Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

2020 Stitches' Colts Mock Off-season 2.0 (post-combine)


Recommended Posts

Great pick with Madubuike, he is a bit undervalued, IMO. I am confident Mims will last till No.44.

 

Did you give consideration to Adam Trautman of Dayton in Round 3? I think he will end up being a better Pro than Okwuegbunam. If we do the FA moves and re-signings that you suggested, a developmental OT prospect in Round 3 may not be as important of a pick as a skill position player, IMO. Maybe Cam Akers in Round 3? I am sure that will be the sweet spot for RBs. It is likely Ballard drafts quality RB depth in Rounds 3 or 4, IMO. 

 

Well done with the FA moves, re-signings and draft picks put together to provide one good picture for all of us.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Superfly said:

I like it, but just don’t see any takers for Brissett or Wilson. 

I agree that it would be hard finding a taker for Brissett. He's and expensive back up, and the QB FA market is a buyers market this year, especially with the lower tier guys. It would likely just be a cut.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Props to you @stitches, and anyone who takes the time and effort to put these plans together. I don't post a lot because I am not as knowledgeable as a lot of you guys, but I really enjoy reading peoples' thoughts. I think the Rivers scenario seems the most likely one. This would be a great offseason for the shoe. I think the other option, if we aren't able to trade up and the top 4 QBs are gone at 13, is that we take Kinlaw at 13 and a project like Anthony Gordon in round 3 or 4.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@stitches Every year you never disappoint with the depth and research  you take to put one of your draft wish lists together.

 

Hargrave is one guy would love the Colts to sign in FA over anyone this year.  Fear tho like last year all 5 top DTs go in R1 (Brown, Kinlaw, Madebuike, Blacklock, and Gallimore). Hargrave will be our NT/weak-side DT based on his current skill set and former college days and Stewart as his backup.  
 

Last year we failed to get a top DT with Dexter and Jeffrey Simmons going much earlier than we anticipated.  This year besides us you got the following teams looking to upgrade their  DL:

 

P14 Bucs

P15 Broncos

P17 Cowboys

P21 Eagles

P25 Vikings

P27 Seahawks

 

Do we really want to chance drafting a R1 QB over securing one of the T5 DTs to replace Autry?  Madebuike and Gallimore are ideal candidates to play 3T.

 

Do like Mims or Claypool in R2 and Pert R3.  Overall wouldn’t mind this outcome and give you a B grade.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Great pick with Madubuike, he is a bit undervalued, IMO. I am confident Mims will last till No.44.

 

Did you give consideration to Adam Trautman of Dayton in Round 3? I think he will end up being a better Pro than Okwuegbunam. If we do the FA moves and re-signings that you suggested, a developmental OT prospect in Round 3 may not be as important of a pick as a skill position player, IMO. Maybe Cam Akers in Round 3? I am sure that will be the sweet spot for RBs. It is likely Ballard drafts quality RB depth in Rounds 3 or 4, IMO. 

 

Well done with the FA moves, re-signings and draft picks put together to provide one good picture for all of us.

I did consider that option indeed(Trautman), but decided that I can't get out of this draft without developmental OT and I like the project that is Peart. Akers is one of the RBs that will be great for us in about R3 too, but I just thought at this point we are pretty well set at RB so... passed on it. 

 

Thanks for the input. Cheers. :cheers:

 

21 minutes ago, Superfly said:

I like it, but just don’t see any takers for Brissett or Wilson. 

 

12 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I agree that it would be hard finding a taker for Brissett. He's and expensive back up, and the QB FA market is a buyers market this year, especially with the lower tier guys. It would likely just be a cut.

Very possible we won't get a taker. I followed what we've done in recent years with young players on the margins - usually there is a team that's willing to give you a 6th-7th round pick for them(Hairston, Anderson, Boehm, etc.). This was for Wilson. For Brissett... I kind of think that he will have more of a market. He is expensive if he's on his full deal, but he won't be... his team will have to pay only about 9M for this year and IMO this is a good deal both for a bridge QB and for high end backup. Or... for an audition for potential starter if some team really likes him(Belichick?).

 

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

@stitches Every year you never disappoint with the depth and research  you take to put one of your draft wish lists together.

 

Hargrave is one guy would love the Colts to sign in FA over anyone this year.  Fear tho like last year all 5 top DTs go in R1 (Brown, Kinlaw, Madebuike, Blacklock, and Gallimore). Hargrave will be our NT/weak-side DT based on his current skill set and former college days and Stewart as his backup.  
 

Last year we failed to get a top DT with Dexter and Jeffrey Simmons going much earlier than we anticipated.  This year besides us you got the following teams looking to upgrade their  DL:

 

P14 Bucs

P15 Broncos

P17 Cowboys

P21 Eagles

P25 Vikings

P27 Seahawks

Yeah, there are lot of teams that can use defensive linemen. But just like us, for mos tof them DL is not their only or even most important need. 

 

9 minutes ago, OhioColt said:

Do we really want to chance drafting a R1 QB over securing one of the T5 DTs to replace Autry?  Madebuike and Gallimore are ideal candidates to play 3T.

To answer your question - if you love the QB and believe he can be a franchise QB - absolutely. DT is nowhere close to importance and value to securing your future franchise QB. 

 

9 minutes ago, OhioColt said:

Do like Mims or Claypool in R2 and Pert R3.  Overall wouldn’t mind this outcome and give you a B grade.

Thanks for the input. Much appreciated. :cheers:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like most of it...especially the QB moves (which I think are likely and necessary).

 

So I will just give my opinion on my preferences:

 

- Not giving Funchess another season

- Using #34 on a WR (in addition to Mims) instead of DL...especially if they go big in FA on the interior DL

- Not re-signing Sheard money and using that money (in addition to the Hargrave money) to get Clowney instead.

 

To address the interior DL, I would look at using that 3rd round pick (and waiting on OT til next year), as well as a FA dice roll (Billings, Jarran Reed).

 

Basically, I think they can fix the offense in this draft...and that should be the focus.

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

 

Very possible we won't get a taker. I followed what we've done in recent years with young players on the margins - usually there is a team that's willing to give you a 6th-7th round pick for them(Hairston, Anderson, Boehm, etc.). This was for Wilson. For Brissett... I kind of think that he will have more of a market. He is expensive if he's on his full deal, but he won't be... his team will have to pay only about 9M for this year and IMO this is a good deal both for a bridge QB and for high end backup. Or... for an audition for potential starter if some team really likes him(Belichick?).

 

I just don't see someone willing to spend 9M for a high priced backup with everything that is available. The best "fit" for him IMO would be Pitt, but their cap situation is horrible. I just think it's more likely we cut him (I hope you're right though), and he goes and signs some place for less. He's not someone I'd want to pair with a rook or young QB. He'd be best going to a stable team with an established starter who would value a safe back up. SF might be a good spot too.

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

I like most of it...especially the QB moves (which I think are likely and necessary).

 

So I will just give my opinion on my preferences:

 

- Not giving Funchess another season

- Using #34 on a WR (in addition to Mims) instead of DL...especially if they go big in FA on the interior DL

- Not re-signing Sheard money and using that money (in addition to the Hargrave money) to get Clowney instead.

 

To address the interior DL, I would look at using that 3rd round pick (and waiting on OT til next year), as well as a FA dice roll (Billings, Jarran Reed).

 

Basically, I think they can fix the offense in this draft...and that should be the focus.

Yeah, those are some good reasonable ideas I can see happening. I can see Funchess being let go... but Ballard's statements for the media makes me think they will try to keep him. 

 

Your thought process seems like the basis for a good mock too. You should do one. :)

 

Thanks for the feedback, Cheers :cheers:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign 'em' up Stitches. Best to my liking that I've see so far. Was hoping for someone like Cleveland at 44 or 75 but think he moved way up with Combine showing. Wanogho from Auburn may be a choice at 75 also but will gladly settle for Peart .

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t like the Rivers addition, like you said he might not want to go to a team that is using a first on a QB. 
 

I also don’t think he will be a good mentor in the QB room, I’d rather keep JB for continuity and knowing the playbook or even trading for Foles because he has an out in his contract next year, and we could probably get him super cheap or even gain a draft pick 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it! Glad you paid attention to Mayocks take on Wilson and i think that would be an all around great trade for both teams. I do think a 4th or 5th round is fair for Jacoby. Their are plenty of teams out there that would want a good back up QB who can win games. Philly comes to mind.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@stitches great job my friend! Absolutely love this and agree with nearly everything you wrote. Rivers, Love, and Kelly is my preference as well. Would replace Madabuke with Blacklock, but that's a minor quibble. Your FA's are solid. This would put us in the playoffs this year IMO with a bright future! :thmup:

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great effort

 

Well thought out!

 

Im not a Rivers fan, and if we get to a position to draft Love, I would let JB start the year, and bring in Love as he is ready

 

We aren’t winning the SB with Rivers..... If we were merely a QB away from the SB and Rivers was 34 years old..... maybe

 

There seems like a great deal of chatter that Love will go in top 10

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

Great effort

 

Well thought out!

 

Im not a Rivers fan, and if we get to a position to draft Love, I would let JB start the year, and bring in Love as he is ready

 

We aren’t winning the SB with Rivers..... If we were merely a QB away from the SB and Rivers was 34 years old..... maybe

 

There seems like a great deal of chatter that Love will go in top 10

 

Yeah, I wouldn't mind going with JB if we draft a QB high. I just thought this team is too good to let it play with such a limited QB for one more year. I think Rivers even in his old state is much better QB than Jacoby on his best days and gives us a better chance to compete. Maybe we don't get to a superbowl, but there is also value to having a QB who can distribute the ball and get it to his receivers(developmental value for the young receivers and OLine). Rivers will run your offense and he will execute. This is very important when you have good playcallers that can scheme receivers open. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

tenor.gif?itemid=10569245

 

While I can agree with most likely not being able to trade JB and have to cut him, I don't think I've seen a mock where I wouldn't have done anything differently. Amazing job man!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice job.  No secret I'm not the biggest Love fan here but at least you didn't have to trade up to get him.  I like the Justin M. and Denzel M. picks, the addition of Hargrave in the middle, and you solidified the roster well.  If I could only find one thing to critique it would be that your roster is over 80 players deep and they would need to cut quite a few of these guys to get down to the requirement.  But that is a good thing when you are having to cut good players, no?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, AZColt11 said:

Very nice job.  No secret I'm not the biggest Love fan here but at least you didn't have to trade up to get him.  I like the Justin M. and Denzel M. picks, the addition of Hargrave in the middle, and you solidified the roster well.  If I could only find one thing to critique it would be that your roster is over 80 players deep and they would need to cut quite a few of these guys to get down to the requirement.  But that is a good thing when you are having to cut good players, no?

Thanks... yeah... I should have added about 10 more UDFAs :D 

I put everybody that's currently on the roster by overthecap's site, but yeah... cuts will need to be done by week 1. The hardest positions to cut will be WR and surprisingly... DL I think. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stitches said:

Thanks... yeah... I should have added about 10 more UDFAs :D 

I put everybody that's currently on the roster by overthecap's site, but yeah... cuts will need to be done by week 1. The hardest positions to cut will be WR and surprisingly... DL I think. 

The WR room will be really interesting this year. Draft, FAs, UDFAs from last year and new ones, plus the other misc PS and roster guys.

 

 

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.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • @NewColtsFan and @MikeCurtis    I say this because Ballard says this.     He says they set their board and draft from it.    Their BPA will most often differ from probably everyone else's BPA. He sets his board with his eye on Special Payers and also  BPA at core positions  And of course they also have a variable in the equation for need.  So if 2 player are rated very close they would take the need player.  But otherwise its BPA on the Colts board.   For instance.  Many people didn't think we should have drafted Q.   While Oline was a need there were a lot of people that thought it was a reach but he was the BPA    Braydon Smith?     Leonard?    Not many saw this one coming.  I didn't even know who he was.     Last yr.   How many saw the Colts using their two 2nd round picks on WR and RB?      My guess is that even if they have a Safety ranked a lot higher than a OT they will take the safety.     So when I say something about these Mock drafts.  I do appreciate that people do them.  I read them all when I can.    Without knowing who was taken with the 1st 20 picks its hard to say who the Colts would/should take without seeing who is available.    https://www.stampedeblue.com/2017/4/5/15192468/chris-ballard-discusses-his-approach-to-the-nfl-draft-colts   Ballard's quote:     Stampede Blue analysis    More analysis from Stampede Blue   I won't be surprised with any pick that Ballard takes.  Even QB, if a top rated one on Ballards board falls to 21    He's pretty transparent in what he does IMO.    
    • Watson is digging in pretty far, the team would be smart to trade him.    They could get a bunch of picks and rebuild in a year or two, or waste a year with no QB, money or picks to speak of.  They would still have a disgruntled QB who is supposed to be the leader, demanding a trade next year.   I don't see how this is repairable, Houston needs to make the right move for once and trade him.
    • I think they need to bring Houston back. He still has gas in the tank and plays a rock solid DE. But they also need another pass rusher. Either draft him or spend the $ on the right FA. They absolutely have to get better at getting to the QB if the D is to take the next step. 
    • I think you nailed it. Johnson just doesn't have it as a route runner. He was never open after his initial flurry of catches, and it became obvious that both Rivers and the team lost confidence in him, and moved on. He'd be a camp body, a best, next season.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...