Deforest Buckner or Javon Kinlaw at 13th pick

[B~Town]

Buckner was the better prospect and is in his prime a easy choice.

[boo2202]

8 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I really like Kinlaw's game but yes when he left the senior bowl because of his knees and then didn't participate at the combine because of his knees that kind of took him off my radar.  I look at it like pursuing a job, the game film is the resume but the combine and all star games, pro days, etc are like the interview.  And IMO, Kinlaw failed the interview... obviously SF feels differently than I do.  

Now that would be big mistake.  But really, what will do if Buckner doesn't fix the dline problem?

I guess you have to spend more picks to fix it. We’ve already spent a lot of draft capital on trying to fix the Dline. Getting to the overkill point. 

[NorthernColt]

Its the classic mystery box scenario. You have an all pro in buckner, but the mystery box could be an all pro! I'll take the mystery box lol.

 

All seriousness its pretty easy. If Kinlaw became the player of Buckners caliber, you're ecstatic. Thats still a big if, and likely 2 or 3 years away. I'll take the current all pro whos still in his mid 20s.

[Superman]

12 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I really like Kinlaw's game but yes when he left the senior bowl because of his knees and then didn't participate at the combine because of his knees that kind of took him off my radar.  I look at it like pursuing a job, the game film is the resume but the combine and all star games, pro days, etc are like the interview.  And IMO, Kinlaw failed the interview... obviously SF feels differently than I do.  

 

 

Yup. The Niner's tolerance for risk can be higher at that position because they have a strong DL group. Let's say Kinlaw takes a year or two to really start making a difference for them, that's fine because they already have a pipeline. 

 

The Colts wanted -- and really, needed -- an immediate contributor, which is why Buckner makes so much sense for them. Ballard called it a no-brainer, and I pretty much agree. It lined up really well with our needs and the resources we had.

 

And I say that as a guy who would have liked to have Love. But I never wanted Love at #13, and if the team really wanted him they could have had him in the 20s. 

[boo2202]

Just now, Superman said:

 

Yup. The Niner's tolerance for risk can be higher at that position because they have a strong DL group. Let's say Kinlaw takes a year or two to really start making a difference for them, that's fine because they already have a pipeline. 

 

The Colts wanted -- and really, needed -- an immediate contributor, which is why Buckner makes so much sense for them. Ballard called it a no-brainer, and I pretty much agree. It lined up really well with our needs and the resources we had.

 

And I say that as a guy who would have liked to have Love. But I never wanted Love at #13, and if the team really wanted him they could have had him in the 20s. 

Completely agree with your assessment sup. Buckner is an immediate upgrade. Just hope Ballard starts focusing on offense with theses 2nd round picks. Don’t trade down and just pick the best fit. Pittman, Swift, mims a lot of talented players that can help us. 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, boo2202 said:

Completely agree with your assessment sup. Buckner is an immediate upgrade. Just hope Ballard starts focusing on offense with theses 2nd round picks. Don’t trade down and just pick the best fit. Pittman, Swift, mims a lot of talented players that can help us. 

 

Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)

 

I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

[stitches]

3 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)

 

I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

I prefer Mims too.

 

Mims>Pittman>Higgins>Shenault

 

What do you think about Shenault? He's so weird. I don't trust my eyes with him. People continue to call him insane athlete and I don't see him being this explosive. I've heard him being called "Saquon at WR". Where do people get this? Does he look like this type of athlete to you? Maybe I'm just completely and utterly wrong on him here and he's just one of those players that don't look super athletic to me but actually is.

 

What about Brian Edwards? He's a bit similar to Shenault IMO.

[Myles]

Starts at 7pm tonight.  We shall know soon.   

[stitches]

53 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

All go off the books at the end of the season, correct? Jacoby is glad to count his money this year because he'd be lucky to get half of that next year.

 

Yeah, our QB salary sheet is clean after this year.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

I prefer Mims too.

 

Mims>Pittman>Higgins>Shenault

 

What do you think about Shenault? He's so weird. I don't trust my eyes with him. People continue to call him insane athlete and I don't see him being this explosive. I've heard him being called "Saquon at WR". Where do people get this? Does he look like this type of athlete to you? Maybe I'm just completely and utterly wrong on him here and he's just one of those players that don't look super athletic to me but actually is.

 

What about Brian Edwards? He's a bit similar to Shenault IMO.

 

I haven't watched Edwards. 

 

I think the thing with Shenault is that he did a little bit of everything for Colorado, and I think his hype really blew up with that huge game against USC where he looked unstoppable. I remember noticing him in 2018 in a big game against UCLA, so I was already somewhat familiar with his ability to put up big numbers, and you don't forget a name like Laviska Shenault...

 

He doesn't have the refinement that I like to see, but he does seem to have an innate understanding of space, good body control and hands, and some off the charts ability to track the ball. But I don't understand seeing him as this outrageous athlete when you watch all his tape and look at his workout numbers. If you just watch that USC game you might think he's the best WR of the last five years, so maybe that's where some of it comes from.

 

He'd be a steal at #75, but not a Year 1 starter, IMO.

 

I think I agree with your order, by the way.

[GoColts8818]

16 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)

 

I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

I think they could get a really good WR as late as third round in the draft.  It’s pretty deep.  

[GoColts8818]

9 minutes ago, Myles said:

Starts at 7pm tonight.  We shall know soon.   

Unless Ballard trades back and if you listened to his interview with McAfee yesterday he hinted at that.  McAfee asked him about trading up and Ballard said he’s bet on them doing the reverse.

[stitches]

2 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I haven't watched Edwards. 

 

I think the thing with Shenault is that he did a little bit of everything for Colorado, and I think his hype really blew up with that huge game against USC where he looked unstoppable. I remember noticing him in 2018 in a big game against UCLA, so I was already somewhat familiar with his ability to put up big numbers, and you don't forget a name like Laviska Shenault...

 

He doesn't have the refinement that I like to see, but he does seem to have an innate understanding of space, good body control and hands, and some off the charts ability to track the ball. But I don't understand seeing him as this outrageous athlete when you watch all his tape and look at his workout numbers. If you just watch that USC game you might think he's the best WR of the last five years, so maybe that's where some of it comes from.

 

He'd be a steal at #75, but not a Year 1 starter, IMO.

 

I think I agree with your order, by the way.

I don't think he's falling to 75. Would you be OK with him at 44? I think I would be, but I too don't think he will be ready year 1. Although I do see the talent with him, just not the insane athleticism some seem to think he has. (BTW I didn't include his workout numbers because he seemed to get injured(another worrying thing with him - injuries) while he was running his 40)

[NorthernColt]

12 minutes ago, stitches said:

I prefer Mims too.

 

Mims>Pittman>Higgins>Shenault

 

What do you think about Shenault? He's so weird. I don't trust my eyes with him. People continue to call him insane athlete and I don't see him being this explosive. I've heard him being called "Saquon at WR". Where do people get this? Does he look like this type of athlete to you? Maybe I'm just completely and utterly wrong on him here and he's just one of those players that don't look super athletic to me but actually is.

 

What about Brian Edwards? He's a bit similar to Shenault IMO.

 

I like Edwards actually. But I'd only be comfortable with him in the 4th. Or 3rd if we dont take a WR in the 2nd.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

I don't think he's falling to 75. Would you be OK with him at 44? I think I would be, but I too don't think he will be ready year 1. Although I do see the talent with him, just not the insane athleticism some seem to think he has. (BTW I didn't include his workout numbers because he seemed to get injured(another worrying thing with him - injuries) while he was running his 40)

 

I'd rather have one of the other guys in the second than use #44 on Shenault. Even if we move back a handful of picks, I assume Pittman or Mims will still be available at #39-ish. I probably have Higgins and Shenault on the same level.

[stitches]

 

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I'd rather have one of the other guys in the second than use #44 on Shenault. Even if we move back a handful of picks, I assume Pittman or Mims will still be available at #39-ish. I probably have Higgins and Shenault on the same level.

Rapoport saying Mims is under consideration for the Bengals at 33. I read a report from a Bengals insider that said Mims was not likely to drop past 33 too. That was a week or two ago. Lets see...

[TheNextGM]

If Buckner were is this draft he’s a top 3 pick. 

[boo2202]

56 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)

 

I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

I prefer Pittman. More polished and catches everything. He’s not as quick as mims but has better hands and more of a route tree. 

[dw49]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Do you have a really strong preference for Pittman, over say Mims? (I actually prefer Mims, but would take Pittman.)

 

I don't think we have to stay at #34 to get a good WR. I'm thinking we trade back.

 

I like Mims (higher ceiling) also but sounds like Cinn will take him or a tackle.

 

I would say odds are like 70% we trade back. Ballard don't know how to lie. He said he was going to watch Buckner film Thursday night ( no trade into 1st round) , said last year he was trading back and is saying very likely trade back this year also.  

IMO , Colts might wait until the 3rd for a WR as there are some hybrid safeties that would fit nicely and they look to be first round talent. He could also like Eason and would need to use a 2nd rounder there. 

[Superman]

5 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

I like Mims (higher ceiling) also but sounds like Cinn will take him or a tackle.

 

I would say odds are like 70% we trade back. Ballard don't know how to lie. He said he was going to watch Buckner film Thursday night ( no trade into 1st round) , said last year he was trading back and is saying very likely trade back this year also.  

IMO , Colts might wait until the 3rd for a WR as there are some hybrid safeties that would fit nicely and they look to be first round talent. He could also like Eason and would need to use a 2nd rounder there. 

 

I'd almost be willing to bet that we trade back. Ballard doesn't seem interested in masking his intentions. He said he wants more picks, best way to do that is to move from #34. He could still sneak back up for Pittman or Mims if he wanted.

 

I'm not all that well versed in this year's draft class, but it seems like WR and safety are the strongest positions remaining. Maybe OL? Some second tier edge players that I'm not crazy about (Epenesa is a well known name, and I don't really like him). 

 

And the lower tier QBs are still there. Let's say they love one of them, maybe he takes him at #44? Eason, Morgan, Fromm, whoever... 

 

I think he's going to try to extract some value out of Day 2, and might come away with three or four guys the staff really loves, and Frank Reich will be sending virtual high fives to everyone.

[Turftoe]

"Bird in the hand" > "Bird in the bush"

[Rackeen305]

13 minutes ago, Turftoe said:

"Bird in the hand" > "Bird in the bush"

Exactly, and I dont think 1 draft will make the current Colts a Superbowl team. Had we had A.Luck, entirely different picture. 

[Nickster]

9 hours ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Hindsight says you take Kinlaw and spend the $16M or so difference much more wisely than they did with JB.
 With the JB$$$ $28M and the $16M that is a lot of missed talent down the drain. Oh well. 

I agree.  The JB contract looks worse and worse every waning minute.  Like Ballard.  Bonehead move giving that stiff that 28 extra mill.  No way that plays good in the clubhouse. 

 

[TrueBlue12]

Buckner is a proven commodity.

Kinlaw isn't. The Colts can afford Buckner's larger contract.