can see him now. Hello GM's.  We have some 5th , 6th or 7th rd picks available.  Looking for WR, DT, CB.  They need to be proven NFL players who can help us immediately.  Please give me a call if interested.   Tick tock tick tock...........still waiting.   LOL

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I had to laugh when I read Ballard's comment yesterday on some radio show when asked about the trade deadline.  He actually said we had "some lines in the water".  I guess he was referring to fishing.  So the next question is what were you using for bait?   It's hard not to believe one player might have been Quincy.  But beyond him are you talking draft picks?  I can see him now. Hello GM's.  We have some 5th , 6th or 7th rd picks available.  Looking for WR, DT, CB.  They need to be proven NFL players who can help us immediately.  Please give me a call if interested.   Tick tock tick tock...........still waiting.   LOL

In many cases the NFL trade deadline is a sellers market and/or involves some form of disgruntled player

  
     Example

       The Jets wanted 2 starters plus picks for Jamal Adams

      

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

In many cases the NFL trade deadline is a sellers market and/or involves some form of disgruntled player

  
     Example

       The Jets wanted 2 starters plus picks for Jamal Adams

      


Agreed it’s typically not for adding that one missing player for a post season run, like in the MLB.

 

I think a lot of fans confuse it with the MLB. A quick fix, to drastically improve the team. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BAllard is not giving up picks for a 30 YO WR when this team is still clearly rebuilding. We have a lot of age on our dline that will need replaced in the next few years. We still need some stars and playmakers on defense. On offense we need to be looking at life after TY. We still don’t know if we have anything Cain. We still need depth on the oline and need to look ahead at life without AC and maybe upgrading Glow or getting another tackle to move smith back to guard. We are not done rebuilding.

Share this post


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

 

Question, would you have preferred to use the draft capital to trade for a player, or would you prefer to use it to move up in the draft to go for a guy (rider of he's someone high on your board and the value is there even with a move up)?

I know you didn’t ask this of me but that was my thought.  I’d rather them either trade them away for future picks or use them to go up and get someone who they really like.  Not unlike what they did with Willis this year.

Share this post


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

 

Question, would you have preferred to use the draft capital to trade for a player, or would you prefer to use it to move up in the draft to go for a guy (rider of he's someone high on your board and the value is there even with a move up)?

I'm firmly of the mind that until you know 100% one way or another that you have your QB of the future under contract(long-term) you don't waste high end assets for non-QB players. You might need every bit of a 1st-2nd-3d round picks to acquire the player you really love in the draft. 

 

Us having an additional high second round pick(most likely) from Washington is great. It might actually allow us to not spend a future 1st in order to jump up in the draft high enough to get a player we love(*cough* Herbert *cough*). The high second would probably get valued similarly to a future 1st by a lot of GMs. 

 

On the flip side I kind of am OK with giving up late round picks to strengthen the team immediately for the current season and fill voids opened up either by under-performing players or injuries...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CoachSmok3 said:

I hardly ever post... I'm not too good at it. I mostly just give reactions to posts I find funny...

 

But this one still has me... Like, why? Lol

 

And some people are acting like they might have sipped the kool-aid that tastes of the OPs ludicrous premise...

 

I really wish I knew how to properly embed videos in a post...

 

My reply would have included the Billy Madison clip. You know which one.

 

Team needs to make moves? Sure that's a valid position to take... But please at least make it a half rational (realistic) attempt to justify

 

IMO it'd be pretty hard to have an actually valid argument for some sort of trade/transaction that which the Colts should have made.

 

Some of the same people- across threads- that argued AGAINST JB saying that he's middle of the road and a mid round draft pick is BAD, hinting that without Luck the Colts need just pull a Miami and shoot for a low/early round pick, are some of the same people now saying the Colts needed to make moves at the deadline. Their explanation? The Colts needed to make moves to make noise...

 

What? Lol

 

IMO the Colts did what they should have done, which is what they have shown themselves to do, and that's manage this team the RIGHT way. This other noise is nonsense. I'd rather hear we need to look at kickers than to hear about x-missed trade opportunity 

 

I'm sorry for ranting... I'll go stand in the corner 

Here you go:

 

 

You should post more often.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Here you go:

 

 

You should post more often.  

 

My man... THIS

 

 

I'm more effective in bursts lol. But I do think ill still around a little longer before going back under the bridge! Thank you

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

and I don't have a problem with that perspective except that we don't play next year this year.

 

We had a chance this year to make some noise.  Because we sat still at the deadline that chance got quite a bit smaller.  It's something of a missed opportunity IMHO


maybe next year they trade for that all world center - you know the more valuable position over qb. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Imgrandojji said:

Except that we could have matched what the Patriots paid for Mohammed Sanu.  I was anxious to see us go for Sanu because he is very talented and would be here beyond this year.

 

We also had multiple chances to pick up Demayrius Thomas, who would have cost little more than a 5th or 6th rounder and represented an upgrade over some of our depth guys.

 

I don't think a big trade was there on the defensive end.  I also don't think we necessarily needed a big splash on defense.  Our D has been adequate for the most part and I would prefer to let them mature in place and learn on the job, at least until it becomes an issue.  IMHO the D has been carrying its weight.

 

The unit I was and still am most concerned about is WR.  We don't have good depth there and a lot of what we do have is either out or playing hurt.  If Pascal didn't step up we'd be on the edge of disaster right now.

 

The standard for what would constitute a trade that would improve the team are low enough that there's not a lot of valid excuses for sitting tight there.  Especially because WR is an area where drafting talent is anything but settled science.


Sweet baby Jesus - can we get the readers digest version of this post?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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


Sweet baby Jesus - can we get the readers digest version of this post?

"we could have traded assets for any of at least a few different veteran WRs at a reasonable price and should probably have done so."

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

"we could have traded assets for any of at least a few different veteran WRs at a reasonable price and should probably have done so."

The Colts didn’t and it is time to move on

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2019 at 3:58 PM, Southside Hoosier Fan said:

1) A Pass Rusher- Could have gotten someone not top shelf but someone for maybe a 4th rounder....did nothing

2) A WR-could have gotten someone for a 2nd to a 5th depending on whom. Would have loved AJ Green for a 3 or 4...did nothing

3) A stud OL to replace Glowinski and move Braden Smith back inside, for a 4th to 5th...did nothing

 

They did ZERO and it cost them. I get Ballard wants to build through the draft, so do I, but damn,  either fixing 2 or 3 here and we win that game.

Who exactly could we have acquired that would have been a difference maker with the picks you suggested ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DiogoZ said:

Jackpot here.

 

C'mon people, our WR is kinda fine. It could've a upgrade, but it's nothing so serious right now. Most of the problems with our receivers are tied with how our QB is reading the field and progressions.

 

So please, stop talking a little about how we should go find a awesome WR or things like that.

 

It's going to be interesting how this year and QB pans out, and how that translates into WR personnel strategy. Given Reich's conservative play calling and JB's lack of vertical ability and/or willingness, I can see why Reich went after a possession guy like Funch in FA. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The Colts didn’t and it is time to move on

Agreed.  Time to focus om the now.  I just wish I was sure we were doing that before the deadline.

Share this post


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

 

It's going to be interesting how this year and QB pans out, and how that translates into WR personnel strategy. Given Reich's conservative play calling and JB's lack of vertical ability and/or willingness, I can see why Reich went after a possession guy like Funch in FA. 

This is the role that Pascal is starting to shine in.  No disrespect to Funchess, but Pascal has filled the role we originally had in mind for him.  And the fact that Pascal is able to take that skillset and also score touchdowns with it is very encouraging

 

Not that two guys capable of playing the short pass is a bad thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

A note to anyone saying we should've done a trade for Player X...

 

Please stop saying we made a mistake trading for someone who wasn't traded. If they weren't traded, you have absolutely no idea what they wanted and whether that would be a good trade.

 

I'm fine with people saying we should've traded for Sanu, or whoever they want that was traded. But please stop saying we should've traded for Ryan Kerrigan, or AJ Green, or whoever, when we have no idea how reasonable the offers were.

 

I'm not fine with people saying we should have traded a 2nd for Sanu, since that is what it would have taken.

Share this post


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

This is the role that Pascal is starting to shine in.  No disrespect to Funchess, but Pascal has filled the role we originally had in mind for him.  And the fact that Pascal is able to take that skillset and also score touchdowns with it is very encouraging

 

Not that two guys capable of playing the short pass is a bad thing.

Yup. Pascal doesn't have the huge body that Funch has, but he's a bit quicker and has much better hands. If Pascal can maintain his consistency, no reason to pay a FA 10M a year. I'd draft another big X type guy in the middle rounds and let Funch go.

 

I'm still pretty interested to see how Funch does. His first and only game was a mixed bag. 3 of 5 which is not bad, but he had a bad drop (20% drop rate)... Not saying he's going to maintain that drop rate, but you can not ignore his history with drops.

 

And I'm pretty unexcited that our O sucks going deep. Such as waste for all the speed we have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trading for E Sanders convinced me Ballard has decided this is another "wait until next year" season.  Disappointing.

Share this post


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

Not trading for E Sanders convinced me Ballard has decided this is another "wait until next year" season.  Disappointing.

 

Luck kind of made that decision for him.

 

You don't give away valuable draft assets when you don't even know what you have at QB yet. Regardless of what Ballard says to the media and fans he knew we weren't going to a SB without Luck and JB is still being evaluated. 

 

No realistic trade that Ballard could have made was going to make us contenders this year. Those 3rd and 4th rounds picks (minimum we might have had to pay even more) are much more valuable to the Colts than Sanders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man... Ballard sure is an *.


He should have traded for Aaron Donald, Khalil Mack and Michael Thomas. Geeeesh. :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Maniac said:

 

I'm not fine with people saying we should have traded a 2nd for Sanu, since that is what it would have taken.

 

Well I meant I'm fine with people saying that as in at least we know what it would take and we can knowledgeably debate about it. I didn't mean I'm fine with people saying that as in I agree with them

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.

×
×
  • Create New...