Math for Pick #13

[Archer]

I’ve been thinking about our first round pick, and I think a few great players at positions of need will definitely available for us to choose from.  Now, some of us have been vocal anti-Lovers, but you can throw him into the discussion also.  Here’s how the math breaks down:

 

Players who’ll be long gone:

 

(6) Burrow, Young, Tua, Okudah, Herbert, Simmons

 

That leaves six more players that’ll be gone before we pick.  Most of the likeliest players to go in the other six picks before us seem to be at positions of need: DT, WR, and OT.

 

OT may not be an obvious position of need to many of you, but when you win in the trenches, you have to ensure proper depth and succession.  I think Castonzo is going to come back, but getting his successor in place and gaining experience (probably starting at another position) is a great idea.  Not too easy to find a top LT without a high pick or grossly overpaying.  Plus, it potentially gets the weak link (Glowinski) out of the lineup and makes him available for depth.  So, the following players should make up the bulk of the rest selected before our pick:

 

DT (2) Kinlaw, Brown

WR (3) Jeudy, Ruggs, Lamb

OT (4) Wills, Thomas, Becton, Wirfs

QB (1) (If you must) Love

 

So, at least four of those ten should be available to us.  Maybe more if someone snags another EDGE or CB or Safety or something.  I think my priorities would be the DTs in the order above, followed by the four OTs.  I’d be tempted to take Jeudy over Wirfs, maybe...

[chad72]

I agree with your assessment totally. We may or may not be in a position to get a blue chip DT in the first round again if we went 7-9 despite sub-par QB play, meaning, there is enough talent on our squad that with a few breaks, we could hit double digit wins. 

 

That is why I am all for the trenches at No.13 (DT or OT) and then move back into Round 1, if we really feel it is necessary to get our QB. If we sign a guy like Rivers, it actually increases our flexibility in the draft too, IMO. I remember the forum wanting Derek Barnett and he went just before our Malik Hooker pick at No.15, if I remember right. That is the latest sweet spot for blue chip 3 down DTs, I feel.

[AZColt11]

Love it.  I just would reverse the order on the DT's.  I think Kinlaw is an excellent prospect and could fit well into the Colts scheme, I just think Brown is EXACTLY the right piece for this defense.  Too bad he will likely be gone IMHO.  But I would be more than thrilled to get Kinlaw too, don't get me wrong.

[Fisticuffs111]

Yeah, it hit me recently looking over mocks that luckily we’re picking right before that usual mid round drop off in talent.

 

I’ve not been a big fan of the idea of trading back, now even more so.

[FalseStart]

Nice problem to have... Possibility of one or more of the Top 2 at each position could fall to Colts...

[Barry Sears]

This makes me want to stay at #13, because we'll get a difference maker at this spot, whether it's OL or DL, which I would expect Ballard to focus on, or depending on free agency, he could go WR at this spot.

 

Would not want to see Love picked at #13, if he's the only one of the top 4 QBs available.  But, if Ballard sees him as worthy of the #13 pick, then I know he has been thoroughly evaluated and CB would be comfortable with him at 13.

[Archer]

32 minutes ago, Barry Sears said:

Would not want to see Love picked at #13, if he's the only one of the top 4 QBs available.  But, if Ballard sees him as worthy of the #13 pick, then I know he has been thoroughly evaluated and CB would be comfortable with him at 13.

This is how I feel.  From everything I’ve seen, I don’t think I’d take Love with our #34 pick, but it CB pulls the trigger at #13, I’ll be thinking, “I guess I was wrong!”

[CantBeStopped]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

I agree with your assessment totally. We may or may not be in a position to get a blue chip DT in the first round again if we went 7-9 despite sub-par QB play, meaning, there is enough talent on our squad that with a few breaks, we could hit double digit wins. 

 

That is why I am all for the trenches at No.13 (DT or OT) and then move back into Round 1, if we really feel it is necessary to get our QB. If we sign a guy like Rivers, it actually increases our flexibility in the draft too, IMO. I remember the forum wanting Derek Barnett and he went just before our Malik Hooker pick at No.15, if I remember right. That is the latest sweet spot for blue chip 3 down DTs, I feel.

Pretty sure Barnett was back around the Werner draft. Hes much older than hooker and plays DE not DT

[CantBeStopped]

3 minutes ago, CantBeStopped said:

Pretty sure Barnett was back around the Werner draft. Hes much older than hooker and plays DE not DT

NVM I'm thinking of someone else. My apologies

[John Hammonds]

2 hours ago, chad72 said:

That is why I am all for the trenches at No.13 (DT or OT) and then move back into Round 1, if we really feel it is necessary to get our QB. If we sign a guy like Rivers, it actually increases our flexibility in the draft too, IMO. I remember the forum wanting Derek Barnett and he went just before our Malik Hooker pick at No.15, if I remember right. That is the latest sweet spot for blue chip 3 down DTs, I feel.

I remember that, too.  I had been researching Derek Barnett, Charles Harris, and Takk McKinley like crazy that year.  And the big "ooooof" when Barnett was chosen at right in front of us at 14.  To be fair, I wanted us to pick LB Reuben Foster instead of Malik Hooker.  Good thing we didn't.  And good thing I'm not the GM!

[OffensivelyPC]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think people are underselling Tua's hip injury by a Bill Clinton Mile.  I get that his camp is saying how everything is going ahead of schedule, but that's his agent working for him like he should.  And even if the report is 100% accurate, those types of injuries have affected other players careers in a permanent manner. 

 

Tua's young, but his injury history is nothing to scoff at.  I could easily see him falling out of the top 10.  But, I guess it really only does take one team.  I just hope it's not the colts.

[aaron11]

6 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think people are underselling Tua's hip injury by a Bill Clinton Mile. 

i think the opposite, that its being over rated by fans and he will have a good career

 

i dont expect him to play until 40 either and id be fine with that

 

 

[CantBeStopped]

43 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i think the opposite, that its being over rated by fans and he will have a good career

 

i dont expect him to play until 40 either and id be fine with that

 

 

We just need someone to play for us until 2026 when we select Arch Manning

[OffensivelyPC]

14 minutes ago, aaron11 said:

i think the opposite, that its being over rated by fans and he will have a good career

 

i dont expect him to play until 40 either and id be fine with that

 

 

Even so, the kid has been dealing with injuries quite a bit.  Forget about the hip.  Dude's broke his finger in training camp 2018, left several games in 2018.  Left briefly vs LSU.  Knee/quad injury against Miss St. and did not return.   High ankle sprain in SEC championship and did not return (resulted in tightrope surgery). Then 2019 had a high ankle sprain in the opposite ankle and needed another tightrope surgery.  Now throw on the hip injury . . .

 

I mean, if that's nothing to you, then take him in your mock drafts.    But that's a serious roll of the dice at 6.  it's hard enough to hit on your QB draft picks, let along draft one that even if he is a hit, is one serious collision closer than most to long absences.  I'd rather be a bit more conservative with a 1st round pick (particularly a top 6 pick which is really what I'm disputing).  

[NannyMcafee]

3 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Even so, the kid has been dealing with injuries quite a bit.  Forget about the hip.  Dude's broke his finger in training camp 2018, left several games in 2018.  Left briefly vs LSU.  Knee/quad injury against Miss St. and did not return.   High ankle sprain in SEC championship and did not return (resulted in tightrope surgery). Then 2019 had a high ankle sprain in the opposite ankle and needed another tightrope surgery.  Now throw on the hip injury . . .

 

I mean, if that's nothing to you, then take him in your mock drafts.    But that's a serious roll of the dice at 6.  it's hard enough to hit on your QB draft picks, let along draft one that even if he is a hit, is one serious collision closer than most to long absences.  I'd rather be a bit more conservative with a 1st round pick (particularly a top 6 pick which is really what I'm disputing).  

 

Just look at Marcus Mariotas injury history. Pass. 

[OffensivelyPC]

15 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

Just look at Marcus Mariotas injury history. Pass. 

He's missed so many games this year because he's just not been good that I forgot how often he was injured earlier on.

[Hoose]

2 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Maybe I'm missing something, but I think people are underselling Tua's hip injury by a Bill Clinton Mile.  I get that his camp is saying how everything is going ahead of schedule, but that's his agent working for him like he should.  And even if the report is 100% accurate, those types of injuries have affected other players careers in a permanent manner. 

 

Tua's young, but his injury history is nothing to scoff at.  I could easily see him falling out of the top 10.  But, I guess it really only does take one team.  I just hope it's not the colts.

You're right. Tua's injury history should factor into a team's decision. That hopefully drops him down to the Colts. And if I'm Ballard, I jump all over him. He's been banged up but he's a phenomenal talent. Frank Gore had two knee surgeries in college. He dropped down to I believe the 3rd round for the Niners. And he's still chugging along today. College injuries have to be a factor, but they should never be an eliminating factor when you're talking about a rare talent. And Tua is that. 

 

Now, if there is a question if Tua will ever heal properly, that's different. But assuming he's on his way to a total recovery as advertised, he's very much worth the #13 pick in the draft. That question should be answered by late April. 

[stitches]

Good summary. I think it just shows how good of a draft this is in the first 15 or so picks. If we don't pick a QB we re very likely to get a very good prospect. After QB, my preference out of those would be to just go BPA, no matter the position or trade back. We are kind of lucky that we need all of those positions, too. My favorites are Jerry Jeudy and Andrew Thomas, but IMO it's almost certain they go before 13 too. 

[stitches]

3 hours ago, Archer said:

This is how I feel.  From everything I’ve seen, I don’t think I’d take Love with our #34 pick, but it CB pulls the trigger at #13, I’ll be thinking, “I guess I was wrong!”

Does Ballard get a second chance at a QB? I kind of feel like he won't get a second chance, so he needs to be right on whoever he picks. 

[OffensivelyPC]

53 minutes ago, Hoose said:

You're right. Tua's injury history should factor into a team's decision. That hopefully drops him down to the Colts. And if I'm Ballard, I jump all over him. He's been banged up but he's a phenomenal talent. Frank Gore had two knee surgeries in college. He dropped down to I believe the 3rd round for the Niners. And he's still chugging along today. College injuries have to be a factor, but they should never be an eliminating factor when you're talking about a rare talent. And Tua is that. 

 

Now, if there is a question if Tua will ever heal properly, that's different. But assuming he's on his way to a total recovery as advertised, he's very much worth the #13 pick in the draft. That question should be answered by late April. 

Oh I'm not saying he should be off people's draft boards entirely.  I am saying though that I think it's perfectly justifiable to drop guys up to a whole round because of certain red flags - injury history and character are the two in particular I would co-sign on. 

 

He could be a rare talent, but if I can't trust his availability, I won't want to use my highest resources on that guy until he proves otherwise.  Now no player is impervious to getting into trouble or injured, but this is risk assessment.  When you demonstrate the proclivity to make a stupid decision or susceptibility to injury, I will tend to want to trust someone else. 

 

That's just my preference, though.  If he's there at 13 and Ballard takes him, I'd be happy with him as QB.  I'd question the logic behind it from day 1, but I'm open to be proven wrong.  If me being wrong gets us a long term franchise QB, well then hell yeah I'd be glad about it.

[aaron11]

3 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

If he's there at 13 and Ballard takes him, I'd be happy with him as QB

 

 

hes really too good to last until 13, hes probably going to go early.  availability wanst an issue until he broke his hip.  

[WifiGuy]

4 hours ago, stitches said:

Does Ballard get a second chance at a QB? I kind of feel like he won't get a second chance, so he needs to be right on whoever he picks. 

That's why he should not take one this yr.   None of them are worth the risk.   FA  for a few yrs until he build up draft capital to get the one he wants 

 

Take Kinlaw if available and roll on 

[richard pallo]

I don't know why but I'm starting to think our QB and a DT and a WR will come from FA.  Our 1st pick will be an OT and then we will trade back into the back of the 1st for a QB.  My 1st choice would still be to trade for Carr though.  

[Moosejawcolt]

Ballard needs 2  DTs in this draft and early. I would b more in favor of moving up to pick Brown then waiting at 13 for Kinlaw if he was there.  

[NewColtsFan]

8 hours ago, stitches said:

Does Ballard get a second chance at a QB? I kind of feel like he won't get a second chance, so he needs to be right on whoever he picks. 

If you’re speaking in code, I’m not following.   Are you hinting that if Ballard doesn’t fix the QB position this year, 2020,  that if we don’t have a playoff caliber year,  Irsay will fire Ballard ?    Is that your meaning?

[stitches]

44 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

If you’re speaking in code, I’m not following.   Are you hinting that if Ballard doesn’t fix the QB position this year, 2020,  that if we don’t have a playoff caliber year,  Irsay will fire Ballard ?    Is that your meaning?

No, I'm not talking about now or you are gone. I'm talking whenever he decides to address it... How many GMs survive drafting a bust at QB? If the QB he drafts busts, I doubt he will get a second chance to draft another one... So he must be pretty sold on whoever he drafts.

[stitches]

4 hours ago, WifiGuy said:

That's why he should not take one this yr.   None of them are worth the risk.   FA  for a few yrs until he build up draft capital to get the one he wants 

 

Take Kinlaw if available and roll on 

The problem is... Our draft capital won't get dramatically better. We are drafting 13, we have 2 high seconds. How much more capital realistically do you think we can build without bottoming out(and if we bottom out he will probably be gone before he even gets the chance to draft a QB)? And what's the chance you will be in position to draft your preferred QB next year? Do you expect us to be worse or better? If better our draft position will be worse and you will need even more draft capital to get in position to draft the QB Ballard likes and the great no risk QBs all go in top 10ish. 

 

We are in a pretty good position right now for Ballard to get the QB he likes. We have the draft picks. Now the question is does he like one enough to use them to go up and secure the player he wants. 

 

But if he doesn't like any of the QBs I agree - he should be acquiring future draft capital to make it easier to trade up whenever he falls in love with a QB. My favorite option is trading out of #34 for future 1st. Or trading back from 13 to the mid-late 20s for future 1st but we will miss on some blue chip prospects at 13.

 

So yeah, in summary - I think this year provides us with a very good chance to get our future QB and I don't think it will be any easier in the future because great QBs don't fall and we won't be drafting higher than we are now.

[FalseStart]

Earliest I see Ballard grabbing a QB is in the third round...There are too many good/great Starters/prospects at positions of need at 13, 34, 44... to grab a project QB.  Unless Burrow, Tua or Herbert fall... 95% chance Ballard goes BPA...or trades back a little and acquires another pick.

[Hoose]

11 hours ago, stitches said:

The problem is... Our draft capital won't get dramatically better. We are drafting 13, we have 2 high seconds. How much more capital realistically do you think we can build without bottoming out(and if we bottom out he will probably be gone before he even gets the chance to draft a QB)? And what's the chance you will be in position to draft your preferred QB next year? Do you expect us to be worse or better? If better our draft position will be worse and you will need even more draft capital to get in position to draft the QB Ballard likes and the great no risk QBs all go in top 10ish. 

 

We are in a pretty good position right now for Ballard to get the QB he likes. We have the draft picks. Now the question is does he like one enough to use them to go up and secure the player he wants. 

 

But if he doesn't like any of the QBs I agree - he should be acquiring future draft capital to make it easier to trade up whenever he falls in love with a QB. My favorite option is trading out of #34 for future 1st. Or trading back from 13 to the mid-late 20s for future 1st but we will miss on some blue chip prospects at 13.

 

So yeah, in summary - I think this year provides us with a very good chance to get our future QB and I don't think it will be any easier in the future because great QBs don't fall and we won't be drafting higher than we are now.

I really feel like trading one of the  picks from Day 1 or 2 for a future pick is a serious mistake. The time is now to build with some Blue Chip talent. The Colts can get three such players with the 13, 34 and 44 picks. If they were to trade a pick it should be for improving their draft this year....either a short move up or down. A short move back into the bottom of round 1, likely for a QB....or a short move down in round 1 or 2 for an additional 3rd rounder. 

[stitches]

12 minutes ago, Hoose said:

I really feel like trading one of the  picks from Day 1 or 2 for a future pick is a serious mistake. The time is now to build with some Blue Chip talent. The Colts can get three such players with the 13, 34 and 44 picks. If they were to trade a pick it should be for improving their draft this year....either a short move up or down. A short move back into the bottom of round 1, likely for a QB....or a short move down in round 1 or 2 for an additional 3rd rounder. 

No they can't get 3 blue chip players. This year's draft is somewhat deep with blue chip players and they still will be taken in the first 15-16 picks. Counting on acquiring blue chip talent in the second round is not realistic expectation. What you get in the second is much more often something like... Rock or Banogu, rather than Darius Leonard. 

 

If you don't have a franchise QB priority no.1 should be either getting a franchise QB or loading up on assets to help you get a franchise QB in the future. That's why I wouldn't mind trading down big or trading out for future picks. 

[OffensivelyPC]

2 hours ago, FalseStart said:

Earliest I see Ballard grabbing a QB is in the third round...There are too many good/great Starters/prospects at positions of need at 13, 34, 44... to grab a project QB.  Unless Burrow, Tua or Herbert fall... 95% chance Ballard goes BPA...or trades back a little and acquires another pick.

Most QBs are projects anyway. Even the Carson Wentz' taken at the top of round 1 have a developmental year.  FOMO isnt something that should keep us from taking QB in the 1st. We should take the best prospect accounting for positional value, trading up or down as necessary. If that happens to be QB, great.

[crazycolt1]

52 minutes ago, stitches said:

No they can't get 3 blue chip players. This year's draft is somewhat deep with blue chip players and they still will be taken in the first 15-16 picks. Counting on acquiring blue chip talent in the second round is not realistic expectation. What you get in the second is much more often something like... Rock or Banogu, rather than Darius Leonard. 

 

If you don't have a franchise QB priority no.1 should be either getting a franchise QB or loading up on assets to help you get a franchise QB in the future. That's why I wouldn't mind trading down big or trading out for future picks. 

There have been quite a few 'blue chip' players taken in the 2nd and 3rd round. 

It's a matter of the GM finding and hitting on the picks. 

Darius Leonard was a 2nd round pick that didn't even complete all his talent levels at the combine. 

He is about 'blue chip' as you can get. 

[stitches]

25 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

There have been quite a few 'blue chip' players taken in the 2nd and 3rd round. 

It's a matter of the GM finding and hitting on the picks. 

Darius Leonard was a 2nd round pick that didn't even complete all his talent levels at the combine. 

He is about 'blue chip' as you can get. 

People throw out 'blue chip' way too loosely. There are all pros everywhere in the draft, but the frequency with which you can find them drops significantly the lower you go. And the fact that some turn into great players doesn't mean those players were blue chip prospects when they entered the league. Darius Leonard was NOT a blue chip prospect(and I'm saying this as the person on this forum who had him probably higher than anyone else). You CANNOT expect to get a Darius Leonard in every draft with your 2nd round pick.  Ballard might draft for 10 more years and not get anyone close to Darius Leonard in the second round. 

 

In the long term, about half of your second rounders will bust, about half of them will be various levels of successful - from good rotational players to... solid starters to ...Darius Leonard levels all pro. It's not wise to expect to consistently draft all pros in the second round. It's just NOT going to happen. And Ballard knows that and he knows his own limitations and that's why he's accumulating more picks in that second-third round range. More shots, more chances to get good players. 

[FalseStart]

42 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Most QBs are projects anyway. Even the Carson Wentz' taken at the top of round 1 have a developmental year.  FOMO isnt something that should keep us from taking QB in the 1st. We should take the best prospect accounting for positional value, trading up or down as necessary. If that happens to be QB, great.

I don’t think we are in fear of missing out on anything... I just think QB 4,5,6... are not going to crack into/onto our board... until much later.

[Fisticuffs111]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

No they can't get 3 blue chip players. This year's draft is somewhat deep with blue chip players and they still will be taken in the first 15-16 picks. Counting on acquiring blue chip talent in the second round is not realistic expectation. What you get in the second is much more often something like... Rock or Banogu, rather than Darius Leonard. 

 

If you don't have a franchise QB priority no.1 should be either getting a franchise QB or loading up on assets to help you get a franchise QB in the future. That's why I wouldn't mind trading down big or trading out for future picks. 

 

Yeah, I feel like Leonard and even Smith have kind of warped the idea 2nd round picks. You’re more likely to get a potentially decent starter, good depth, etc. And then there are guys like Tyquan Lewis, who I guess could be labeled as good depth if we’re being kind.

 

As to another point you made in another post, I actually hope and think Ballard could get a second chance if he whiffs on a QB. But it is interesting to think about what happens if he does so.

[stitches]

11 hours ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

 

Yeah, I feel like Leonard and even Smith have kind of warped the idea 2nd round picks. You’re more likely to get a potentially decent starter, good depth, etc. And then there are guys like Tyquan Lewis, who I guess could be labeled as good depth if we’re being kind.

 

As to another point you made in another post, I actually hope and think Ballard could get a second chance if he whiffs on a QB. But it is interesting to think about what happens if he does so.

 

IMO it is possible he gets a second chance if he moves on quick from a first mistake... Kinda like Steve Keim took Rosen with Arizona top 10 and then moved on from him the very next year when he got the chance to take QB no.1.

 

But if the mistake prolongs over 3-4 years, IMO it probably will be too late. 

[Zoltan]

34 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

IMO it is possible he gets a second chance if he moves on quick from a first mistake... Kinda like Steve Keim took Rosen with Arizona top 10 and then moved on from him the very next year when he got the chance to take QB no.1.

 

But if the mistake prolongs over 3-4 years, IMO it probably will be too late. 

 

Man I wouldn't want Rosen now, but I still feel like he never had a chance to develop into a franchise QB.(Cardinals and Dolphins ruined him) 

[NannyMcafee]

On 2/14/2020 at 3:05 PM, Hoose said:

You're right. Tua's injury history should factor into a team's decision. That hopefully drops him down to the Colts. And if I'm Ballard, I jump all over him. He's been banged up but he's a phenomenal talent. Frank Gore had two knee surgeries in college. He dropped down to I believe the 3rd round for the Niners. And he's still chugging along today. College injuries have to be a factor, but they should never be an eliminating factor when you're talking about a rare talent. And Tua is that. 

 

Now, if there is a question if Tua will ever heal properly, that's different. But assuming he's on his way to a total recovery as advertised, he's very much worth the #13 pick in the draft. That question should be answered by late April. 

 

It's just always something with his injuries. For me it's not about his most recent injury as much as its how consistently he is injured. In 2006, the Colts defense was lucky enough to get Bob Sanders back right for the playoffs. Can anyone on these forums say without doubt, that the Colts go on to win the SB without a healthy Bob Sanders in there? I cannot. 

 

I for one, am unwilling to draft a guy who has shown to be made of glass. When a guy gets injured so much you cant count on him to be ready to play our most important games for us. If I'm Ballard I cannot draft this guy no matter how good he is, if he has that lengthy of a injury list. 

 

The Colts were lucky and fortunate that Bob Sanders got healthy when he did, or the Colts may not have a SB. 

 

 

[stitches]

1 minute ago, Zoltan said:

 

Man I wouldn't want Rosen now, but I still feel like he never had a chance to develop into a franchise QB.(Cardinals and Dolphins ruined him) 

I liked Rosen too, but at some point he has to take responsibility for his career, too. Fitzpatrick did so much more with the same/worse talent around him. He didn't end up in the best of situations by any means and he might have had better start to his career elsewhere, but it seems like he didn't do himself any favors either. 

[Zoltan]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

I liked Rosen too, but at some point he has to take responsibility for his career, too. Fitzpatrick did so much more with the same/worse talent around him. He didn't end up in the best of situations by any means and he might have had better start to his career elsewhere, but it seems like he didn't do himself any favors either. 

 

True but I don't think you can compare Rosen to Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick is an outlier, the dude has played for like 7 teams by the time he hit miami and is a great backup/average starter, I think Rosen hasn't had a good OL or coach (both HC have been defensive and one only had one year before he was fired) and it's probably to late for him. The only upside he has is that he has Fitzpatrick in the room with him.