Building Draft Capital vs Acquiring Proven Players

[Defjamz26]

So a topic that I’ve heard discussed on some of the podcasts I listen too is how a lot of teams are now no longer putting all their eggs in the draft basket and are instead trading draft capital for proven players. The Rams traded for Ramsey, Steelers trades for Minkah, the Texans have basically traded their entire draft for Tunsil, Stills, Johnson, and Conley, Seahawks got Clowney for a 3rd, and Dee Ford went to the 49ers for a 2nd.

 

I also saw Bucky Brooks tweet this:

 

 

So we have a GM who has openly stated how he likes to build through the draft and collect picks. I’m wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on this philosophy. Should Ballard maintain course or try and switch it up a bit? How well do you think his strategy has worked so far? Want to hear a few takes and then I’ll give my opinion.

[TheMiz]

Ballard has said multiple times that he wants to first build a foundation, and then will look at adding big name people via free agency or trade if it's the right move. His philosophy appears to be working, but the foundation took a massive shot 10 days before the season started 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

7 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

So a topic that I’ve heard discussed on some of the podcasts I listen too is how a lot of teams are now no longer putting all their eggs in the draft basket and are instead trading draft capital for proven players. The Rams traded for Ramsey, Steelers trades for Minkah, the Texans have basically traded their entire draft for Tunsil, Stills, Johnson, and Conley, Seahawks got Clowney for a 3rd, and Dee Ford went to the 49ers for a 2nd.

 

I also saw Bucky Brooks tweet this:

 

 

So we have a GM who has openly stated how he likes to build through the draft and collect picks. I’m wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on this philosophy. Should Ballard maintain course or try and switch it up a bit? How well do you think his strategy has worked so far? Want to hear a few takes and then I’ll give my opinion.

we can see how ballards method is not working. we have a team with just a few playmakers. proven talent costs money and he opts for cheaper free agents who are lacking in elite talent. he likes to trade down in the draft to get more picks. there are not as many playmakers in the lower rounds. I like proven talent over lower round draft picks.

[Mr.Debonair]

5 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

we can see how ballards method is not working. we have a team with just a few playmakers. proven talent costs money and he opts for cheaper free agents who are lacking in elite talent. he likes to trade down in the draft to get more picks. there are not as many playmakers in the lower rounds. I like proven talent over lower round draft picks.

 Right. I understand building thru the draft but a guy like Minkah Fitzpatrick or Clowney are worth a 3rd round pick. 

[TheMiz]

11 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

we can see how ballards method is not working. we have a team with just a few playmakers. proven talent costs money and he opts for cheaper free agents who are lacking in elite talent. he likes to trade down in the draft to get more picks. there are not as many playmakers in the lower rounds. I like proven talent over lower round draft picks.

I disagree, the overall talent of the roster has been steadily improving the last 3 years. Ballard's method is working, expecting instant results with a complete rebuild is unrealistic. Especially when the biggest building block in place unexpectedly left.

[KB]

I dont see how Fitzpatrick or Clowney would of put us over the top. There wernt many people that were traded that would of elevated us that much. With all the complaining about the roster it's obvious that we need more of the foundation before we make those moves. Anything that would of been done this year would of been a waste of time with the possibility of a worse draft pick and no super bowl.

 

Also, Clowney has had one good game. I live in WA and the common talks before last night is that it looks like Clowney wasnt amounting to much. Hawks fans were saying they were glad they only used a third for a one year rental.

[MPStack]

13 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 Right. I understand building thru the draft but a guy like Minkah Fitzpatrick or Clowney are worth a 3rd round pick. 

3rd Rd pick?

 

Sorry, you lost me. Please elaborate more on when they were available for a 3rd.

 

 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

2 minutes ago, TheMiz said:

I disagree, the overall talent of the roster has been steadily improving the last 3 years. Ballard's method is working, expecting instant results with a complete rebuild is unrealistic. Especially when the biggest building block in place unexpectedly left.

I agree our roster has improved, but it is far from being an above average team. his method takes too long if it even works at all to ever be among the top teams

[KB]

3 minutes ago, MPStack said:

3rd Rd pick?

 

Sorry, you lost me. Please elaborate more on when they were available for a 3rd.

 

 

Clowney was acquired for a third and two players

[dodsworth]

Ballard has been stacking young talent the last couple of drafts.

Once these guys become seasoned vets then you will see results.

 

We need a stud D lineman but the draft went heavy on linemen 

last draft and the cupboard was pretty much empty when we drafted

[Myles]

10 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

I agree our roster has improved, but it is far from being an above average team. his method takes too long if it even works at all to ever be among the top teams

The Colts are an above average team.

 

[Mr.Debonair]

18 minutes ago, MPStack said:

3rd Rd pick?

 

Sorry, you lost me. Please elaborate more on when they were available for a 3rd.

 

 

Sorry edited my post and forget to put 1sr round in there. The 3rd round part was for Clowney

[IinD]

Luck retiring was a huge blow to our short term plans (ie: next few years).

 

But Ballard has absolutely built a solid bottom third of the roster. That's huge and is the proper way to do things. We were terrible depth wise when he got here. We can now lose guys and have decent players step in who can function.

 

Don't underestimate the injuries we've had. TY and Funchess being healthy all season would definitely make the O look different. Same with Turay at DE.

 

Now that he's lost an elite franchise QB, he's going to have to keep building this thing up a bit more instead of filling a few spots with some stars.

 

I'm just guessing, but I think next year would have been a season where he would've spent on several stars regardless if Luck had stayed.

 

With all that said I think he'll be a little more open to spend next year as that was part of his original 4/5 year building plan.

 

People act like he's been here 10 years. You need 3/4 drafts to build up a team and account for the inevitable bust or two draft picks.

 

If he doesn't spend anything again next season I think it'll be safe to assume he just won't get into FA in general as a GM or Jim just isn't allowing him to spend because he doesn't want to shell out millions in signing bonuses. 

 

Sorry for the rant.

 

[Flash7]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't were a a playoff team (with a playoff win) last season?

 

Should we wait to win a Superbowl before we think we've built a good enough foundation?

 

Then we'll finally be ready to acquire top-level talent?

[CoachSmok3]

39 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 Right. I understand building thru the draft but a guy like Minkah Fitzpatrick or Clowney are worth a 3rd round pick. 

 

 

I am not a fan of trading high picks for players their original team no longer wants or cant afford...

 

BUT...

 

Mr. D- I absolutely agree with your statement. Bold emphasis added to the thought I agree with. If we could have sent a 3rd for EITHER of those two... we should have done THAT

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

The Colts are an above average team.

 

they did not look above average against the fins, all I can say they are how they play, below average

[CoachSmok3]

1 minute ago, DEFENSE said:

they did not look above average against the fins, all I can say they are how they play, below average

 

 

I hate comparing teams but.... does that mean you think the Saints are below average? They lost to the Falcons, and looked terrible doing so...

 

Any given Sunday...

 

Com on, man

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

7 minutes ago, IinD said:

Luck retiring was a huge blow to our short term plans (ie: next few years).

 

But Ballard has absolutely built a solid bottom third of the roster. That's huge and is the proper way to do things. We were terrible depth wise when he got here. We can now lose guys and have decent players step in who can function.

 

Don't underestimate the injuries we've had. TY and Funchess being healthy all season would definitely make the O look different. Same with Turay at DE.

 

Now that he's lost an elite franchise QB, he's going to have to keep building this thing up a bit more instead of filling a few spots with some stars.

 

I'm just guessing, but I think next year would have been a season where he would've spent on several stars regardless if Luck had stayed.

 

With all that said I think he'll be a little more open to spend next year as that was part of his original 4/5 year building plan.

 

People act like he's been here 10 years. You need 3/4 drafts to build up a team and account for the inevitable bust or two draft picks.

 

If he doesn't spend anything again next season I think it'll be safe to assume he just won't get into FA in general as a GM or Jim just isn't allowing him to spend because he doesn't want to shell out millions in signing bonuses. 

 

Sorry for the rant.

 

hoodie does not need 4 to 5 years to put a winning team on the field, he puts an elite team on the field with new talent each season as a great gm should

[KB]

1 minute ago, DEFENSE said:

hoodie does not need 4 to 5 years to put a winning team on the field, he puts an elite team on the field with new talent each season as a great gm should

Did you wake up at the * crack of dawn just to come here and troll? Time to kill or cant sleep?

[IinD]

Just now, DEFENSE said:

hoodie does not need 4 to 5 years to put a winning team on the field, he puts an elite team on the field with new talent each season as a great gm should

Because it's so easy to do what NE does. Nobody can do what they do.

 

Ballard literally got here in 2017. It's not that easy to build a SB roster. And our franchise QB bailed which probably alters plans a bit.

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

1 minute ago, KB said:

Did you wake up at the * crack of dawn just to come here and troll? Time to kill or cant sleep?

just telling it like it is, some find it hard to face reality

[ManningGM]

28 minutes ago, Myles said:

The Colts are an above average team.

 

No they're not. 

[Flash7]

3 minutes ago, IinD said:

Because it's so easy to do what NE does. Nobody can do what they do.

 

Ballard literally got here in 2017. It's not that easy to build a SB roster. And our franchise QB bailed which probably alters plans a bit.

Although I agree that Luck leaving has definitely altered the plans moving forward, Luck was with the team during last FA. Ballard didn't do much then, even when we were a playoff winning team and had a stud QB.

 

I just don't think Ballard will ever go after top-level talent via FA, and that's alright. He wants to build his team with guys like Big Q and Leonard, who are top-level talents in themselves.

[IinD]

2 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

Although I agree that Luck leaving has definitely altered the plans moving forward, Luck was with the team during last FA. Ballard didn't do much then, even when we were a playoff winning team and had a stud QB.

 

I just don't think Ballard will ever go after top-level talent via FA, and that's alright. He wants to build his team with guys like Big Q and Leonard, who are top-level talents in themselves.

Only thing is we don't know if he'll ever be a player in FA yet. That's why I said I think this off-season will tell us more about who he is.

Don't forget, he literally got hired in 2017 and had his QB bail in 2019. 

Not really a ton of time to do whatever his vision is/was.

[ColtV]

Like any successful approach, there is no one path that leads to success. It is a combination, and I'm sure when Ballard feels there is a time to make a move via trade he will. It can be argued that it should have already happened(I've argued it myself last season) but neither point can address our current problem: We don't have a franchise quarterback right now. And despite what some people have decided to believe, you don't win in the modern NFL without one. We're not currently in a "win now" mode because of that, so there really is no pressure to make a trade for an established player.

 

Right now reserving all draft capital in the case that the Colts decide that Jacoby is not the long term answer and need to move up in the draft is more important. Going by value chart alone, the Colts have enough value to move up to #5, where either a Justin Fields or Justin Herbert may be targeted. 

[CoachSmok3]

16 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

hoodie does not need 4 to 5 years to put a winning team on the field, he puts an elite team on the field with new talent each season as a great gm should

 

soooo, just to point out...

 

Belichick as CLE HC... 36-44

 

Belichick as NE HC w/o TB12... 1 season, 5-11

 

 

So, DEFENSE.... youre right, he doesnt need 4-5 seasons... he just needed the 1 lucky pick of TB12 to change his fortunes...

[Defjamz26]

Here’s my thoughts. So one of the arguments that I constantly see being made is that “we have young players who are still developing”. While I understand the basic thinking in that philosophy, I disagree with that notion.

 

If you’re committing towards building through the draft but the goal is still the post season each year, that means you’re counting on the ability of young players to play and contribute early. Especially if you’re not not signing big name FAs. And while Nelson, Leonard, Mack, and Smith have exceeded expectations, the rest of Ballard’s picks have not. Also let’s stop saying that every player is developing. A rookie will not be lights out, so they are developing. A 2nd year player should have taken a big leap in his development. By their 3rd year, you’re no longer developing. You’re being evaluated as a veteran player. So Quincy Wilson is no longer developing. It’s clear he can’t play. It’s clear Grover is a solid depth piece but nothing more. Hooker is elite if healthy

 

Injuries aside, his picks have not been impressive. Injuries aside, neither Lewis or Turray showed anything that indicates they may be 3 down game wreckers when healthy. That’s a problem if you’re going to just hoard draft picks. Clowney went for a 3rd, and it wouldn’t have been unreasonable to pay a 2nd for him because it’s not like Turray or Banogu (both 2nd rounders) will be as good.

 

While I still believe in the overall philosophy of building through the draft and not spending crazy in FA, I think the flaws of this formula have begun to show. If you don’t hit on players with those extra picks, then all you end up with is an abundance of young, low ceiling players who don’t make much impact on Sunday’s. At some point you either have to trade up higher in the 1st round or trade those extra picks for proven players.

[shasta519]

Both were absolutely trades that Ballard should have made (in a vacuum...obviously HOU likely doesn't trade to IND).

 

I love trading back in the draft when the opportunity arises, but I strongly believe in building a roster with all of your resources...and trading picks for proven talent is one of those avenues...especially on a team that is drafting 9-10 guys every year with dwindling roster spots.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 Right. I understand building thru the draft but a guy like Minkah Fitzpatrick or Clowney are worth a 3rd round pick. 

 

 We didn't need Fitzpatrick (Willis for a 4th) and Justin Houston is as good all around in this D, andfor less $$$ with no lost pick for a one year rental.

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

3 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Here’s my thoughts. So one of the arguments that I constantly see being made is that “we have young players who are still developing”. While I understand the basic thinking in that philosophy, I disagree with that notion.

 

If you’re committing towards building through the draft but the goal is still the post season each year, that means you’re counting on the ability of young players to play and contribute early. Especially if you’re not not signing big name FAs. And while Nelson, Leonard, Mack, and Smith have exceeded expectations, the rest of Ballard’s picks have not. Also let’s stop saying that every player is developing. A rookie will not be lights out, so they are developing. A 2nd year player should have taken a big leap in his development. By their 3rd year, you’re no longer developing. You’re being evaluated as a veteran player. So Quincy Wilson is no longer developing. It’s clear he can’t play. It’s clear Grover is a solid depth piece but nothing more. Hooker is elite if healthy

 

Injuries aside, his picks have not been impressive. Injuries aside, neither Lewis or Turray showed anything that indicates they may be 3 down game wreckers when healthy. That’s a problem if you’re going to just hoard draft picks. Clowney went for a 3rd, and it wouldn’t have been unreasonable to pay a 2nd for him because it’s not like Turray or Banogu (both 2nd rounders) will be as good.

 

While I still believe in the overall philosophy of building through the draft and not spending crazy in FA, I think the flaws of this formula have begun to show. If you don’t hit on players with those extra picks, then all you end up with is an abundance of young, low ceiling players who don’t make much impact on Sunday’s. At some point you either have to trade up higher in the 1st round or trade those extra picks for proven players.

i agree, very good summary

[Mr.Debonair]

1 minute ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 We didn't need Fitzpatrick (Willis for a 4th) and Justin Houston is as good all around in this D, andfor less $$$ with no lost pick for a one year rental.

Who says Clowney has to be a one year rental? 

 

Willis has done his job but he is not in the realm of Fitzpatrick. Willis does not have the playmaking ability of a Fitz 

[Dingus McGirt]

32 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

just telling it like it is, some find it hard to face reality

Visiting from the Texans forum, are we?

[Dingus McGirt]

14 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Here’s my thoughts. So one of the arguments that I constantly see being made is that “we have young players who are still developing”. While I understand the basic thinking in that philosophy, I disagree with that notion.

 

If you’re committing towards building through the draft but the goal is still the post season each year, that means you’re counting on the ability of young players to play and contribute early. Especially if you’re not not signing big name FAs. And while Nelson, Leonard, Mack, and Smith have exceeded expectations, the rest of Ballard’s picks have not. Also let’s stop saying that every player is developing. A rookie will not be lights out, so they are developing. A 2nd year player should have taken a big leap in his development. By their 3rd year, you’re no longer developing. You’re being evaluated as a veteran player. So Quincy Wilson is no longer developing. It’s clear he can’t play. It’s clear Grover is a solid depth piece but nothing more. Hooker is elite if healthy

 

Injuries aside, his picks have not been impressive. Injuries aside, neither Lewis or Turray showed anything that indicates they may be 3 down game wreckers when healthy. That’s a problem if you’re going to just hoard draft picks. Clowney went for a 3rd, and it wouldn’t have been unreasonable to pay a 2nd for him because it’s not like Turray or Banogu (both 2nd rounders) will be as good.

 

While I still believe in the overall philosophy of building through the draft and not spending crazy in FA, I think the flaws of this formula have begun to show. If you don’t hit on players with those extra picks, then all you end up with is an abundance of young, low ceiling players who don’t make much impact on Sunday’s. At some point you either have to trade up higher in the 1st round or trade those extra picks for proven players.

Time will tell.

[rockywoj]

I am Vehemently opposed to trading away valuable draft capital for one year rental players. If the player looks to be worthwhile, to me such a trade has to be contingent on a extension being signed. Trading away valuable draft picks for ONE year rental players is the epitome of short sightedness. 

[lollygagger8]

Fitzpatrick was a guy I wanted them to go after for sure. 

 

Oh well, I ain't crying over it 

 

 

 

[Mr.Debonair]

1 minute ago, lollygagger8 said:

Fitzpatrick was a guy I wanted them to go after for sure. 

 

Oh well, I ain't crying over it 

 

 

 

I'll do it for the both of us lol

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

So a topic that I’ve heard discussed on some of the podcasts I listen too is how a lot of teams are now no longer putting all their eggs in the draft basket and are instead trading draft capital for proven players. The Rams traded for Ramsey, Steelers trades for Minkah, the Texans have basically traded their entire draft for Tunsil, Stills, Johnson, and Conley, Seahawks got Clowney for a 3rd, and Dee Ford went to the 49ers for a 2nd.

 

I also saw Bucky Brooks tweet this:

 

 

So we have a GM who has openly stated how he likes to build through the draft and collect picks. I’m wondering what everyone’s thoughts are on this philosophy. Should Ballard maintain course or try and switch it up a bit? How well do you think his strategy has worked so far? Want to hear a few takes and then I’ll give my opinion.

 

To the bolded...I will separate out strategy and actual draft picks. On the former, I think the draft strategy is sound and I agree with Ballard's focus on trading back and acquiring additinal Day Two picks. They give you a lot of flexibility in how you draft...and because the draft is a crapshoot...the more picks you have the the better chance you have to find talent in general...but also to hit HRs. 

 

But given that, I am a big supporter of trading picks for proven talent...since the draft is a crapshoot and competitive windows come and go. This is an area the Colts haven't really explored yet...and I hope that changes. It would appear that teams are more willing than ever to trade away talented players (to save money or otherwise)...and the Colts are in a perfect position to capitalize and acquire players they would have never been able to draft and likely wouldn't have bid on in FA. This of course could change with the new CBA...but I expect to see more of the same this offseason.

 

As for FA, this has been beaten to death. We all know Ballard's stance on this. The only thing I will say in regards to financial side is...I am not a huge fan of the "re-sign as many of your own players as you can" strategy. Yes, core talent should be retained if possible...but spending more on the same players is not a great strategy overall.

[IinD]

2 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Fitzpatrick was a guy I wanted them to go after for sure. 

 

Oh well, I ain't crying over it 

 

 

 

Hoyer definitely bumped Fitzpatrick's stock around here.. Lol...

[stitches]

IMO it would have been irresponsible to trade a 1st round pick before you know where you are with your QB position. Every piece of draft capital is vital if we decide to move on from Brissett and seek our future QB in the draft and it's much more important to get the QB you want, than to get a safety even if he's a very good one. 

[Mr.Debonair]

6 minutes ago, IinD said:

Hoyer definitely bumped Fitzpatrick's stock around here.. Lol...

 

If you think that one pick is why, you're crazy. The impact he has made in Pitt is outstanding