Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Did we hit a homerun in the draft?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hold your horses on this "future signal caller" stuff.

You may be the only person on the planet that thinks mack is just like taylor

The real question is, which of the players drafted over the past few days will be traded to the jets in 2 to 3 years?

14 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

I know the term applies to another sport, but heck I think Ballard did a great job filling the needed positions.  WRs, RBs and the future signal caller.

 

Your thoughts comrades?

I like this draft a lot. The one move I wouldn’t have made was trading down and missing out on Lattimore. Aside from that, don’t think they could have done much better.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we hit a HR for sure.

 

Louis Riddick on ESPN when they were signing off, said he thought Colts had best draft, if including Buckner.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Thunderbolt said:

I know the term applies to another sport, but heck I think Ballard did a great job filling the needed positions.  WRs, RBs and the future signal caller.

 

Your thoughts comrades?

I think we had a solid draft, but i think it’s far too early to call it a homerun.

 

thing is, when you swing Too hard for just the home run, you often strike out

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, with a Ballard draft, you don’t know right away because you don’t know who the players are sometimes. Lol.  I’m betting the lineman from Ball State makes it. Ballard loves this young man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The term “starter” has changed over the years but as far as potential “starters”

 

Pittman

Taylor

Blankenship ?

 

  Some depth in the defensive backfield, OL and special teams. And knowing Ballard, he’s not done yet. Eason was a bit of a head scratcher but like csmopar said, it too early to tell.

  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was a really good draft. There are a lot fewer glaring holes in the roster than there were a few years ago, so I think it can be a little tougher to judge. I absolutely love Pittman and Taylor, and I thought Eason was a fantastic calculated risk in the 4th. Lots of other good prospects as well.

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

Hold your horses on this "future signal caller" stuff.

Eason was the qb I wanted in the 2nd but even more excited to get him in the 4th.  Nobody is calling him the future because we all know he will have to sit a yr or two to learn at this level.  We Colts fans are all SPOILED as the last 20 yrs had a qb that could step in from day 1 and be ELITE.  I ask you this, what about him do you not like?  Have you watched his highlight vids and what did you come away with?  I liked what I seen and if given time to learn, I cant help but see a Drew Brees type player!  Maybe that's just me and many here can't imagine anything else than a bust but maybe that's because we as fans are not used to a project qb??  Sorry, a Manning or Luck is not walking thru this door anytime soon and we should not worry about the backup position!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BornHoosier said:

Eason was the qb I wanted in the 2nd but even more excited to get him in the 4th.  Nobody is calling him the future because we all know he will have to sit a yr or two to learn at this level.  We Colts fans are all SPOILED as the last 20 yrs had a qb that could step in from day 1 and be ELITE.  I ask you this, what about him do you not like?  Have you watched his highlight vids and what did you come away with?  I liked what I seen and if given time to learn, I cant help but see a Drew Brees type player!  Maybe that's just me and many here can't imagine anything else than a bust but maybe that's because we as fans are not used to a project qb??  Sorry, a Manning or Luck is not walking thru this door anytime soon and we should not worry about the backup position!

didnt need a project qb if we are going for it all this season, too many other needs that could help this season win it all

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DEFENSE said:

didnt need a project qb if we are going for it all this season, too many other needs that could help this season win it all

I get you but playing Devils advocate, did the Packers need to trade up in the first to grab Jordan Love?  I still hear you but at some point you got to plan for the future & I'm glad it only cost us a 4th!

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

liked the first two, but he was reaching from there on.

 

based on who's draft board?

1 hour ago, DEFENSE said:

didnt need a project qb if we are going for it all this season, too many other needs that could help this season win it all

 

such as?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DEFENSE said:

didnt need a project qb if we are going for it all this season, too many other needs that could help this season win it all

Why not draft to go for it every season? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

neither of those are positions that required upgrades in order to help us win now.

Nah.... let's look at the 3 position groups in terms of "win now"

 

QB - we're paying the position group more than anyone in the NFL without Eason, and have arguably the best 1-2 combo in the league. JB is not a great starter, but he is a very solid back up. Absolutely no need for another QB to "win now"

 

TE - we really don't have a TE1. You can make the case for Doyle, but he's not a true detached pass catching monster. In a perfect world, he's a TE2 that is balanced between blocking and catching. Burton is more of an H-back or bully slot at his 6-2 height. MAC is a wild card (although I think he steps up this year). Unless MAC emerges, we won't have a RZ freak TE IMO.

 

OT - after AC and Braden, who is there? If either get hurt, we're likely in huge trouble. Clark??? nope. Lang and Donnal??? UDFA???

Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked trading #13 for Buckner. I like Pittman. I think Taylor would have been a great pick for another team but not so much for the Colts.

 

Mack is just lke Taylor IMO. Size, speed, burst. Clones. Wilkens, who has averaged 5.8 yards per carry, is now pitched to the curb. 

 

Taylor is very good, but redundant.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Nah.... let's look at the 3 position groups in terms of "win now"

 

QB - we're paying the position group more than anyone in the NFL without Eason, and have arguably the best 1-2 combo in the league. JB is not a great starter, but he is a very solid back up. Absolutely no need for another QB to "win now"

 

TE - we really don't have a TE1. You can make the case for Doyle, but he's not a true detached pass catching monster. In a perfect world, he's a TE2 that is balanced between blocking and catching. Burton is more of an H-back or bully slot at his 6-2 height. MAC is a wild card (although I think he steps up this year). Unless MAC emerges, we won't have a RZ freak TE IMO.

 

OT - after AC and Braden, who is there? If either get hurt, we're likely in huge trouble. Clark??? nope. Lang and Donnal??? UDFA???

 

OK and what TE was available when we picked Eason that would have been that RZ freak TE? Btw doesn't Pittman help in the RZ area? 

 

Same question about OT. who was there when we picked Eason that you would have taken to beat out Clark for this season? 

 

I agree we needed OL depth and they brought some in. But unless you think there was an OT that was still available that would have instantly been better than our current backups then they likely wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. If castonzo/Smith stay healthy (a big if, I know) , then a drafted OT wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TrueBlue12 said:

I liked trading #13 for Buckner. I like Pittman. I think Taylor would have been a great pick for another team but not so much for the Colts.

 

Mack is just lke Taylor IMO. Size, speed, burst. Clones. Wilkens, who has averaged 5.8 yards per carry, is now pitched to the curb. 

 

Taylor is very good, but redundant.

 

You may be the only person on the planet that thinks mack is just like taylor

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

OK and what TE was available when we picked Eason that would have been that RZ freak TE? Btw doesn't Pittman help in the RZ area? 

 

Same question about OT. who was there when we picked Eason that you would have taken to beat out Clark for this season? 

 

I agree we needed OL depth and they brought some in. But unless you think there was an OT that was still available that would have instantly been better than our current backups then they likely wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. If castonzo/Smith stay healthy (a big if, I know) , then a drafted OT wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. 

On TE, in general, I wouldn't have waited till the 4th. Personally, I would have taken TE before RB or S. At worst, I would have moved up a a few spots in the 4th to take Albert O. He's definitely a freak. Asiasi is also a good prospect. Still can't believe Trautman lasted till 3-41.

 

OT, would have taken that before 4th too. Cleveland late 2nd would have been nice. Josh Jones lasting till 3-8 is surprising to me. Niang at 3-32 too. Available at the pick though, I would have taken Wanogho in a heartbeat. Still can't believe he fell as far as he did given all the grades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it looks a very solid draft. 

 

But don't we have this every year where the outlook on the draft immediately after is uber positive?

 

If you look back to the same time last year there will have been people gushing about Rock, Okereke, Banogu and especially Campbell?

 

Shall we just wait and see a little bit? 

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

On TE, in general, I wouldn't have waited till the 4th. Personally, I would have taken TE before RB or S. At worst, I would have moved up a a few spots in the 4th to take Albert O. He's definitely a freak. Asiasi is also a good prospect. Still can't believe Trautman lasted till 3-41.

 

OT, would have taken that before 4th too. Cleveland late 2nd would have been nice. Josh Jones lasting till 3-8 is surprising to me. Niang at 3-32 too. Available at the pick though, I would have taken Wanogho in a heartbeat. Still can't believe he fell as far as he did given all the grades.

 

OK, and I have no problem with any of that. But since you're talking about picking both prior to the 4th round, they don't have anything to do with the pick used on eason :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the draft. I love Buckner and Pittman both fill needs and will help the team. Taylor is somehow a luxury pick in my eyes as RB wasn't a huge need. I mean its nice to have him but trade down an take an OT like Josh Jones while adding more picks would have been my choice as we don't have any quality depth on the Tackle position with Castonzo going to retire soon. Blackmon, Eason, Windsor, Pinter... not a fan of them. I give it a C- and hope Ballard will prove me wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, w87r said:

I think we hit a HR for sure.

 

Louis Riddick on ESPN when they were signing off, said he thought Colts had best draft, if including Buckner.

Yeah I gave our draft a B+ which is very good but if you include the whole off season = the Buckner trade and the Rivers signing I give us an A which is great.

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

 

OK and what TE was available when we picked Eason that would have been that RZ freak TE? Btw doesn't Pittman help in the RZ area? 

 

Same question about OT. who was there when we picked Eason that you would have taken to beat out Clark for this season? 

 

I agree we needed OL depth and they brought some in. But unless you think there was an OT that was still available that would have instantly been better than our current backups then they likely wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. If castonzo/Smith stay healthy (a big if, I know) , then a drafted OT wouldn't have done anything to help us win this year. 

I agree with this. On day 3 you rarely get substantial win-now pieces. Eason is not win now, but drafting Eason in the 4th is more win-now than trading up for Love and losing one of the 2nds and the 3d most likely for a player who wouldn't play this year, or taking Hurts in the 2nd. I posted last week that I thought we would be in precarious position with no QB under contract for 2021 and especially no potential future QB under contract if we didn't draft a QB. I think drafting Eason in the 4th is a good balance between win-now(still draft players on day 2 that will help now) and draft fot the future(I think Eason is a very good flyer to take on day 3, you rarely get players with similar traits and pedigree in the 4th). 

 

With that said I thought there were some TEs that we might have gotten in the 5th or 6th that could help. But the same can be said about the OL - there were players like Muti, Tega Wanogho, Driscoll, Onwenu, etc. In other words - the Colts still had the chance to draft OL and TEs later in the draft but chose not to. Probably they didn't think they were that much of a win now or win ever players, anyways.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, our_dbs_rock said:

The real question is, which of the players drafted over the past few days will be traded to the jets in 2 to 3 years? :)

New term for those guys.

 

Flight risk.

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like that we got, IMO, 3 first round talents with our first 3 picks (including Buckner). After that I like the positions we addressed, but I have to admit  that despite my off season research I know very little about most of the guys we picked. I'm going to have to take an "In Ballard We Trust" approach on them for now, but I can see the potential on some of them. And Eason was a solid pick. I would have been okay with him in the 3rd, yet we got him in the 4th. Here's to hoping he makes strides here. I don't think we had the greatest draft, but I do think we got significantly better in some areas this off-season. Particularly on the d-line and hopefully in the pass catching department. If Pittman produces we're in great shape there. If Burton is healthy and contributes then we're already better off at TE than we were last season, even if we could have done better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This draft was awesome to say the least. One sneaky, undercover, and very under rated move the Colts did. That might be one of the top 5 moves this offseason was bringing in the fullback from Pittsburgh.

With Roosevelt Nix, Jonathan Taylor, and Big Q. They will be closing many games out this year.

With Phil Rivers and this receiving room. Slow starts should be a thing of the past.If Pittman comes in hungry and motivated. I can’t see how one CB will stop him

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TrueBlue12 said:

I may also be the only person on the planet who is correct....lol

JT is bigger, faster and was a lot more productive 

 

macks fumble rate was HIGHER too

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

 

OT - after AC and Braden, who is there? If either get hurt, we're likely in huge trouble. Clark??? nope. Lang and Donnal??? UDFA???

Clark played much better last season.  Not all pro by any means, but he wasn't embarrassing himself out there.  And there will be plenty of guys available at cut down days we can find depth

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

    • Didnt Vick Ballard tear his Achilles? I know he was pretty much done afterwards
    • For some reason I’m thinking the Titans had a bye or something like that.  I’m sure there are a lot of circumstances that comes into play with each decision the league makes.  Obviously the Saints/Broncos wasn’t a marquee matchup without much playoff implications involved. Teams should be prepared to play with who they have and if the NFL moves the game then it’s a bonus. The games must be played
    • We should have sent in a scrub to target Tannehill and inflict a Teddy Bridgewater-level hypersnap knee injury.  
    • I have to admit, this was the first time this year that I was disappointed in the guys on this team. They actually looked bored, of all things. If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say it looked like they were told that the Titans were given the win by the league in this one, and they didn't have it in them to even make it look like a real game.   Now that's how it looked.   In reality, though, it did look like they, for whatever reasons, couldn't find it in them to be up emotionally for this game. And there's no other way to describe that than extremely disappointing. And as a result, it left me increasingly bored with the game as it went along. So much so that it took me three viewings to complete it. I actually fell asleep on two different occasions trying to finish it.   BLECH!!!
  • Members

    • Hark

      Hark 315

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Btown_Colt

      Btown_Colt 571

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Gdlyons

      Gdlyons 0

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ar7

      ar7 446

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • MFT5

      MFT5 445

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • buccolts

      buccolts 5,143

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • danlhart87

      danlhart87 5,111

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Sikma

      Sikma 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PrincetonTiger

      PrincetonTiger 12,383

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ColtsSouljah

      ColtsSouljah 491

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