Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Recommended Posts

Still waiting for a poster, any poster,  to address the point of thread.

 

To not take a WR with pick 21.

 

Im already on record as not wanting a WR at 21.

 

So who will respond to the OP?    Anyone?

 

Anyone at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Still waiting for a poster, any poster,  to address the point of thread.

 

To not take a WR with pick 21.

 

Im already on record as not wanting a WR at 21.

 

So who will respond to the OP?    Anyone?

 

Anyone at all?

I see the point.   With the depth at WR.  you can find another value at 21 and also get a good talent at WR later.   It's the same reason I would wait on OT and take an ER or CB if the grading is close because they group of OT's after the top 3 maybe 4 if you include Jenkins as a 1st rounder are all very close in grades as I see them.

 

I am not as against taking a WR as you are but I understand your position on it.   Chase is not falling to 21. No Way.  But if for some reason Waddle does.  I take him for sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, tvturner said:

I'll take Rashod Bateman at 21

I have him ranked just slightly above Jenkins and it's very close.   So if both were available I would take Jenkins only because I feel the need is higher.

 

I really want Jaycee Horn.    

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Still waiting for a poster, any poster,  to address the point of thread.

 

To not take a WR with pick 21.

 

Im already on record as not wanting a WR at 21.

 

So who will respond to the OP?    Anyone?

 

Anyone at all?

You just did technically

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BluesGirl said:

I see the point.   With the depth at WR.  you can find another value at 21 and also get a good talent at WR later.   It's the same reason I would wait on OT and take an ER or CB if the grading is close because they group of OT's after the top 3 maybe 4 if you include Jenkins as a 1st rounder are all very close in grades as I see them.

 

I am not as against taking a WR as you are but I understand your position on it.   Chase is not falling to 21. No Way.  But if for some reason Waddle does.  I take him for sure.


Yes...   if Waddle falls to 21, I’d take him too, assuming his ankle has been cleared.   There are exceptions to the rules.   And the top-4 pass catchers are the exception this year.  
 

One last thought to consider...   

 

What my board, your board, and any other board out there, they all look different.  The further you get away from pick #1 the more different every boards look.  People do not see personnel decisions the same.  We all see this differently.  We value various qualities differently.  We value different positions differently.   

 

32 teams, their 32 different boards would all look different.   I say this every year,  but it seems a concept that some do not understand or embrace.   I know you’re new, so some of this is more focused on other readers and not you.  My comments are more broadly focused and not just for you.   Thanks for understanding. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

Yep.....  good TE"s are much harder to acquire than WR's. 

TEs drafted high doesn't have the same guaranteed success as WRs has shown to be. I understand Pitts is fantastic but he could just as likely be a bust as anybody.

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

Still waiting for a poster, any poster,  to address the point of thread.

 

To not take a WR with pick 21.

 

Im already on record as not wanting a WR at 21.

 

So who will respond to the OP?    Anyone?

 

Anyone at all?

Draft best value available. No matter the position. If it's WR... do it. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, stitches said:

Draft best value available. No matter the position. If it's WR... do it. 

Thats only true to an extent. Value is important but so is need. If one of the top flight QBs take a Rodgers type fall they won't take them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

Have you now ruled out trading down to collect more picks?  

"Best value" could be a trade(down ... or up?) too, I'm not excluding that. Because of the way NFL teams value picks IMO trade down should almost always be option no.1. Teams are gifting value trying to trade up IMO. So... I'm almost always team "trade down" if such opportunity presents itself. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Thats only true to an extent. Value is important but so is need. If one of the top flight QBs take a Rodgers type fall they won't take them. 

Of course that's within reason. Although... to be honest... I personally would draft one of the top 4 QBs if he falls even with Wentz on the roster... but I know I'm in the small minority here and I know Ballard would never do that. And I think it would be a mistake not to take him if he fell(Lance or Fields lets say) . Getting as many good shots at a franchise QB as possible to me is more valuable than a random late 1st DE or OT or WR or CB. Especially when you see what those QBs go for once they fail. Wentz failed and still managed to return 1st and a 3d. Darnold has been bottom 5 QB for his entire career and he still managed to return 2nd , 4th and 6th(this is about 1st round type value). QBs are valuable. I consider all top 4 QBs great prospects and amazing value at 21... so... if one of them falls... I run to the podium.

 

If Wentz returns to his MVP form... great... You have an MVP type QB and you have an amazing backup for a QB who's had injury problems for several years... or if he's amazing in practice and beats Wentz... maybe you trade Wentz. Or if he's good, but not better than Wentz I bet you can still get at least a second for him in a couple of years. And if Wentz fails you get a shot at a top tier talent with a modest investment. 

 

So yeah... this is my line of thinking here. 

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

Of course that's within reason. Although... to be honest... I personally would draft one of the top 4 QBs if he falls even with Wentz on the roster... but I know I'm in the small minority here and I know Ballard would never do that. And I think it would be a mistake not to take him if he fell(Lance or Fields lets say) . Getting as many good shots at a franchise QB as possible to me is more valuable than a random late 1st DE or OT or WR or CB. Especially when you see what those QBs go for once they fail. Wentz failed and still managed to return 1st and a 3d. Darnold has been bottom 5 QB for his entire career and he still managed to return 2nd , 4th and 6th(this is about 1st round type value). QBs are valuable. I consider all top 4 QBs great prospects and amazing value at 21... so... if one of them falls... I run to the podium.

 

If Wentz returns to his MVP form... great... You have an MVP type QB and you have an amazing backup for a QB who's had injury problems for several years... or if he's amazing in practice and beats Wentz... maybe you trade Wentz. Or if he's good, but not better than Wentz I bet you can still get at least a second for him in a couple of years. And if Wentz fails you get a shot at a top tier talent with a modest investment. 

 

So yeah... this is my line of thinking here. 


You take BPA even if that position is filled.  The only exception at QB is if you have a Pro Bowl QB less than a decade into his career. Teams like the Chargers, Cardinals, Cowboys and Chiefs will not draft a QB even if Wilson falls to them. If a player is clearly graded highest at 3T, OG or WLB....you take him if no trade is offered worth considering. A team can’t have too many good players. It works itself out long term. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AwesomeAustin said:


You take BPA even if that position is filled.  The only exception at QB is if you have a Pro Bowl QB less than a decade into his career. Teams like the Chargers, Cardinals, Cowboys and Chiefs will not draft a QB even if Wilson falls to them. If a player is clearly graded highest at 3T, OG or WLB....you take him if no trade is offered worth considering. A team can’t have too many good players. It works itself out long term. 

I agree. There is just so much turnover in the league. You don't know what will happen a year or two in the future, who is going to get injured, who is going to retire out of nowhere, who will suffer drop in form, etc. That's why absolutely agree - get the best value available even if you think that position is already strong on your roster. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, stitches said:

Of course that's within reason. Although... to be honest... I personally would draft one of the top 4 QBs if he falls even with Wentz on the roster... but I know I'm in the small minority here and I know Ballard would never do that. And I think it would be a mistake not to take him if he fell(Lance or Fields lets say) . Getting as many good shots at a franchise QB as possible to me is more valuable than a random late 1st DE or OT or WR or CB. Especially when you see what those QBs go for once they fail. Wentz failed and still managed to return 1st and a 3d. Darnold has been bottom 5 QB for his entire career and he still managed to return 2nd , 4th and 6th(this is about 1st round type value). QBs are valuable. I consider all top 4 QBs great prospects and amazing value at 21... so... if one of them falls... I run to the podium.

 

If Wentz returns to his MVP form... great... You have an MVP type QB and you have an amazing backup for a QB who's had injury problems for several years... or if he's amazing in practice and beats Wentz... maybe you trade Wentz. Or if he's good, but not better than Wentz I bet you can still get at least a second for him in a couple of years. And if Wentz fails you get a shot at a top tier talent with a modest investment. 

 

So yeah... this is my line of thinking here. 

Drafting a QB at 21 means you have no faith in Wentz whatsoever 

 

You have buried him before he even threw a pass

 

the undertaker GIF

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Drafting a QB at 21 means you have no faith in Wentz whatsoever 

 

You have buried him before he even threw a pass

 

the undertaker GIF

Nah. It doesn't. It means I have good understanding that Wentz is not a surefire franchise QB at this point of his career and I'm doubling my chances I hit on one in case he doesn't pan out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, stitches said:

Nah. It doesn't. It means I have good understanding that Wentz is not a surefire franchise QB at this point of his career and I'm doubling my chances I hit on one in case he doesn't pan out. 

Perhaps a move like that would light a fire under him like Rodgers with Love

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Perhaps a move like that would light a fire under him like Rodgers with Love

That would be great if it happened. But didn't he have the chance to do that last year? 

  • Thanks 1
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.

×
×
  • Create New...