Countdown Part 1: Strongest and Weakest Position Group

[EastStreet]

Thought it would be fun to rank the position groups. Voting at both ends, and will try to do 1 round every evening till we have a final stack rank.

 

Note, this is how you view the overall position groups, including starters and depth, AT THIS TIME. I know additional signings could change this real time.

[Dogg63]

Thanks East. For QB, starter retired. Probably could have included STs too in the poll.

[EastStreet]

Just now, Dogg63 said:

Thanks East. For QB, starter retired. Probably could have included STs too in the poll.

Trying to keep it simple. At QB, we all know we have our starter, be it good or bad lol. 

 

STs is a little to complex to toss into the main mix. As we countdown, I plan to add a third question, and one of the rounds will ask folks to rank STs sub units (only against other STs sub units). And also planned to do some ranking of units (passing O, passing D, rushing O, rushing D) and may throw in ST elements in that. 

[EastStreet]

So far going like I thought it would. Still surprised a bit some are voting for a group like TE as worst/weakest, over some of the others.

[Zoltan]

1 minute ago, EastStreet said:

So far going like I thought it would. Still surprised a bit some are voting for a group like TE as worst/weakest, over some of the others.

 

Yeah, it's hard to pick a stronger group than our RBs, I think DT is a good second. I just couldn't go with the OL because we still don't have a key position LT.

 

As for the weakest I was surprised to see someone go QB and WR over DE. DE seems to be the glaring need, honestly I couldn't think of a close 2nd. I think I would have to go with TE as the second weakest or maybe OL just for the fact that the LT position is a very important position even though it will be addressed in the draft most likely.

[craigerb]

17 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Still surprised a bit some are voting for a group like TE as worst/weakest, over some of the others.

"some" = 1 person

[EastStreet]

4 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

Yeah, it's hard to pick a stronger group than our RBs, I think DT is a good second. I just couldn't go with the OL because we still don't have a key position LT.

 

As for the weakest I was surprised to see someone go QB and WR over DE. DE seems to be the glaring need, honestly I couldn't think of a close 2nd. I think I would have to go with TE as the second weakest or maybe OL just for the fact that the LT position is a very important position even though it will be addressed in the draft most likely.

So we have 4 of 5 OL returning, and 3 are PBers. Even if you added a jag LT, it would still not be the near the weakest position group IMO.

 

I think DT is good, but a bit top heavy. Buckner of course is a monster. Grover is OK. Stallworth is meh. Lewis is a decent 3T/DE tweener to slide in. 

 

IIRC, TE accounted for 900 our our 4000 passing yards last year, and that's with RBs adding in another 900ish yards. IIRC we had a top 10 passing O (and top 10 rushing), even though we threw it short a ton. I honestly can't look at any of our O and think weakest, or near weakest given we're only down a LT and TE3. And bonus, we have Mack back.

Just now, craigerb said:

"some" = 1 person

WR and QB got a vote too. 

I said "a group like" TE

[richard pallo]

Resigning Houston would put the defense in a good place.  Signing Clowney would put the defense in a better place IMO.  There is more upside potential with Clowney versus downside potential with Houston.  To me the incremental cost to sign Clowney would be worth the potential increased return.  So I’m still hoping there is a chance we sign him but it feels like we are in another waiting game with one of our own FA’s and he eventually signs and we are content with going with the older veteran one more year.  Oh well.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

Resigning Houston would put the defense in a good place.  Signing Clowney would put the defense in a better place IMO.  There is more upside potential with Clowney versus downside potential with Houston.  To me the incremental cost to sign Clowney would be worth the potential increased return.  So I’m still hoping there is a chance we sign him but it feels like we are in another waiting game with one of our own FA’s and he eventually signs and we are content with going with the older veteran one more year.  Oh well.

 

Clowney isn't a great pass rusher. He's more of a run stopper right now. 

I'd no doubt take him as an add, but wouldn't expect a ton of sacks. I think Houston is probably better in that department, as he was top 10 in pass rush win rate. 

[Zoltan]

10 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

So we have 4 of 5 OL returning, and 3 are PBers. Even if you added a jag LT, it would still not be the near the weakest position group IMO.

 

 

I more say it because aside from DE, the LT position has the biggest question marks. Even though the rest of the line is solid

[EastStreet]

2 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

I more say it because aside from DE, the LT position has the biggest question marks. Even though the rest of the line is solid

I agree that LT is one of our top needs, but OL isn't one of our weakest groups. 

 

If we were down both LT and RT, I'd put that on the level of being without both DEs.

[richard pallo]

2 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

 

Clowney isn't a great pass rusher. He's more of a run stopper right now. 

I'd no doubt take him as an add, but wouldn't expect a ton of sacks. I think Houston is probably better in that department, as he was top 10 in pass rush win rate. 

He is more of a run stopper now but I think playing as a down DE alongside Buckner has the potential to change his pass rushing stats considerably.  He is a player teams have to game plan for which is no longer the case for Houston.  Much more upside remaining at age 28 as well.  Houston is more likely to decline at age 32.  I would want Clowney over Houston right now if it was up to me but it isn’t.  Darn.

[Hoose]

5 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

He is more of a run stopper now but I think playing as a down DE alongside Buckner has the potential to change his pass rushing stats considerably.  He is a player teams have to game plan for which is no longer the case for Houston.  Much more upside remaining at age 28 as well.  Houston is more likely to decline at age 32.  I would want Clowney over Houston right now if it was up to me but it isn’t.  Darn.

I totally agree RP. I’m hoping Ballard fixes an under performing pass rush by taking a chance on Clowney. We know what we have in Houston which is a solid but aging and declining talent. I’m not dissing Houston so much as pushing Clowney. Let’s try to move

the needle with a younger and potentially more talented player. The Colts need a better pass rush. Coming back with basically the same group is  a recipe for regression, not improvement. 

[EastStreet]

57 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

He is more of a run stopper now but I think playing as a down DE alongside Buckner has the potential to change his pass rushing stats considerably.  He is a player teams have to game plan for which is no longer the case for Houston.  Much more upside remaining at age 28 as well.  Houston is more likely to decline at age 32.  I would want Clowney over Houston right now if it was up to me but it isn’t.  Darn.

IDK, I just don't see Clowney being to much better at sacks in a 4-3 that only rushes 4 and blitzes near a league low.

In the 3-4 at TN at least they blitzed around 30% which helped. 

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I agree that LT is one of our top needs, but OL isn't one of our weakest groups. 

 

If we were down both LT and RT, I'd put that on the level of being without both DEs.

I just look at position groups a little differently in terms of overall performance and impact. 

[AwesomeAustin]

I voted DT as our strongest group with RB a close 2nd. I agree with EastStreet that it is top heavy but Buckner is a beast and Stewart is above average.  I think Lewis will have a big year on 3rd down this year rushing from the middle. He is my pick to be the surprise contributor this year.  I don’t think he is PB material but will put up similar numbers as Autry.  The interior of our DL will make a lot of plays this year.  

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:

I voted DT as our strongest group with RB a close 2nd. I agree with EastStreet that it is top heavy but Buckner is a beast and Stewart is above average.  I think Lewis will have a big year on 3rd down this year rushing from the middle. He is my pick to be the surprise contributor this year.  I don’t think he is PB material but will put up similar numbers as Autry.  The interior of our DL will make a lot of plays this year.  

Yup. I agree that Lewis should do well sliding in. I just don't like the current options at DE, especially when Lewis slides in. 

[AwesomeAustin]

Just now, EastStreet said:

Yup. I agree that Lewis should do well sliding in. I just don't like the current options at DE, especially when Lewis slides in. 

Yeah, that’s why I voted DE the weakest along with everyone else lol. Hopefully scheme can make some of these JAGs look good by collapsing the pocket and forcing the qb into a DE.  Hopefully if they aren’t good at generating a pash rush off the corner these guys can keep containment.  Being in position to make a play is the first step. 

[EastStreet]

Just now, AwesomeAustin said:

Yeah, that’s why I voted DE the weakest along with everyone else lol. Hopefully scheme can make some of these JAGs look good by collapsing the pocket and forcing the qb into a DE.  Hopefully if they aren’t good at generating a pash rush off the corner these guys can keep containment.  Being in position to make a play is the first step. 

I don't think we can rely on change of scheme that much lol.

Hoping we resign Houston, or bring in a guy like Clowney, in addition to drafting a DE in the 1st.

[Zoltan]

1 hour ago, EastStreet said:

I agree that LT is one of our top needs, but OL isn't one of our weakest groups. 

 

If we were down both LT and RT, I'd put that on the level of being without both DEs.

 

I get what you mean, I'll try to explain my train of thought on it being one of our weaker groups but forgive me as I am not the greatest at explaining through typing. 

 

So looking at our starting defense the weakest link is obviously the DE position because we don't know who will be the starters, now when looking at our starting offense the weakest position is LT for the same reason. So now to give a metaphor for the offensive line "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link." Therefore OL is a weakness because the starting LT (right now) is unknown and frankly good DCs would exploit this weakness, but this is all mute because the roster/depth chart is gonna change between now and August.

[Zoltan]

43 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

I just look at position groups a little differently in terms of overall performance and impact. 

Just saw this, yeah your right it really is just different looks

[RollerColt]

Strongest: Running Backs

 

Weakest: Defensive Ends

 

Our O-Line should be really good too depending on how the draft goes. 
 

WR is going to be controversial on this site all year as either okay or very weak. 

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, Zoltan said:

 

I get what you mean, I'll try to explain my train of thought on it being one of our weaker groups but forgive me as I am not the greatest at explaining through typing. 

 

So looking at our starting defense the weakest link is obviously the DE position because we don't know who will be the starters, now when looking at our starting offense the weakest position is LT for the same reason. So now to give a metaphor for the offensive line "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link." Therefore OL is a weakness because the starting LT (right now) is unknown and frankly good DCs would exploit this weakness, but this is all mute because the roster/depth chart is gonna change between now and August.

I understand your train of thought, but I disagree. Ds can try to target a weak LT, but Os can adjust by chipping with a TE, or keeping a RB in, or simply rolling right. Conversely, you can't do much if you don't have at least one quality DE to get a pass rush.

[DiogoSales]

Strongest: OL - easy... 3 very young Pro Bowlers 

 

Weakest: DE - also easy, nobody.

[EastStreet]

9 minutes ago, DiogoSales said:

Strongest: OL - easy... 3 very young Pro Bowlers 

 

Weakest: DE - also easy, nobody.

I almost voted OL, but had to give it to RB. Very close. Give the OL an average LT and the OL would be my #1

[superrep1967]

14 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Thought it would be fun to rank the position groups. Voting at both ends, and will try to do 1 round every evening till we have a final stack rank.

 

Note, this is how you view the overall position groups, including starters and depth, AT THIS TIME. I know additional signings could change this real time.

A very good post I made a mistake I met to put the DE's as the weakest group at the moment. 

[superrep1967]

11 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I don't think we can rely on change of scheme that much lol.

Hoping we resign Houston, or bring in a guy like Clowney, in addition to drafting a DE in the 1st.

I strongly believe it will be left tackle in the first round. I would be kind of shocked if it's not a left tackle actually very shocked. 

[DougDew]

The groupings are skewed a bit to favor answering the DE group.  The OL is considered one unit, whereas the the DEs and DTs are separated into two, isolating the weaker DE unit from Buckner.  

 

The DE position is by its nature rotational, especially when the 3T is your 3 down all pro.  The LT position is not rotational, and is therefore, by far the most pressing need.  As of now, the OT group is the weakest unit, IMO.

[stitches]

This is surprisingly one sided on both questions. I voted for both favorites too. I think we have both versatility and volume of good players at RB, I think that group can rival any RB stable in the league. On the weakest - DE... we have 0 players who've played as starters in the league. Sure some of them are young and can improve but arguably our best player at the position is Kemoko who has maxed at about 30% of the snap and this was before his bad injury and multiple surgeries... so yeah. I have no confidence at all that that position group won't be bottom 5 in the league. 

[DiogoSales]

13 hours ago, EastStreet said:

I almost voted OL, but had to give it to RB. Very close. Give the OL an average LT and the OL would be my #1

I can give you RB voting.. but looking at importante, 3 good OL > 3 good running backs

[BluesGirl]

17 hours ago, EastStreet said:

So far going like I thought it would. Still surprised a bit some are voting for a group like TE as worst/weakest, over some of the others.

Who are you saying are the top 2 TE's back? Doyle and ???  Because that was Burton not MAC 

 

The Colts (Jim Irsay) said they want a playmaking TE so apparently they do not feel like there is one on the team right now.  Wentz uses his TE's as well as RB's.   So TE is a huge need for this team 

 

And I will once again disagree with you thinking that utilizing these positions RB. Strength of the offense and TE which they   are on record wanting to upgrade.  (only the media and fans on here are screaming for WR).  Will be what you consider slow rolling the offense.   This is what this team is designed for.   

 

Maybe your'e wanting the spread offense with deep passes, but apparently Ballard nor Reich agree so far 

 

So as "one of" the voters of TE being the worst/weakest.   It is 

[richard pallo]

5 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

Who are you saying are the top 2 TE's back? Doyle and ???  Because that was Burton not MAC 

 

The Colts (Jim Irsay) said they want a playmaking TE so apparently they do not feel like there is one on the team right now.  Wentz uses his TE's as well as RB's.   So TE is a huge need for this team 

 

And I will once again disagree with you thinking that utilizing these positions RB. Strength of the offense and TE which they   are on record wanting to upgrade.  (only the media and fans on here are screaming for WR).  Will be what you consider slow rolling the offense.   This is what this team is designed for.   

 

Maybe your'e wanting the spread offense with deep passes, but apparently Ballard nor Reich agree so far 

 

So as "one of" the voters of TE being the worst/weakest.   It is 

I think Ertz is destined to be a Colt.  Just like Wentz was once he became available.  I think one way or the other through trade or release he will wind up with us.  And that is going to turn out to be a great addition.  Just what the doctor ordered.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

I wanted to vote RB as being the strongest but I went O.Line simply because we have Nelson, Kelly, and Smith. Voting O.Line is touchy for the simple fact we do not have a good LT yet. Weakest I voted DE's. If we re-sign Houston, TE's will be the weakest, and draft a LT at #21, my voting will pan out regarding O.Line being the strongest. I love our RB's though. Taylor and a healthy Mack along with Hines is like a 3 headed Black Mamba snake.

[EastStreet]

5 hours ago, superrep1967 said:

I strongly believe it will be left tackle in the first round. I would be kind of shocked if it's not a left tackle actually very shocked. 

I wouldn't be shocked at all. I would be surprised a bit if DE and LT aren't our first two picks given the current roster situation. 

[EastStreet]

2 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

I can give you RB voting.. but looking at importante, 3 good OL > 3 good running backs

4/5 good to great OL vs 3/3 good to great RBs. 

If we were combining importance of a position group, I agree. But this is just a "strongest" exercise.

[EastStreet]

1 hour ago, BluesGirl said:

Who are you saying are the top 2 TE's back? Doyle and ???  Because that was Burton not MAC 

huh? MAC led Indy TEs in catches, yards, and AVG even though Burton was targeted more. MAC led all TEs and WRs in catch %

 

MAC was near the top if not the top of TEs in PFF grading for a large part of the season, and his final grade was 10+ points higher than both Doyle and Burton.

 

I'd add that Burton is more slot/h-back than TE in the first place. His route tree was very limited compared to the other 2 TEs.

 

And if the above doesn't do it for ya, Indy put a 2nd round tender on MAC, and appears to be letting Burton walk. If Burton was the 2nd best, they would have signed him, and put an original round tender on MAC. The fact they used a 2nd round tender on him means they weren't taking chances.

1 hour ago, BluesGirl said:

 

The Colts (Jim Irsay) said they want a playmaking TE so apparently they do not feel like there is one on the team right now.  Wentz uses his TE's as well as RB's.   So TE is a huge need for this team 

I always say, look at what they do, not what they say.

IMO, they are looking for a move TE, which Doyle is a possession TE. MAC is also a possession TE, but showed the ability to be used intermediate to deep (see MN game). In short, they want a faster guy who can run out of the slot and across the middle. Burton was OK at that, but simply not a prototypical TE.

1 hour ago, BluesGirl said:

 

And I will once again disagree with you thinking that utilizing these positions RB. Strength of the offense and TE which they   are on record wanting to upgrade.  (only the media and fans on here are screaming for WR).  Will be what you consider slow rolling the offense.   This is what this team is designed for.   

 

Maybe your'e wanting the spread offense with deep passes, but apparently Ballard nor Reich agree so far 

 

So as "one of" the voters of TE being the worst/weakest.   It is 

I don't want an air-raid O. I want balance. 

 

And given our D will likely take a major step back, it's even more important that we can score.

And if you don't think WR is important to Ballard/Reich, they used our first pick last year, and a 2nd rounder the year before on WRs.

 

For the record, I'm not calling for them to take a WR early this year. I've been pretty clear we need to go DE and LT with our first two picks.

 

And if TE is so important, I'd add that Ballard has used zero draft capital on TE in 4 years, and have two starters who are UDFAs, and last year had a meh Burton who we signed at the vet min. The only attempt to really improve the TE situation was Ebron, who worked extremely well with Luck, and not so great with JB getting slow rolled. 

[BluesGirl]

25 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

huh? MAC led Indy TEs in catches, yards, and AVG even though Burton was targeted more. MAC led all TEs and WRs in catch %.      you are correct I stand corrected on this 

 

MAC was near the top if not the top of TEs in PFF grading for a large part of the season, and his final grade was 10+ points higher than both Doyle and Burton.

 

I'd add that Burton is more slot/h-back than TE in the first place. His route tree was very limited compared to the other 2 TEs.

 

And if the above doesn't do it for ya, Indy put a 2nd round tender on MAC, and appears to be letting Burton walk. If Burton was the 2nd best, they would have signed him, and put an original round tender on MAC. The fact they used a 2nd round tender on him means they weren't taking chances.

I always say, look at what they do, not what they say.

IMO, they are looking for a move TE, which Doyle is a possession TE. MAC is also a possession TE, but showed the ability to be used intermediate to deep (see MN game). In short, they want a faster guy who can run out of the slot and across the middle. Burton was OK at that, but simply not a prototypical TE.

I don't want an air-raid O. I want balance.   Offense was very balanced last yr IMO. Not sure what more you want

 

And given our D will likely take a major step back, it's even more important that we can score. I don't agree with this at all. Why because they haven't added a ER?

And if you don't think WR is important to Ballard/Reich, they used our first pick last year, and a 2nd rounder the year before on WRs.  I don't think its as important in this yrs draft.  I think we have the players already on the roster.  Now if a receiver falls and they are BPA then yea I think they will take them,   But I don't think they consider it near the need some on here do

 

For the record, I'm not calling for them to take a WR early this year. I've been pretty clear we need to go DE and LT with our first two picks.

 

And if TE is so important, I'd add that Ballard has used zero draft capital on TE in 4 years, and have two starters who are UDFAs, and last year had a meh Burton who we signed at the vet min. The only attempt to really improve the TE situation was Ebron, who worked extremely well with Luck, and not so great with JB getting slow rolled.   Ballard added Ebron 3 yrs ago he was a star with Luck  and then added Burton last yr.  Doubt there is a TE with value at our draft spots to take one,  But Ballard will absolutely add one either by draft or FA IMO because this is a big weakness on this team.

 

 

Added comments above 

[EastStreet]

11 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

Added comments above 

 

 you are correct I stand corrected on this 

If you watch MAC's film, it's really good. IMO, we tried forcing the ball way too much to Burton (which is apparent in his poor catch%), and didn't use MAC enough. He was very reliable when his number was called, and was very dynamic at times. His route running on intermediate and deep routes (especially the sail routes vs MN) were incredible. 

 

I'm more than happy though to add in a move TE that's a WR/TE hybrid. Burton's not the answer to me. Ertz would be OK, but at 30 I wouldn't expect 2015-2019 performance, especially in Reich's scheme.

 

11 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

 

Offense was very balanced last yr IMO. Not sure what more you want

Two things here. 1) We were 24th in pass/run %. I'd prefer to be nearer the median. 2) we're not stretching the field enough in terms of general game plan. Most of our deep attempts came when we were behind. Opposing Ds cheated up way too much, making it harder on the running and short passing game.

 

Again, not calling for an air raid scheme at all. I want us to have a bit better pass/rush % (about a 5% change), and I want us to make teams respect our deep capability. A deep shot or two early in games to keep Ss deep and CBs off the LOS.

11 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

I don't agree with this at all. Why because they haven't added a ER?

Our pass D was poor the second half of the year when we started playing better teams, and teams started testing us deeper. Our Ss were abysmal on the back end. Oke's coverage took a step back. Rock's coverage took a step back. Blackmon's C1/3 coverage on the backend was abysmal the last 6ish games after teams got film on him. Now add in we're now without our 2 starting DEs, and half our DL stat production. Folks were already critical of our inability to get home and get a sack (I actually defended Houston and Autry). 

 

Not saying we can't fill the holes at DE before the season. Houston and some other guys are still available. We can draft a DE early. Lot's of moves left to make if we want too.

 

That said, as it stands now, our LB and DB coverage just wasn't good vs teams that could pass. The bend don't break, broke a lot more towards the end of the season, and in the playoffs. Hoping the existing DBs and LBs all of sudden improve a lot, isn't really a strategy for improvement. Out of our 5 staring DBs, only 2 (Moore and Rhodes) are consistently above average. And both those are CBs. S will be pretty scary unless we see major improvement in coverage from Blackmon. And it will just get worse if we don't solve for the DL.

11 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

 

I don't think its as important in this yrs draft.  I think we have the players already on the roster.  Now if a receiver falls and they are BPA then yea I think they will take them,   But I don't think they consider it near the need some on here do

I don't see it as a big need this year either, but that's more because we have other, much bigger and more pressing needs. 

I don't really agree we already have the players on the roster. We have X covered with Pittman, Pascal, and Patmon, but Z and traditional slot still have a ton of questions. TY is fading and on a one year deal. Campbell can't stay healthy. Pascal really isn't a traditional slot candidate, but can be big slot situational guy. Behind TY and Campbell, there's Harris and Dulin. I like both, but assuming either one develops to be a starter is a huge dice roll. 

 

In short, only X is solved for long term.

 

11 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

Ballard added Ebron 3 yrs ago he was a star with Luck  and then added Burton last yr.  Doubt there is a TE with value at our draft spots to take one,  But Ballard will absolutely add one either by draft or FA IMO because this is a big weakness on this team.

TE accounted for near 1/4 of our passing yards last year. near a 1/4 was RB receiving, and 1/2 was WR. TE doesn't scream "lacking" in terms of production. If anything, WR only accounting for 1/2 is a flag given we're in 3WR/1TE/1RB sets most of the time.

 

On TE and the draft... TE, as a position, is very devalued in the league. And due to the fact CFB teams are all over the place in terms of TE use, means you can find very good TE value mid and late in the draft. 

 

Here's a look at the top 10 TEs in the league last year.

1. Kelce - 3rd round

2. Waller - 6th round

3. Hockenson - 1st round

4. Gesicki - 2nd round

5. Andrews - 3rd round

6. Fant - 1st round

7. Thomas - 4th round

8. Engram - 1st round

9. Kittle - 5th round

10. Gronk - 2nd round

 

So only half of the top 10 were early rounds. And top 2 were mid / late.

I'd almost never use a 1st for a TE. Just not a great value. Pitts, who is really more of jumbo WR is an exception.