Building Draft Capital vs Acquiring Proven Players

[shasta519]

18 minutes ago, IinD said:

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

 

Haha...so did Ryan Fitzpatrick and Jared Goff. Minkah was a huge part in the PIT pass defense turnaround...which currently has them as the #6 passing defense according to DVOA.

 

His impact is on a similar level to Leonard it would appear.

[chad72]

Yes, it has to be a combination of both. However, I am afraid the bar has been set too high with trades like that of Mohammed Sanu, Jalen Ramsey etc. that unless it is a high draft pick on Day 1 or Day 2, you are not going to get a player of quality.

 

Yes, quality does trump quantity when it comes to acquiring talent. But depth was seriously lacking on our roster and Ballard's first priority was to instill depth on the roster, next off season would be the right time to explore more options in free agency, IMO. I just do not want us continually going down the path of "yeah, we got Funchess for a one year rental and saved money..." but what did we get in return? We have been down that road before with Donnie Avery, Hakeem Nicks, Andre Johnson etc. Grigson was astute with the cap too, showing us it is not that difficult to do so but he failed miserably with a bunch of middle-of-the-road or no-good free agents that did not contribute.

 

Polian, once he gave up something to get Booger and signed Vinatieri in free agency, both played a big part on our way to the SB, and Polian is an even greater stickler for sticking to the draft over FA. At least Ballard recognizes the true value of paying our own free agents appropriate amounts so far. He just needs to take a few more steps realizing that teams have gotten more aggressive in free agency with all our swings and misses, and it is a player's market.

 

We are not quite at the same level as the Patriots when it comes to coaching where you can fit in above average pieces and coach them to be better than what they were. Sometimes we just have to open the wallet if the fit is right.  There are some positions where players out of the draft contribute faster and we can definitely save free agency for established talent for positions that are harder to transition from college to the NFL. I do believe next off season is when we will see more such moves. 

 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, KB said:

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.

 

But you don't bring in a player to put you over the top...that is a flawed way of looking at it. Does the player you draft with that pick you didn't trade...put you over the top? Very unlikely. It's just about acquiring talent when and where you can to improve the roster.

 

Besides, Colts will likely never be in a situation where one single player does that (outside of a franchise QB). Ballard doesn't strike me as the type to rest on his laurels...he's going to keep churning talent. 

 

 

 

 

[IinD]

20 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

 

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

I was simply stating how he's getting a ton of love here. 

I think we'll be fine even without him.

[shasta519]

Ballard has been profusely praised for talent and depth of this roster...yet this team couldn't beat MIA at home with that depth. I think it's fair to question just how talented the roster really is at this point...so I hope we see moves this offseason...in addition to the draft.

 

 

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, ColtV said:

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. 

 

I agree with this....in the current context...and I hope you are right.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, CoachSmok3 said:

 

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...

 

Didn't NE go 11-5 with Cassel starting one season. Besides, at this point, I can't imagine anyone questioning BB's ability to put together a winning roster.

[Flash7]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Didn't NE go 11-5 with Cassel starting one season. Besides, at this point, I can't imagine anyone questioning BB's ability to put together a winning roster.

Yup, 11-5 with Cassel.

 

And while TB12 was suspended due to deflategate, BB won with Jimmy G and Brisset.

[shasta519]

1 hour 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 with the philosophy as well...however...acquiring those picks allows you the flexibility to use them in different ways...which we have not seen yet.

 

And to your point...so far...the results are mixed (outside of Leonard and Smith). 

[shasta519]

5 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

Yup, 11-5 with Cassel.

 

And while TB12 was suspended due to deflategate, BB won with Jimmy G and Brisset.

 

Yep...I am not sure why anyone would argue with BB's prowess as a GM. Ballard likely has an entire section about BB in his binder.

[shasta519]

46 minutes ago, stitches said:

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. 

 

I agree...but I would argue that PIT is also in a scenario with long-term questions at the QB position...and I am sure they are glad they pulled the trigger.

 

Not to derail this thread into a JB debate...but I do hope you are right and that Ballard intends to be "very open-minded" this upcoming draft.

[Defjamz26]

2 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree with the philosophy as well...however...acquiring those picks allows you the flexibility to use them in different ways...which we have not seen yet.

 

And to your point...so far...the results are mixed (outside of Leonard and Smith). 

That makes sense but that would require Ballard to change his philosophy. He pretty much stockpiles picks to draft more players. Unless it’s Khari Willis in the 4th or Turray in the 2nd, he’s never really traded anything substantial to go out and get anyone; whether it be in the draft or from another team.

 

Lets see how if he changes course at all. If there were ever a time to do it, this offseason would be it. Our final record still TBD, but I think there are signs that this approach may not be working by following it to the tee.

[stitches]

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

I agree...but I would argue that PIT is also in a scenario with long-term questions at the QB position...and I am sure they are glad they pulled the trigger.

 

Not to derail this thread into a JB debate...but I do hope you are right and that Ballard intends to be "very open-minded" this upcoming draft.

And I still think PIT made a mistake with that trade BTW, precisely because they were in somewhat similar situation. The thing that they have that we don't is a legacy QB who they won't move on from until he retires, so it's possible they know they will have him at least for a year or two more, in which case maximizing his window would be OK. 

[lollygagger8]

58 minutes ago, stitches said:

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. 

[shasta519]

11 minutes ago, stitches said:

And I still think PIT made a mistake with that trade BTW, precisely because they were in somewhat similar situation. The thing that they have that we don't is a legacy QB who they won't move on from until he retires, so it's possible they know they will have him at least for a year or two more, in which case maximizing his window would be OK. 

 

Yeah...they would have to be pretty sure before pulling the trigger...unless they are sold on Rudolph...which no.

 

 

[coltsblue1844]

2 hours 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.

 

How awesome would it be right now, to have Clowney and Ford on the team and have only lost a 2nd and a 3rd?!  I know that GMs and armchair GMs on message boards all want to draft the next big thing... but as long as the guys are young, i'd much rather have the PROVEN players, especially with the cap space that we have.

 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, obviously, but that is mine... I'm also of the opinion that if we lose a couple more games and fall out of playoff contention, let Kelly start the rest of the season and find out what we have, so that we know if we need to draft a QB with our top pick or sign one in FA.

[coltsblue1844]

1 hour ago, CoachSmok3 said:

 

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...

 

They went 11-5 with Matt Cassell starting at QB when Brady blew out his knee week 1.  Matt hadnt started a game at QB since High School.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour 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.

 

  Clowney will be available for $22M per in a few months, i hope you get him. 
  And Turay was grading at an Elite level. Lots of hits and hurries, really coming on. 3 down? Don't know.

 Robert Mathis was excellent at the same size as a pass rusher with Mannings leads. Poor against the run of course.
Lewis wasn't a bad draft pick because we don't know what he can do yet. Just unlucky and an unknown.

[CoachSmok3]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

Didn't NE go 11-5 with Cassel starting one season. Besides, at this point, I can't imagine anyone questioning BB's ability to put together a winning roster.

 

And he didnt win a SB with Cassel...

 

The original point was BB gets to the SB year in and year out... and while hes been a LOT (hes def the single greatest HC, IMO, of all time)... hes NOT automatic year in and year out...

27 minutes ago, coltsblue1844 said:

 

They went 11-5 with Matt Cassell starting at QB when Brady blew out his knee week 1.  Matt hadnt started a game at QB since High School.

 

Agreed, I addressed this point with my (just) prior response

 

Edit- NVM on the "prior"... it merged my responses

[Defjamz26]

2 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  Clowney will be available for $22M per in a few months, i hope you get him. 
  And Turay was grading at an Elite level. Lots of hits and hurries, really coming on. 3 down? Don't know.

 Robert Mathis was excellent at the same size as a pass rusher with Mannings leads. Poor against the run of course.
Lewis wasn't a bad draft pick because we don't know what he can do yet. Just unlucky and an unknown.

I think Turray is the classic case of a player that’s overrated by the fan base. Because he looks the part and we saw him training with Mathis, there was an image created of him that he was this next big thing waiting to happen.

 

Something I heard Bucky say on the Move the Sticks podcast is that when you have a player that gets a lot of pressures but no sacks, it means that they don’t have the juice or skill to actually finish and get to the QB. That’s why I kind of held my tongue on him. He certainly “flashed” but Jonathan Newsome once lead the team with 6.5 sacks. I look for signs of dominance and consistency not just flashes. Flashing has been the story of too many Colts draft picks and UDFA’s going back to the Grigson days.

 

If I had a choice between either paying Clowney in FA (doubt Seattle let’s him walk though) or hoping Turray becomes an elite pass rusher, I’m taking Clowney. Proven player over a possible.

[Flash7]

2 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I think Turray is the classic case of a player that’s overrated by the fan base. Because he looks the part and we saw him training with Mathis, there was an image created of him that he was this next big thing waiting to happen.

 

Something I heard Bucky say on the Move the Sticks podcast is that when you have a player that gets a lot of pressures but no sacks, it means that they don’t have the juice or skill to actually finish and get to the QB. That’s why I kind of held my tongue on him. He certainly “flashed” but Jonathan Newsome once lead the team with 6.5 sacks. I look for signs of dominance and consistency not just flashes. Flashing has been the story of too many Colts draft picks and UDFA’s going back to the Grigson days.

 

If I had a choice between either paying Clowney in FA (doubt Seattle let’s him walk though) or hoping Turray becomes an elite pass rusher, I’m taking Clowney. Proven player over a possible.

For me, the thing about Turay is that he was injured consistently in college, missing so much time. The potential is there, but the NFL is littered with potential. As soon as he was drafted, I knew he'd be someone constantly on the injury list. 

[Kenzicocapontas]

3 hours 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. 

Minkah costed the steelers a 1st rounder, not a third.

[Defjamz26]

6 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

For me, the thing about Turay is that he was injured consistently in college, missing so much time. The potential is there, but the NFL is littered with potential. As soon as he was drafted, I knew he'd be someone constantly on the injury list. 

Yup. That’s another knock against him. He’s a guy that probably won’t ever be healthy a full season so you’ll get trapped in the cycle of  “he’s good but he’s just gotta get healthy”, or “he’s still recovering from injury and getting used to being back out there. He missed a lot of valuable reps”. That cycle can really skew player evaluation. You end up holding your breath for a player that probably isn’t ever going to hit a ceiling that his GM envisioned when he drafted him. That’s essentially Clayton Geathers.

[Shepman]

In what scenario would our Division Rival trade a player to us and/or vice versa?  We had no chance to get Clowney.  Even Conference trades are pretty much taboo come on.

[aaron11]

i dont expect much when TY, funchess and campbell are all out and we are playing a third string QB

 

Texans would never trade Clowney here either 

[Mr.Debonair]

1 minute ago, aaron11 said:

i dont expect much when TY, funchess and campbell are all out and we are playing a third string QB

 

Texans would never trade Clowney here either 

You can't say that, when you have no idea. 

[Four2itus]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

Something I heard Bucky say on the Move the Sticks podcast is that when you have a player that gets a lot of pressures but no sacks, it means that they don’t have the juice or skill to actually finish and get to the QB.

There is a reason Bucky Brooks holds a microphone...rather than a clipboard. 

[aaron11]

21 minutes ago, Mr.Debonair said:

You can't say that, when you have no idea. 

sure i can

[The Fish]

2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

Ballard has been profusely praised for talent and depth of this roster...yet this team couldn't beat MIA at home with that depth. I think it's fair to question just how talented the roster really is at this point...so I hope we see moves this offseason...in addition to the draft.

 

 

I think people are just going on assumptions about what this team was with Luck around here. The people who praised Ballard did so because of the the Nelson/Darius picks and how those are paying off, but we forget that this is a total overhaul at this point (Grigson!) and we're two and a half years in. I don't know when the due date actually is at this point, but it's a young team with an old kicker and a QB question. 

[B~Town]

3 hours ago, shastamasta said:

Ballard has been profusely praised for talent and depth of this roster...yet this team couldn't beat MIA at home with that depth. I think it's fair to question just how talented the roster really is at this point...so I hope we see moves this offseason...in addition to the draft.

 

 

Take away any teams 1st and 2nd string qb top 3 recievers and the offense will struggle . Really its pretty amazing the amount of sucess we had this year especially with the injuries on defense .

[boo2202]

Building depth that’s funny. We didnt have enough depth to beat the lowly dolphins. This team has lacked receiver depth for so long. Then we have a chance to address that last April with the likes of Metcalf, brown, etc and we take Campbell. The Dline depth is also pretty bad. Took a swing at that with Lewis and failed. We could actually benefit from drafting in the top half of the draft. Then maybe we could fix one of the problems with an elite player. Ballard’s had one good draft, the jury is still out for this years group with ya sin and Campbell not paying much dividends as of right now.

[Defjamz26]

1 hour ago, Four2itus said:

There is a reason Bucky Brooks holds a microphone...rather than a clipboard. 

You do realize that he played in the NFL, was a scout, and is currently the HC at a high school right?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I think ballard is trying to build a good foundation before spending on a young high priced FA. Fans aren’t patient and want instant gratification. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

49 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

Building depth that’s funny. We didnt have enough depth to beat the lowly dolphins. This team has lacked receiver depth for so long. Then we have a chance to address that last April with the likes of Metcalf, brown, etc and we take Campbell. The Dline depth is also pretty bad. Took a swing at that with Lewis and failed. We could actually benefit from drafting in the top half of the draft. Then maybe we could fix one of the problems with an elite player. Ballard’s had one good draft, the jury is still out for this years group with ya sin and Campbell not paying much dividends as of right now.

We have no idea what Campbell could of done this year if he had not of got injured what two days into camp. I think that Steelers game really showed how electric he was. Metcalf fell because a lot of teams had questions. He is perfect for Wilson though. 

 

Ballard did address the WR position. Brought in a FA and took Campbell. You can’t predict injuries. The only thing I do question him on and it’s more hindsight because he is playing so well. I would of took Mclaurin instead of Campbell. He was more NFL ready. But I think they actually thought Cain was ready. But Mclaurin beside TY would of been fun.

 

[Myles]

2 hours ago, Kenzicocapontas said:

Minkah costed the steelers a 1st rounder, not a third.

Yep.   He was worth every bit of it too.   He was a steal for a pick which will end up being in the 15-20 range.

[Four2itus]

15 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

You do realize that he played in the NFL, was a scout, and is currently the HC at a high school right?

Your point is well taken. I do. However, the idea that sacks indicate one thing...and pressures indicate another, is missing information. A defensive player can rack up significant sack numbers by being alongside players that are so dominant, that they cause onlinemen to miss assignments. The player wreaking the havoc and getting pressures on an offensive line and makes it so another player gets easier path to the QB. Which one is more important? The one with big sack numbers?

 

My comment about Brooks as that he is now giving opinion and commentary about the game, rather than being in the NFL. He is now paid to get followers and create conversation. Towing the coaching line hardly accomplishes that. 

[Imgrandojji]

6 hours 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.

 

"now?"  Teams have been building both ways since the dawn of the NFL Draft

 

Teams can succeed without drafting extremely well but if you struggle in the draft it's really hard to collect a strong roster and get everything you need under the cap.

 

Ballard has had some early success in the draft. not surprising if he slightly overvalues draft picks.  He's young for a GM, he'll find a balance as he matures in his role. 

 

That's something we're going to be saying about a lot of our guys in this organization, the second-year HC, the GM,, the QB, most of the D.  The only old fart in the entire organization is Irsay, who's the guy who turned the organization on its head in the first place, and he's done an admirable job of keeping his mouth shut this year and letting his executives grow.

 

This is very much an organization from the ground up still figuring out what it actually is.  Appearances notwithstanding we have made very significant progress this year, especially on D.  Just didn't quite come together for us to make a big run.  It was long odds to begin with TBPH.

 

I think we can be comfortable letting Ballard do his work.  I wish he'd invested in this year but I guess he saw at the deadline what we're now seeing 2 weeks later, too many fatal flaws. 

 

The only overall concern I have is with Reich, and that's mitigated by the fact that he's clearly in a teaching mode right now, and still winning more football games than he loses.

 

Overall the organization looks solid, even with the steps backward they took in the last 2 weeks factored in.  We're still in the playoff hunt, a quick turnaround will see us in the Wild Card round.

[Imgrandojji]

17 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think ballard is trying to build a good foundation before spending on a young high priced FA. Fans aren’t patient and want instant gratification. 

I fell for that trap, because I felt we were close enough to stringing together a run that it was worth a shot.  I guess Ballard saw then what we're seeing now.  Looks talented, but not quite ready to put it all together.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

8 minutes ago, Imgrandojji said:

I fell for that trap, because I felt we were close enough to stringing together a run that it was worth a shot.  I guess Ballard saw then what we're seeing now.  Looks talented, but not quite ready to put it all together.

It does make sense.  Why give away draft picks if your still building the foundation. Plus with Luck even without all the foundation pieces he gives you a chance to win a SB. Not having luck has exposed places we need to improve. That is a good thing.

 

I also think If you ask ballard he would admit he made a mistake thinking Cain was ready. I bet he would of went out and got another WR if he had thought Cain needed more development.

[Kenzicocapontas]

31 minutes ago, Myles said:

Yep.   He was worth every bit of it too.   He was a steal for a pick which will end up being in the 15-20 range.

No doubt, I don't think you can convinve Ballard to make that trade off though.