Draft scenario

[CR91]

Let's say for argument sake, the colts don't get Wentz, Darnold, or Carr. Would you be ok with the following;

 

Colts trade up to 6 by giving up our first, second, third this year and first and second next year.

 

Keep in mind with 6, most likely Lawrence, Fields, and Wilson are off the board with the Jags, Jets, and Falcons likely to take QBs. That leaves Trey Lance. Now I love Trey. I think he's Watson like with maybe a bigger arm, but do any of us really see Ballard giving up 5 picks which is what it will most likely take to get that up.

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, CR91 said:

Let's say for argument sake, the colts don't get Wentz, Darnold, or Carr. Would you be ok with the following;

 

Colts trade up to 6 by giving up our first, second, third this year and first and second next year.

 

Keep in mind with 6, most likely Lawrence, Fields, and Wilson are off the board with the Jags, Jets, and Falcons likely to take QBs. That leaves Trey Lance. Now I love Trey. I think he's Watson like with maybe a bigger arm, but do any of us really see Ballard giving up 5 picks which is what it will most likely to take to get that up.

No

[BlackTiger]

Would I be ok with it as a fan?  Sure I would

 

I cant say i would pull the trigger on that myself though, I like him but you have to really love the guy to do that.  I dont have that much information 

[DaColts85]

Not at all. 

[TomG]

No way

[RNGDShobby]

Thats a lot, but thats a splash you have to make to get your guy. Not sure if I'd do it. But if CB does it, I'll trust his judgement more than my own!

[jchandler7]

If Ballard pulls the trigger i would be ok with it. However, I'd rather go with a vet like Winston or Fitzmagic & Eason before giving up that kind of draft capitol. 

[BProland85]

2 hours ago, CR91 said:

Let's say for argument sake, the colts don't get Wentz, Darnold, or Carr. Would you be ok with the following;

 

Colts trade up to 6 by giving up our first, second, third this year and first and second next year.

 

Keep in mind with 6, most likely Lawrence, Fields, and Wilson are off the board with the Jags, Jets, and Falcons likely to take QBs. That leaves Trey Lance. Now I love Trey. I think he's Watson like with maybe a bigger arm, but do any of us really see Ballard giving up 5 picks which is what it will most likely take to get that up.

I highly doubt it would take that much to move up to 6 from 21. Remember KC moved up 17 spots and just gave up two 1sts and a 3rd. Also I doubt the top 3 QBs will be all gone by then. Jets and Falcons could both stick with their current QBs. 

[CR91]

28 minutes ago, BProland85 said:

I highly doubt it would take that much to move up to 6 from 21. Remember KC moved up 17 spots and just gave up two 1sts and a 3rd. Also I doubt the top 3 QBs will be all gone by then. Jets and Falcons could both stick with their current QBs. 

 

Perhaps, but 10 is different then 6. Imo, this whole draft will be dictated by what the jets do with Darnold.

[NewColtsFan]

3 hours ago, CR91 said:

Let's say for argument sake, the colts don't get Wentz, Darnold, or Carr. Would you be ok with the following;

 

Colts trade up to 6 by giving up our first, second, third this year and first and second next year.

 

Keep in mind with 6, most likely Lawrence, Fields, and Wilson are off the board with the Jags, Jets, and Falcons likely to take QBs. That leaves Trey Lance. Now I love Trey. I think he's Watson like with maybe a bigger arm, but do any of us really see Ballard giving up 5 picks which is what it will most likely take to get that up.

No.   This is EXACTLY what Ballard said the Colts would NEVER do...  act out of desperation.   This would be a desperate trade. 

[Shepman]

I would rather play with Eason and if he fails draft QB next year for that much draft stock.

[polk_high_allstar]

Feel like 2 x 1st's, 2 x 2nd's and a 3rd would be about what it would take to possible trade for Watson.  If your giving up that much i would rather have known commodity then an unproven rookie QB.

[Mackrel829]

Definitely not.

[MikeCurtis]

16 hours ago, CR91 said:

Let's say for argument sake, the colts don't get Wentz, Darnold, or Carr. Would you be ok with the following;

 

Colts trade up to 6 by giving up our first, second, third this year and first and second next year.

 

Keep in mind with 6, most likely Lawrence, Fields, and Wilson are off the board with the Jags, Jets, and Falcons likely to take QBs. That leaves Trey Lance. Now I love Trey. I think he's Watson like with maybe a bigger arm, but do any of us really see Ballard giving up 5 picks which is what it will most likely take to get that up.

The really "sad" thing is that you hit the compensation piece right on the head.....

 

I just dont see the Colts taking the chance

[Moosejawcolt]

16 hours ago, BProland85 said:

I highly doubt it would take that much to move up to 6 from 21. Remember KC moved up 17 spots and just gave up two 1sts and a 3rd. Also I doubt the top 3 QBs will be all gone by then. Jets and Falcons could both stick with their current QBs. 

Moving up to #6 Will b very expensive. Chiefs moved outside the top 10 to get Mahommes. A team dropping from #6 To #21 will want a kings ransom.

[Moosejawcolt]

16 hours ago, BProland85 said:

I highly doubt it would take that much to move up to 6 from 21. Remember KC moved up 17 spots and just gave up two 1sts and a 3rd. Also I doubt the top 3 QBs will be all gone by then. Jets and Falcons could both stick with their current QBs. 

If the Colts were to move up to the top 5, I believe  thry would have to do what the Eagles did when they drafted Wentz. Trade up to say the top 10. Then trade the #6 pic with say the #10 pick. Teams at the top of the draft still want a chance at a blue chip player. They will not trade back to #21

[Jackie Daytona]

On 2/13/2021 at 9:29 PM, NewColtsFan said:

No.   This is EXACTLY what Ballard said the Colts would NEVER do...  act out of desperation.   This would be a desperate trade. 

Its a bit more than I think it would take, sure.... But landing your Franchise qb with a couple firsts and a third or whatever, would be no more drastic than swapping a first for a DT to anchor your defense for years to come.... 

 

You are basically saying Ballard believes he doesn't need a consistently top half of league qb.... Thinks he can steal one late, or is ok bombing some random season down the line to acquire a high pick.... You have to give something to get something.... You don't sign FA QBs to be your cornerstone....

 

 

 

 

[NewColtsFan]

2 minutes ago, Shafty138 said:

Its a bit more than I think it would take, sure.... But landing your Franchise qb with a couple firsts and a third or whatever, would be no more drastic than swapping a first for a DT to anchor your defense for years to come.... 

 

You are basically saying Ballard believes he doesn't need a consistently top half of league qb.... Thinks he can steal one late, or is ok bombing some random season down the line to acquire a high pick.... You have to give something to get something.... You don't sign FA QBs to be your cornerstone....

 

 

 

 

How does a 5 for 1 trade (1x2, 2x2, 3) equal the same as one first round pick for a DT? How are those the least bit the same?

 

I didn’t say Ballard would never trade up (though I think it’s unlikely this year). I was only being specific to the proposal the OP made.   I don’t think CB would do THIS trade.
 

But I assume he’ll do a deal when he’s comfortable with it.