Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Ballard just said he wants more picks in the draft


Recommended Posts

He said he feels so confident in his ability and the level of talent. This is why I have felt all along they could trade back a few spots and get the same level of player. I would be awesome to have 3 second round picks and maybe an extra pick in rounds 4-7

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Trading down "should" be on a case by case scenario (depends on how the draft play put). At some point you have to pick a "good" player, especially if you have confidence in your scouting department t

Take the best player with your pick. Missing a player trading down is a lack of confidence. Trading down if it doesn’t work out then it’s not as big a mistake. Colts need difference makers not just vo

This is entirely dictated by how the draft unfolds..... and how we have our board stacked.   Ballard won’t trade down just for the sake of trading down.   He hammered home the BPA

Take the best player with your pick. Missing a player trading down is a lack of confidence. Trading down if it doesn’t work out then it’s not as big a mistake. Colts need difference makers not just volume. Ballard can get volume on undrafted  free agents.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading down "should" be on a case by case scenario (depends on how the draft play put). At some point you have to pick a "good" player, especially if you have confidence in your scouting department to find difference makers. Just as he gloated about the Superbowl play of Deforest Buckner. In big games, the best players stand out or flashes. 

 

Can you imagine a practice of Buckner Vs Nelson. Thats like PPV MMA fighting going on. 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Blueblood23 said:

Take the best player with your pick. Missing a player trading down is a lack of confidence. Trading down if it doesn’t work out then it’s not as big a mistake. Colts need difference makers not just volume. Ballard can get volume on undrafted  free agents.


Agreed!

 

I’m really hoping the Colts stay put at 34 and 44. The risk of potentially losing out on a solid player, isn’t worth it to me.

 

I didn’t mind the trade down last season and getting Rock, but that pick could have been Montez Sweat and he quietly had a very good rookie season. 
 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superfly said:


Agreed!

 

I’m really hoping the Colts stay put at 34 and 44. The risk of potentially losing out on a solid player, isn’t worth it to me.

 

I didn’t mind the trade down last season and getting Rock, but that pick could have been Montez Sweat and he quietly had a very good rookie season. 
 

 

Alot of people  wanted sweat

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Superfly said:


Agreed!

 

I’m really hoping the Colts stay put at 34 and 44. The risk of potentially losing out on a solid player, isn’t worth it to me.

 

I didn’t mind the trade down last season and getting Rock, but that pick could have been Montez Sweat and he quietly had a very good rookie season. 
 

 


I wanted Sweat...I was going nuts at the draft when he was still there. Sweat was arguably a top 10 prospect...who fit a huge need...much like Nelson...from a talent standpoint.
 

WAS also has NFL caliber people working in their FO and they happily gave up a future 2nd to turn their mid 2nd round into him last year.

 

We will never know if he was in fact off the board though. But I think he’s a potential All Pro in a 4-3. Hopefully Ballard nails this #34 pick.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

 

2 hours ago, shastamasta said:

WAS also has NFL caliber people working in their FO

If you are going to make outrageous claims, you have to back them up....

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

He said he feels so confident in his ability and the level of talent. This is why I have felt all along they could trade back a few spots and get the same level of player. I would be awesome to have 3 second round picks and maybe an extra pick in rounds 4-7

One way way to get a third 2nd round pick is to offer next years 1st round pick.   
 

I don’t see that happening.

 

Another way is to offer our 3 and 4 and see if that gets us into the bottom of the 2nd round.   But that’s a 2-for-1 trade where we lose a pick,  not gain one.

 

So I don’t see that happening.
 

Odds are high that Ballard wants to collect another 4 and 5 by moving down ever so slightly on picks 34 and 44.


That would give us multiple picks in rounds 4, 5, and 6.   That feels like a Ballard-like thing to do. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, indyagent17 said:

He said he feels so confident in his ability and the level of talent. This is why I have felt all along they could trade back a few spots and get the same level of player. I would be awesome to have 3 second round picks and maybe an extra pick in rounds 4-7

Ok...   I’ve come up with a third way to get an additional two.

 

We’d have to trade pick 34 to Seattle.  The Seahawks have two late second round picks, 59 and 64.   The points almost match. 
 

So the question is:  do you want to trade down 25 spots to pick 59 to gain pick 64?

 

That would be the third way.    
 

Do any of these three ways appeal to you? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ok...   I’ve none up with a third way to get an additional two.

 

We’d have to trade pick 34 to Seattle.  The Seahawks have two late second round picks, 59 and 64.   The points almost match. 
 

So the question is:  do you want to trade down 25 spots to pick 59 to gain pick 64?

 

That would be the third way.    
 

Do any of these three ways appeal to you? 

That's too far back

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, shastamasta said:


I wanted Sweat...I was going nuts at the draft when he was still there. Sweat was arguably a top 10 prospect...who fit a huge need...much like Nelson...from a talent standpoint.
 

WAS also has NFL caliber people working in their FO and they happily gave up a future 2nd to turn their mid 2nd round into him last year.

 

We will never know if he was in fact off the board though. But I think he’s a potential All Pro in a 4-3. Hopefully Ballard nails this #34 pick.

But you know he fell because of a possible heart condition, right?  Lots of teams passed. It was reported it may have been misdiagnosed but still...that’s a serious thing to consider for a first round pick. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is entirely dictated by how the draft unfolds..... and how we have our board stacked.

 

Ballard won’t trade down just for the sake of trading down.

 

He hammered home the BPA concept repeatedly in his press conference.... and the board will steer whatever trades we might entertain.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hearing Ballard's press conference, it definitely makes me think we are trading down in the second round, whether it be pick 34 or 44. Think of last year where we traded down 3 spots with the Browns to acquire a 5th rounder before taking Banogu in the second round. That sounds somewhere close to what we may do this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could get extra picks in multiple ways.

 

1 simple trade down

Trade Brissett during draft

Trade Wilson during draft

 

I dont see us trading a 2021 pick but think we have a good chance of adding one.

 

I would say depending on the board, we could do anything at #34. Trade up, trade back or stay put. 

 

I really don't see them staying put, unless someone they have rated real high, falls. There will just be to much talent there, can trade back and still get what we need.

 

I could see us trade back a little from #34 or #44 while picking up a 2nd, 4th/ or 5th and 2021 3rd.

 

If they trade up into the 1st, preferably we use #44 and #75 that gets us to high 20's. Then still leave us #34 to pick or accumulate more picks.?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see them using the 34 pick themselves for a top WR or OT; trading down a little from the 44 pick to gain an additional 4th rounder; and that’s it. They don’t need an army of draft picks but in this draft, an additional 4th has genuine value. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LockeDown said:

But you know he fell because of a possible heart condition, right?  Lots of teams passed. It was reported it may have been misdiagnosed but still...that’s a serious thing to consider for a first round pick. 

 

I don’t disagree...but I still thought the talent was too great to pass up with a late 1st round. Hopefully he never has any issues. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Hoose said:

I see them using the 34 pick themselves for a top WR or OT; trading down a little from the 44 pick to gain an additional 4th rounder; and that’s it. They don’t need an army of draft picks but in this draft, an additional 4th has genuine value. 

 

That's exactly what I was thinking.... grab Ezra Cleveland or Denzel Mims at #34.... and then if they have a tight cluster of players valued at 44-54 then shop the #44 pick for a slight trade down. :thmup:

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it will depend on who is off the board and who remains and their thoughts on said player. For those that watched last season’s With the next pick series they didn’t accept the trade until they were on the clock. My hope is that a WR they really really like is still available that they have a 1st/2nd round grade on. If not I believe they will look for a trade back to get more 2nd/3rd round picks.
 

If I’ve learned anything it’s expect the unexpected with Ballard. I remember couple years ago being like who in the world is Darius Leonard. I look his tape up and see he’s not only pretty good but find out Ballard had him rated as his top remaining linebacker. This group of scouts, GM, assistant GM don’t leave no stone unturned. I think the only disagreement I have with them is their excitement with performances at the Senior Bowl. I view that game as a glorified scrimmage. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be an extremely unpopular opinion given the instant gratification needs of fans, but given the unorthodox pre-draft process, the relative lack of overall talent compared to other years, and the uncertainty that a game will even be played this year, i almost hope we go rogue and trade any and all 2020 draft capital for 2021 capital.  A perfect draft and we still can't sniff the Chiefs or Ravens next year, so i'm rooting for maybe 1 WR and 13-14 picks in 2021 (counting our own)

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jlid said:

This will be an extremely unpopular opinion given the instant gratification needs of fans, but given the unorthodox pre-draft process, the relative lack of overall talent compared to other years, and the uncertainty that a game will even be played this year, i almost hope we go rogue and trade any and all 2020 draft capital for 2021 capital.  A perfect draft and we still can't sniff the Chiefs or Ravens next year, so i'm rooting for maybe 1 WR and 13-14 picks in 2021 (counting our own)

Be more specific when you say lack of overall talent.... because right off the top of my head... OT and DT are said to be 2-3 rounds deep this year in addition to the WRs.

 

And it seems like EVERY year a couple RBs emerge from mid to late rounds.

 

I’m not against a value-driven trade down that nets us an extra 2021 pick... but let’s not get carried away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The draft is such a crapshoot. It is easy in hindsight to go back and say I wanted this guy but we didn't take him (when he turned out good) because he was there.

 

Nobody will admit this but how many people wanted Ryan Leaf over Peyton Manning in the draft? There was a few I am sure. I was even 50/50 on it because Leaf never got in trouble in college or never showed signs of being the type of a guy that he turned out to be. He even had a stronger arm than Peyton did. He was a great college QB. I leaned toward Peyton by a hair only because his dad played in the NFL so I knew he grew up loving football from the day he was born. I wasn't sure Leaf did, it turned he didn't.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Staying on topic, I hope we stay put. Picking at 34 and 44 is great stuff!

Yup. And really, who doesn't want more picks lol...

 

As long as we get an X like Pittman or Claypool, I really don't mind sliding + or - 5-10 spots for one of them to pick up an extra though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall I think he has flashed just about enough. Consistency does need to improve though and maybe with an improved pass rush we finally see that.

Would not be looking to get rid of him tbh 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

In my mock I have him trading back 5 spots from 34 to 39 and then trade back to 8 spots from 44 to 52 to pick up 3 extra picks this year and a Second next year - per his 

19 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

In my mock I have him trading back 5 spots from 34 to 39 and then trade back to 8 spots from 44 to 52 to pick up 3 extra picks this year and a Second next year - per his MO

I dont see a scenario where the Colts could pick up a future 2nd rounder by trading back.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pacolts56 said:

 

That's exactly what I was thinking.... grab Ezra Cleveland or Denzel Mims at #34.... and then if they have a tight cluster of players valued at 44-54 then shop the #44 pick for a slight trade down. :thmup:

YUP

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

We may not "see" it, but Ballard is shrewd and someone may be desperate enough......

So show me a draft scenario where the Colts could pick up a 2nd rounder?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

So show me a draft scenario where the Colts could pick up a 2nd rounder?

From a capital value perspective, it's really hard to pick up a 2nd rounder without a 1st. From a chart value perspective, if a team who has two late 2nd round picks (like Seattle, Balt, or LAR) was a bit desperate, they could trade both for our 34.

 

Our 34 = 560

 

Seattle's 59+64 = 580

Baltimore's 55+60 = 650

Ram's 52+57 = 710

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

From a capital value perspective, it's really hard to pick up a 2nd rounder without a 1st. From a chart value perspective, if a team who has two late 2nd round picks (like Seattle, Balt, or LAR) was a bit desperate, they could trade both for our 34.

 

Our 34 = 560

 

Seattle's 59+64 = 580

Baltimore's 55+60 = 650

Ram's 52+57 = 710

I just don't think   Ballard would slide back to the 50's to pick up an extra 2nd.  I could b wrong, but just my feeling. I could see him sliding back to say late 30's or early 40's and pick up an extra 3rd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Ok...   I’ve come up with a third way to get an additional two.

 

We’d have to trade pick 34 to Seattle.  The Seahawks have two late second round picks, 59 and 64.   The points almost match. 
 

So the question is:  do you want to trade down 25 spots to pick 59 to gain pick 64?

 

That would be the third way.    
 

Do any of these three ways appeal to you? 

I wouldn’t like that move though it could be something Ballard would consider.  The way I see it that number 34 is almost like a first rounder to us.  We already dealt out first round pick for Buckner which I would do again all day! However we traded our first last year to obtain this #34 pick and to trade that one just move back 25 spots to pick up an an additional pick at 64 just seems like less bang for our buck.  Look this roster needs some playmakers at wideout.  We are in good position to pick up someone like Shenault or Mims at 34.  Don’t be too cute here Ballard.  Then you take Kmet or the best available tight end at 44.  Get Rivers what he needs.  Lord knows he will need all the receiving help he can get.  I’m not trying to sit through a 20 interception season.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coltsman1788 said:

I wouldn’t like that move though it could be something Ballard would consider.  The way I see it that number 34 is almost like a first rounder to us.  We already dealt out first round pick for Buckner which I would do again all day! However we traded our first last year to obtain this #34 pick and to trade that one just move back 25 spots to pick up AB additional pick at 64 just seems like less bang for our buck.  Look this roster needs some playmakers at wideout.  We are in good position to pick up someone like Shenault or Mims at 34.  Don’t be too cute here Ballard.  Then you take Kmet or the best available tight end at 44.  Get Rivers what he needs.  Lord knows he will need all the receiving help he can get.  I’m not trying to sit through a 20 interception season.  

 

I'm with you.     I wouldn't make that trade.    And I absolutely agree that pick 34 is just like a first round pick.    We will get a player who is a first rounder on our board as we did last year with pick 34 who turned into Rock.   Looked terrible the first half of the season.   Looked pretty darn good the 2nd half.

 

And I'd like a WR with that pick.   Though, I could hold off on that until pick 44.   But I wouldn't like waiting much longer than that.    If Ballard trades down from 44 to 52 to gain another 4,  and uses pick 52 on a WR,  I would be fine with that.    But, as you noted,  we do have to get Rivers more weapons.    If 34 turns into a DL or OT,  I'll be good with that too.

 

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

 

I'm with you.     I wouldn't make that trade.    And I absolutely agree that pick 34 is just like a first round pick.    We will get a player who is a first rounder on our board as we did last year with pick 34 who turned into Rock.   Looked terrible the first half of the season.   Looked pretty darn good the 2nd half.

 

And I'd like a WR with that pick.   Though, I could hold off on that until pick 44.   But I wouldn't like waiting much longer than that.    If Ballard trades down from 44 to 52 to gain another 4,  and uses pick 52 on a WR,  I would be fine with that.    But, as you noted,  we do have to get Rivers more weapons.    If 34 turns into a DL or OT,  I'll be good with that too.

 

Yes...I could definitely get down with that as well.  Bottom line is that our second round picks need to be  spent on adding guys we think have a good chance to make an impact  to the roster at positions of need.  I won’t get mad if Ballard decides to invest more in the trenches with one of our 2nd rounders since that is our bread and butter...and rightfully so.  It’s a deep receiver draft.  But we need at least one 2nd round worthy talent at wideout added to this roster.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I just don't think   Ballard would slide back to the 50's to pick up an extra 2nd.  I could b wrong, but just my feeling. I could see him sliding back to say late 30's or early 40's and pick up an extra 3rd.

Given we have 44, I could see him doing it, IF he believes the guy he wants will be there at 44.

 

Personally, my biggest want is a legit 6-3 or more X with speed....., 

And chances are, one of Pittman/Claypool/Edwards/Mims will be available at 44.

 

If Higgins somehow fell to 34, then'd I'd take him at 34. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

Given we have 44, I could see him doing it, IF he believes the guy he wants will be there at 44.

 

Personally, my biggest want is a legit 6-3 or more X with speed....., 

And chances are, one of Pittman/Claypool/Edwards/Mims will be available at 44.

 

If Higgins somehow fell to 34, then'd I'd take him at 34. 

 

  Amazes me how many still seem to think that Higgins is going in the 1st 

  round (or at least prior to #34)....

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

    • Great info. Thanks!   I was curious about the above question posed by Dontevergiveup too. It seems relevant.    In addition, is there a metric that takes in to account whether the receiver got seperation by his own route-running, or if he was schemed open? In other words, did the receiver get the seperation by his own skill, or did the coach's play get him seperation? That seems helpful when determining if it was indeed the receiver's skill, or the coach's skill.   Finally, it seems that frequently dumping the ball off to a RB would increase the seperation numbers, as they rarely have someone relatively close by, and Rivers seems to do that a lot.   As someone not very computer savvy, I appreciate many of your advanced metrics posts. Thanks again!
    • Two things stand out here. One I am not joking and second, I am not the dense one. 
    • I'm anxious to see which injured players we might get back this week.  I think Leonard and Pittman would give us a nice boost.   I noticed that the last 4 teams to beat the Falcons all lost the following week.  The Lions beat the Falcons last week, so maybe we keep that trend going?   This one looks like a toss up.  If we get Leonard and Pittman back, I like the Colts to come out on top, 27-24.
    • Thanks for sharing.   I wonder what these stats really tell us, since it is only for plays where the receiver is targeted.   I can't speak for last year, but the popular take I get from Colts fans is that Brissett was too conservative in his decision making and didn't push the ball downfield.  The stats you provided show that the receivers were open last year when they were targeted, but I wonder how open they were getting on all routes...I honestly don't know.  I assume Rivers makes more tight window throws than Brissett, and often times successfully, so I would expect that to skew the separation stats downward slightly for this season.
  • Members

    • IinD

      IinD 3,075

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Southern Cal

      Southern Cal 6

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Robert Johnson

      Robert Johnson 356

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DynaMike

      DynaMike 28

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Four2itus

      Four2itus 4,459

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Lancer1

      Lancer1 135

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • buccolts

      buccolts 4,966

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 9,607

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • King Colt

      King Colt 1,876

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Jared Cisneros

      Jared Cisneros 5,475

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...