Ballard's draft approach

[CR91]

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/nfl-draft-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard

[CurBeatElite]

25 minutes ago, CR91 said:

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/nfl-draft-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard

 

It'll be interesting to see how this draft shapes up.  With the amount of depth at WR, I really won't be shocked to see the 34 or 44 pick be traded back to acquire 2 picks and then take 2 WRs (there should be several guys who could probably come in an contribute from day 1 around at 34-44, but there is a slew of others who look like nice developmental pieces that should be around in rounds 3-5).

[twfish]

I do like the draft network. I would expect this draft to be much different then previous years. I could see him trading the 45th and the third pick to move up to mid 20's  and pick up someone i wont name if they are there then moving down from 34 picking up a later 2nd and another 3rd or maybe an extra 2nd. ORRRRRRR he could trade back from 34 and trade back at 45 to pick up a bundle of 2nd's and 3rd's

[AwesomeAustin]

Ballard has been fantastic at trading.  Moving back from #3 in 2018 was a brilliant move and he really capitalized.  Nelson alone is worth the trade but getting Braeden Smith and Rock Ya-sin?   Crushed it. Jury is still out on the other two due to injuries but people are excited about Turay. 
 

Jets’ haul

QB Sam Darnold

Colts’ haul

OL Quenton Nelson

OL Braden Smith

DE Kemoko Turay

RB Jordan Wilkins

CB Rock Ya-Sin

 

[crazycolt1]

For those who think Ballard has been 'meh' I say it is you that are 'meh'. 

I don't have a clue or an assumption what Ballard is going to do. 

I guess if enough scenarios are thrown out there someone will hit on something but always keep in mind Ballard does not think like a fan. 

A few are questioning Ballards approach to the trenches but IMO he is building this team to accommodate any talented QB. Thus the Rivers signing. 

We as fans have to face the fact there are no Mannings, Bradys or Mahomes available. Those are generational QBs and Ballard is not sitting around waiting for one. We don't need one of those QBs if we can control the line of scrimmage (on both sides) and control the ball. 

I think it is a very exciting time to be a Colt fan. 

[throwing BBZ]

11 hours ago, CR91 said:

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/nfl-draft-indianapolis-colts-chris-ballard

 

  We need more picks so if we don't trade back it will come as a surprise.
   One should believe in CB's vetting process, his shorter draft board, and that there are good players/prospects, in every round.

[EastStreet]

19 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

For those who think Ballard has been 'meh' I say it is you that are 'meh'. 

I don't have a clue or an assumption what Ballard is going to do. 

I guess if enough scenarios are thrown out there someone will hit on something but always keep in mind Ballard does not think like a fan. 

A few are questioning Ballards approach to the trenches but IMO he is building this team to accommodate any talented QB. Thus the Rivers signing. 

We as fans have to face the fact there are no Mannings, Bradys or Mahomes available. Those are generational QBs and Ballard is not sitting around waiting for one. We don't need one of those QBs if we can control the line of scrimmage (on both sides) and control the ball. 

I think it is a very exciting time to be a Colt fan. 

As to the bolded, only one of those were considered no brainers.... Brady certainly wasn't considered generational, and neither was Mahmoes, when drafted.... Only Manning was. So nobody can say that one of the QBs drafted this year is or isn't the next generational QB... 

[EastStreet]

9 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

  We need more picks so if we don't trade back it will come as a surprise.
   One should believe in CB's vetting process, his shorter draft board, and that there are good players/prospects, in every round.

I'm fine with a strategy to get more picks, but it's not always the best move. Depends on who is available, what you need, who you want, where you think guys will be available, and what you think others will do. Skipping 3T in prior years was very evident, and led to our FA move this year to address the hole. 

[Moosejawcolt]

20 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Ballard has been fantastic at trading.  Moving back from #3 in 2018 was a brilliant move and he really capitalized.  Nelson alone is worth the trade but getting Braeden Smith and Rock Ya-sin?   Crushed it. Jury is still out on the other two due to injuries but people are excited about Turay. 
 

Jets’ haul

QB Sam Darnold

Colts’ haul

OL Quenton Nelson

OL Braden Smith

DE Kemoko Turay

RB Jordan Wilkins

CB Rock Ya-Sin

 

Ummmmm.....not to rain on your analysis of Ballard's move from #3 to #6.   However, I bet 99% of the people on this forum would have taken that trade and ran with it. We didn't need a qb and the  Jets did.  We moved back 3 spots and we were  still guaranteed a shot at a blue chip player. Easy decision; not a brilliant one.

[DougDew]

20 hours ago, AwesomeAustin said:

Ballard has been fantastic at trading.  Moving back from #3 in 2018 was a brilliant move and he really capitalized.  Nelson alone is worth the trade but getting Braeden Smith and Rock Ya-sin?   Crushed it. Jury is still out on the other two due to injuries but people are excited about Turay. 
 

Jets’ haul

QB Sam Darnold

Colts’ haul

OL Quenton Nelson

OL Braden Smith

DE Kemoko Turay

RB Jordan Wilkins

CB Rock Ya-Sin

 

I'm not sure its accurate to look at it like that.  Ballard received three picks for pick #3 in a year where their were 3 top desirable QBs, and he took Nelson, Smith, and Turay.  I think the other two players were the result of further trades with other teams.  Ya-Sin is the result of a trade with Washington that originated as our own #1, which is why we also have pick #34 this year.

[NewColtsFan]

28 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Ummmmm.....not to rain on your analysis of Ballard's move from #3 to #6.   However, I bet 99% of the people on this forum would have taken that trade and ran with it. We didn't need a qb and the  Jets did.  We moved back 3 spots and we were  still guaranteed a shot at a blue chip player. Easy decision; not a brilliant one.

Ummmmmm...,    Not to rain on your parade,  but at the time — real time — I’d say the reaction was roughly 50-50.

 

Half liked it and half didn't.   They either didn’t like trading back and taking Nelson, as some wanted us to take Smith, the LB who went next to Chicago, while others wanted Ballard to trade back yet again, collect more picks, and take a different player like the big safety who went to San Diego or the big LB who went to Buffalo.  
 

Things are only obvious in hindsight. 

[Moosejawcolt]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

Ummmmmm...,    Not to rain on your parade,  but at the time — real time — I’d say the reaction was roughly 50-50.

 

Half liked it and half didn't.   They either didn’t like trading back and taking Nelson, as some wanted us to take Smith, the LB who went next to Chicago, while others wanted Ballard to trade back yet again, collect more picks, and take a different player like the big safety who went to San Diego or the big LB who went to Buffalo.  
 

Things are only obvious in hindsight. 

So u r trying to tell me that moving from #3 To #6 and getting 3 2nd rounders was a risky move or took a lot of thought???  You r giving Ballard way to much credit for that move.  I bet 32 other general managers make that move given similar circumstances. 

[NewColtsFan]

29 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I'm not sure its accurate to look at it like that.  Ballard received three picks for pick #3 in a year where their were 3 top desirable QBs, and he took Nelson, Smith, and Turay.  I think the other two players were the result of further trades with other teams.  Ya-Sin is the result of a trade with Washington that originated as our own #1, which is why we also have pick #34 this year.

No.   Sorry.

 

Ya-sin was taken with the second round pick from the Jets that you have second guessed for years.   We traded down 20 spots from 26 to 46 (which got us the 34th pick this year.  Yet another trade that had you wondering if we got enough?) then 3 more spots for a 5 that got us Benagu. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 minute ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So u r trying to tell me that moving from #3 To #6 and getting 3 2nd rounders was a risky move or took a lot of thought???  You r giving Ballard way to much credit for that move.  I bet 32 other general managers make that move given similar circumstances. 

No, that’s not what I’m telling you.   That trade was great.  But it’s what he did with it that had a very mixed reaction.   The response to staying at 6 and taking Nelson was very mixed.   The arm chair GMs here had a wide variety of other preferences.   Plenty of people here HATED taking a guard with a top-10 pick.  Most of those people wont fess up to it now.   But they were not very happy draft night of 18. 
 

Hope that clarifies. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I'm fine with a strategy to get more picks, but it's not always the best move. Depends on who is available, what you need, who you want, where you think guys will be available, and what you think others will do. Skipping 3T in prior years was very evident, and led to our FA move this year to address the hole. 

We didn’t skip the 3T on previous  years.   We signed Autry and he out performed expectations his first season with 9 sacks in just 12 games.   We also drafted Lewis who played some inside when he was healthy, which unfortunately wasn’t very often. 
 

Some moves worked.  Others didn’t. 

[DougDew]

30 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

No.   Sorry.

 

Ya-sin was taken with the second round pick from the Jets that you have second guessed for years.   We traded down 20 spots from 26 to 46 (which got us the 34th pick this year.  Yet another trade that had you wondering if we got enough?) then 3 more spots for a 5 that got us Benagu. 

Wow, you seem to think you remember more about what I said in 2018 than even I do.  Obsessed are you?

 

What have I second guessed about the Jets trade for years?  Trading out of 3 to go to 6 when there were 3 coveted QBs?

 

And I second guessed the Washington trade for half a round, when Ballard made up for getting ripped off by Washington by getting a 5th in a trade from 46 to 49....which he was able to do because he already had targeted an overvalued Benagu.  Nothing to do with the Jets. 

 

[Moosejawcolt]

7 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

No, that’s not what I’m telling you.   That trade was great.  But it’s what he did with it that had a very mixed reaction.   The response to staying at 6 and taking Nelson was very mixed.   The arm chair GMs here had a wide variety of other preferences.   Plenty of people here HATED taking a guard with a top-10 pick.  Most of those people wont fess up to it now.   But they were not very happy draft night of 18. 
 

Hope that clarifies. 

Gotcha......

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

As to the bolded, only one of those were considered no brainers.... Brady certainly wasn't considered generational, and neither was Mahmoes, when drafted.... Only Manning was. So nobody can say that one of the QBs drafted this year is or isn't the next generational QB... 

While anything is possible my point was Ballard is building this team to be successful regardless if we don't have a QB that lights up a scoreboard. 

All we need is a winner. 

 

[NewColtsFan]

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Wow, you seem to think you remember more about what I said in 2018 than even I do.  Obsessed are you?

 

What have I second guessed about the Jets trade for years?  Trading out of 3 to go to 6?  So easy a monkey could do it.

 

And I second guessed the Washington trade for half a round, when Ballard made up for getting ripped off by the Washington trade by getting the 5th in the trade from 46 to 49....which he was able to do because he already had targeted an overvalued Benagu.  Nothing to do with the Jets. 

 

And in the context of the comment I was referring to, Ballard traded out of 26 because he had 34.  The point being that he did not get 4 extra players for the Jets 3rd pick.  He got 2 extra players.  The other players listed he got by making other trades.  The Jets had nothing to do with that.

 

Sorry, Doug....    but this is getting worse for you,  not better.

 

I'll take these observations as you posted them.

 

No, I do not obsess over what you wrote back on draft night in 2018.   That's because you've made the same arguments in the two years since then.   In discussions since that draft spanning 18 and 2019,  you've continued to make the same arguments.   And that's despite the fact that a flood of posters have explained it all to you,  you refuse to accept reality.    So, I don't have to strain myself,  it's recent history for you.

 

Next:  "getting ripped off by Washington".    It was said that night and it's been said ever since.   We got a mid-2nd round pick in 2019 that we eventually turned into Benago,  AND we got pick 34 this year.     So, we got two-2's plus the added 5.    It was a steal for the Colts, NOT the Redskins.   You're the only poster who thinks Ballard got fleeced.    We got pick 34 this year.   That will bring us first round talent this year.   The trade value chart says we got several hundred more points than we gave up.    Trade analysts for places like ESPN and NFL.com gave the Colts a high grade on the deal.    You're all alone on this one, Doug.    

 

Finally....   you're having math problems now.   Yes, he got added players by making more trades.   And that's how this works.   The picks he traded were the picks he acquired in the Nelson trade down.    So, if you use those picks to trade down and get more picks and turn those into players,   that's how the trade is judged.     This isn't me saying this.    This is how these trades are judged by everyone in football.    Everyone apparently except you.

 

As to your last comment...   an over-valued Ben Benagu.     Maybe.    Maybe not.   It's one year in on the kid's career.    He wasn't great, but he was hardly a bust as a rookie.   One should expect improved performance this year and next.   Maybe this gets messed up by virus restrictions and the lack of coaching everyone is going to face this off-season,  but I wouldn't bet against Ballard,  even though the contrarian in you makes you do it time after time after time.

 

[Hoose]

This entire narrative second guessing Ballard on the Nelson trade is ABSURD. Come on now..... in the trade you received a player who looks like an all time great O lineman along with another starting O lineman and potentially your future top pass rushing DE for trading down three spots.... not to mention another starting CB with great promise the next year (those players being Nelson, Smith, Turay and the Rock).  And yet....some people act like that was a no brainer set of picks. Sorry but Ballard hit a grand slam on that trade and no one with a lick of common sense can argue otherwise. Look at the draft trade value charts... Ballard blew those out of the water. He deserves serious accolades for that move, not the incessant whining we continue to see from several of our posters. Time to move on. 

[ColtStrong2013]

49 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So u r trying to tell me that moving from #3 To #6 and getting 3 2nd rounders was a risky move or took a lot of thought???  You r giving Ballard way to much credit for that move.  I bet 32 other general managers make that move given similar circumstances. 

Pre-draft? Absolutely. Sitting at #3 was putting them in a spot to get a premium player at a premium position, like Bradley Chubb. There are still plenty of people that think Big Q shouldn’t have been 6th in the draft. And you assume that Ballard wasn’t the one that initiated the conversations and what he was looking to get out of it. It could have went back and forth and nearly flamed out as far as we know. There was work involved in swinging that kind of trade. A lot of value pulled there. 

[rock8591]

I read the Garfield Comics for my news and DougDew for my humor.

 

Some things that I read from him are just hilarious material, along the lines of Fred Phelps and David Duke.

[EastStreet]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

We didn’t skip the 3T on previous  years.   We signed Autry and he out performed expectations his first season with 9 sacks in just 12 games.   We also drafted Lewis who played some inside when he was healthy, which unfortunately wasn’t very often. 
 

Some moves worked.  Others didn’t. 

Autry played DE for Oakland and played very light at DT his first year in Indy. IIRC, he also played a decent amount of DE in 2018 opposite Sheard on a lot of packages (where some of his sacks came from). Wouldn't surprise me if they played him at DT due to lack of options (depth at 3T was thin, and I think Ridgeway was his backup).

 

Purely my opinion, but his performance in 2018 wasn't really indicative of his norm (at DT), and more a product of the poor talent around him along the DL. Also a little luck. Sheard (in 2018) had more TFLs and a better pressure rate (I think a higher PFF rating as well), yet less sacks. 

 

I'm going to bet Autry moves back to DE this year which IMO is his more natural postion, and takes most of his snaps in Sheard's old spot on 1st and 2nd downs (rushing downs)....... and slides to DT with Buckner on passing downs.

 

And in general, neither Autry or Lewis were realistic adds to become a legit 3T. A few folks (Ballard and others) have talked about 3Ts importance in our scheme (calling it perhaps the most important position on D), and if they are sincere in their description, Autry (a UDFA DE moved to DT) and Lewis (a projected 3rd or 4th rounder) aren't going to be "legit" to the level of their description. 

[EastStreet]

2 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

While anything is possible my point was Ballard is building this team to be successful regardless if we don't have a QB that lights up a scoreboard. 

All we need is a winner. 

 

What you said was basically "we fans need to face that there are no good QBs available"... 

And we reality is, we don't have to "face" that... It's purely opinion and speculation. If you look at the top 5 QBRs last year, not one of those QBs were considered can't miss QBs.

 

1. Jackson - was told to switch positions, taken #32

2. Mahomes - was considered and system QB with questionable decision making and projected late first to late second.

3. Brees - too short for most, and taken in the 2nd.

4. Prescott - 4th rounder....

5. Wilson - 3rd rounder....

[crazycolt1]

16 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

What you said was basically "we fans need to face that there are no good QBs available"... 

And we reality is, we don't have to "face" that... It's purely opinion and speculation. If you look at the top 5 QBRs last year, not one of those QBs were considered can't miss QBs.

 

1. Jackson - was told to switch positions, taken #32

2. Mahomes - was considered and system QB with questionable decision making and projected late first to late second.

3. Brees - too short for most, and taken in the 2nd.

4. Prescott - 4th rounder....

5. Wilson - 3rd rounder....

No, that is not what I said. 

Re read what I said. Look at the context of what I said. 

I don't put words in your mouth so please don't do that to me. 

The name of the thread is Ballards draft approach. 

[EastStreet]

29 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

No, that is not what I said. 

Re read what I said. Look at the context of what I said. 

I don't put words in your mouth so please don't do that to me. 

The name of the thread is Ballards draft approach. 

I read the entire thing. You said:

 

Quote

We as fans have to face the fact there are no Mannings, Bradys or Mahomes available. Those are generational QBs and Ballard is not sitting around waiting for one.

 

You also said we didn't need one if we can control the LOS.... but that doesn't detract from the quote, or meaning above. That's not putting words in your mouth, the above is a direct quote. Signing a QB to a one year deal also doesn't mean Ballard won't look for a QB this year. He was after all on staff when KC moved up to take Mahomes who many thought was 2nd rounder, and did so when they had Alex Smith, who took KC to the playoffs 4 of 5 years.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I read the entire thing. You said:

 

 

You also said we didn't need one if we can control the LOS.... but that doesn't detract from the quote, or meaning above. That's not putting words in your mouth, the above is a direct quote. Signing a QB to a one year deal also doesn't mean Ballard won't look for a QB this year. He was after all on staff when KC moved up to take Mahomes who many thought was 2nd rounder, and did so when they had Alex Smith, who took KC to the playoffs 4 of 5 years.

 

 

Ballard is drafting with the intent of not having to find a QB with the talents of Manning, Mahomes ect..ect...

Personally, I don't think it is worth making an issue of it. But if you want to take everything said literally that's up to you. Just because I stated my opinion does not make it fact anymore than yours or anyone else's. 

If you think there is a QB in the draft that has generational talent that's fantastic. I hope we get him. I just don't think there is one. 

 

 

I sure don't think it's worth arguing about. 

 

 

[EastStreet]

24 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

 

 

Ballard is drafting with the intent of not having to find a QB with the talents of Manning, Mahomes ect..ect...

Personally, I don't think it is worth making an issue of it. But if you want to take everything said literally that's up to you. Just because I stated my opinion does not make it fact anymore than yours or anyone else's. 

If you think there is a QB in the draft that has generational talent that's fantastic. I hope we get him. I just don't think there is one. 

 

 

I sure don't think it's worth arguing about. 

Fair enough, but you say things a lot of the time like it's fact. Take you're first sentence above for example. It doesn't say IMO, or I think, or etc........ It says "Ballard is....." 

[crazycolt1]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

Fair enough, but you say things a lot of the time like it's fact. Take you're first sentence above for example. It doesn't say IMO, or I think, or etc........ It says "Ballard is....." 

Geez, are you through now ?  I don't require a star in the corner of my paper. 

[AZColt11]

I think trying to figure out what Ballard is going to do is an exercise in futility.  I think a lot of people are going to be quite surprised next weekend.

[throwing BBZ]

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I'm fine with a strategy to get more picks, but it's not always the best move. Depends on who is available, what you need, who you want, where you think guys will be available, and what you think others will do. Skipping 3T in prior years was very evident, and led to our FA move this year to address the hole. 

 

   Your point is a given. And last years draft fell how it did and all the cash CB built up landed him just what we needed, just when we needed it.
  It is pretty much always the best move. Because of injuries, FAgency, you need as many players as you can get that we believe in. And you always want to be drafting a year ahead of when you think you may need players at positions of need. This is where the Dreaded Player Development comes in.

 We still have many needs of course, including those depth/development pieces.
Of course CB will find a few more low cost vets after the draft to fill some of these spots.

[DougDew]

13 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Sorry, Doug....    but this is getting worse for you,  not better.

 

I'll take these observations as you posted them.

 

No, I do not obsess over what you wrote back on draft night in 2018.   That's because you've made the same arguments in the two years since then.   In discussions since that draft spanning 18 and 2019,  you've continued to make the same arguments.   And that's despite the fact that a flood of posters have explained it all to you,  you refuse to accept reality.    So, I don't have to strain myself,  it's recent history for you.

 

Next:  "getting ripped off by Washington".    It was said that night and it's been said ever since.   We got a mid-2nd round pick in 2019 that we eventually turned into Benago,  AND we got pick 34 this year.     So, we got two-2's plus the added 5.    It was a steal for the Colts, NOT the Redskins.   You're the only poster who thinks Ballard got fleeced.    We got pick 34 this year.   That will bring us first round talent this year.   The trade value chart says we got several hundred more points than we gave up.    Trade analysts for places like ESPN and NFL.com gave the Colts a high grade on the deal.    You're all alone on this one, Doug.    

 

Finally....   you're having math problems now.   Yes, he got added players by making more trades.   And that's how this works.   The picks he traded were the picks he acquired in the Nelson trade down.    So, if you use those picks to trade down and get more picks and turn those into players,   that's how the trade is judged.     This isn't me saying this.    This is how these trades are judged by everyone in football.    Everyone apparently except you.

 

As to your last comment...   an over-valued Ben Benagu.     Maybe.    Maybe not.   It's one year in on the kid's career.    He wasn't great, but he was hardly a bust as a rookie.   One should expect improved performance this year and next.   Maybe this gets messed up by virus restrictions and the lack of coaching everyone is going to face this off-season,  but I wouldn't bet against Ballard,  even though the contrarian in you makes you do it time after time after time.

 

Don't move the goal post NCF, as you usually do.  Your first post to me did not talk about what I said "on draft day 2018" .  Your comment was specifically about what you THOUGHT I said about the Jets trade, not about other comments I may have made on draft day.  

 

Since you know you're wrong, don't try to move the goal posts by categorizing the discussion to now be about "what I said on draft day".  I said a lot of things on draft day.  Criticizing moving from 3 to 6 wasn't one of them....especially since it wasn't even a draft day trade.  It was made several days before.

 

Yes, Ballard got cheated by the draft value chart measurement by only accepting a future second from Washington.  I pointed that out at the time and thought it was a criticism.  It lasted about  an hour.  Then when he made the trade from 46 to 49 and got the fifth, I said that accepting only the second from Washington was probably done from knowing that he would trade the 46 for a lower pick to get the player he wanted. 

 

Trading for only the 2nd seemed like an execution of the first half of a two part second round strategy.  Getting "ripped off" is a fact but not necessarily a criticism if you know you're going to get compensated elsewhere very shortly thereafter.  

 

Yes, he got more players by making more trades.  Which means that he would not have gotten more players if he just picked players with the Jets picks. 

 

As I said simply, its not accurate to say that he got 5 players from the Jets trade when it took more trades to get 5 players. 

[dodsworth]

Ballard could draft Betty White in the 2nd round and I would 

believe she is starter worthy at this point. Bring on the draft baby!!!

[Myles]

17 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I'm fine with a strategy to get more picks, but it's not always the best move. Depends on who is available, what you need, who you want, where you think guys will be available, and what you think others will do. Skipping 3T in prior years was very evident, and led to our FA move this year to address the hole. 

I agree.

Ballard needed to acquire more picks because Grigson left the cupboard bare.  The team needed depth at almost every position.   In a couple years, Ballard has built a solid team with good depth at most positions.  

 

I wanted the Colts to take Nelson at #3.  I would have been happy with that.   I was thrilled with what he got by trading down 3 spots and still getting the player he wanted.  

I'm not sure why Doug keeps mentioning that there were "3 desirable QB's".  There is no way he was going to draft a QB high when he had Luck on the team.  I can't imagine how people on here would have reacted had he drafted a QB at 3 or 6.   

[chad72]

15 hours ago, rock8591 said:

I read the Garfield Comics for my news and DougDew for my humor.

 

Some things that I read from him are just hilarious material, along the lines of Fred Phelps and David Duke.

 

Maybe he writes for The Onion??  

[EastStreet]

4 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

   Your point is a given. And last years draft fell how it did and all the cash CB built up landed him just what we needed, just when we needed it.
  It is pretty much always the best move. Because of injuries, FAgency, you need as many players as you can get that we believe in. And you always want to be drafting a year ahead of when you think you may need players at positions of need. This is where the Dreaded Player Development comes in.

 We still have many needs of course, including those depth/development pieces.
Of course CB will find a few more low cost vets after the draft to fill some of these spots.

I think there are certain positions you need (most times) to take early, and not role the dice. LT, 3T, QB, etc are examples. Sure you can hit the lotto sometimes in later rounds, but those three positions are typically ones you'd prefer to get a cheep 4 year rookie contract out of, matched with sure thing early production. We've had to spend big on DE and 3T in recent years because we haven't went early on those positions. It's why we're 4th in DL spending right now. And 4 DEs in the 2nd and 3rd rounds in 3 years..... If we don't hit on one of those, we're going to spend more.

[EastStreet]

41 minutes ago, Myles said:

I agree.

Ballard needed to acquire more picks because Grigson left the cupboard bare.  The team needed depth at almost every position.   In a couple years, Ballard has built a solid team with good depth at most positions.  

 

I wanted the Colts to take Nelson at #3.  I would have been happy with that.   I was thrilled with what he got by trading down 3 spots and still getting the player he wanted.  

I'm not sure why Doug keeps mentioning that there were "3 desirable QB's".  There is no way he was going to draft a QB high when he had Luck on the team.  I can't imagine how people on here would have reacted had he drafted a QB at 3 or 6.   

Yup, and it's easier/smarter to trade back and multiply your picks when you have such a weak roster. Holes are easier to fill as talent stinks lol.. But that's what you do early in rebuild, and need to address a bunch early on.

[Myles]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I think there are certain positions you need (most times) to take early, and not role the dice. LT, 3T, QB, etc are examples. Sure you can hit the lotto sometimes in later rounds, but those three positions are typically ones you'd prefer to get a cheep 4 year rookie contract out of, matched with sure thing early production. We've had to spend big on DE and 3T in recent years because we haven't went early on those positions. It's why we're 4th in DL spending right now. And 4 DEs in the 2nd and 3rd rounds in 3 years..... If we don't hit on one of those, we're going to spend more.

Ballard was in a tough spot.   #1 he had to fix the O-line to protect Luck.  He did that with the 3rd pick in the draft.  With that pick, he effectively got Nelson and Smith and transformed the O-line from one of the worst to one of the best in the league.  I think the LB group is good and deep as well.  

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, Myles said:

Ballard was in a tough spot.   #1 he had to fix the O-line to protect Luck.  He did that with the 3rd pick in the draft.  With that pick, he effectively got Nelson and Smith and transformed the O-line from one of the worst to one of the best in the league.  I think the LB group is good and deep as well.  

Oh I'm great with the trade back for Nelson and Smith. Nelson is probably more valuable than the overwhelming majority of LTs. And Smith was a fantastic get too. 

 

Just saying at some point (like now), you go for quality of pick, and less quantity of picks. And you use those early picks for the big positions. Given we don't have a first round this year, and have already address LT (at least for 2 years), 3T (FA), one DE (contract year though), and QB (only one year though), it really doesn't matter unless CB moves up for QB or DE (which are the only two positions I'd consider moving up for this year).

[Myles]

18 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

 

Just saying at some point (like now), you go for quality of pick, and less quantity of picks. 

I'm with you.  Now that Ballard has a solid core of a team and some depth at most positions, he can address the needs (WR, TE, QB, DE).  He used the 13th pick on an all pro DT in Buckner.  

I'm guessing that the 2 second round picks will be used on WR and TE.