Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts re-sign CB TJ Carrie (MERGE)


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

OK.....    the internet works out here in California.     Here's what I found.

 

Currently, right now,  on NFL.com,  you can go to the draft prospects section.   Load-up the year 2017,  and see how they were ranked.    Quincy Wilson is the 64th ranked player from that year.    He's the 4th name down on page 4 and it's 20 players per page.  

Look at his numeric rating. It's the same as a ton of guys. He's one of 34 guys rated 6.2

That would make him tied for 63rd to 96th.

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Here are the other rankings.

The worst, highest, is Kiper at pick 79.

PFF has him at 60.

Mayock has him 46.

McShay and Legwold at ESPN, both, separately have him at pick 31.

Jeremiah has him at pick 27.

So again... all over the place. As I said, it goes back to scouts and GMs hitting or missing. If you give credit for the hits, you have to give credit for the misses. This was a miss.

 

And it really doesn't matter where talking heads have a guy as Ballard says. When he was drafted, many didn't like the pick and thought he was potentially a product of FL just having a good overall secondary. Keep in mind he wasn't even the best CB on FL's team that year and was playing CB2.

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

It's funny now how you make Rhodes an easy decision to sign.    He was coming off two terrible years.   No one predicted he'd have the bounceback he did.    Now you make it seem obvious because he had a long track record.   And Carrie's track was such that he was signed late in the FA process.    Few here were excited about the signing.    Now you want to minimize accomplishment by making it seemed like anyone would do what CB did.

I didn't say it was easy. I said they had NFL history to judge. Both were very very cheap, so little risk. Carrie was considered a very solid backup at Cleveland, so not sure why anyone gets credit one way or another. He's the same player here as he's been before, and that is a solid backup. And Rhodes being cheap, and especially transitioning to a heavy zone D, wasn't exactly a huge gamble. 

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

No one is perfect.  Especially not in the world of personnel.   We will know more about Rock by the end of the year.

I still have hope for RYS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

Look at his numeric rating. It's the same as a ton of guys. He's one of 34 guys rated 6.2

That would make him tied for 63rd to 96th.

So again... all over the place. As I said, it goes back to scouts and GMs hitting or missing. If you give credit for the hits, you have to give credit for the misses. This was a miss.

 

And it really doesn't matter where talking heads have a guy as Ballard says. When he was drafted, many didn't like the pick and thought he was potentially a product of FL just having a good overall secondary. Keep in mind he wasn't even the best CB on FL's team that year and was playing CB2.

I didn't say it was easy. I said they had NFL history to judge. Both were very very cheap, so little risk. Carrie was considered a very solid backup at Cleveland, so not sure why anyone gets credit one way or another. He's the same player here as he's been before, and that is a solid backup. And Rhodes being cheap, and especially transitioning to a heavy zone D, wasn't exactly a huge gamble. 

I still have hope for RYS.

 

Sorry,  long response.   Much to respond to.

 

To the Wilson ranking....   sorry, no.    That's NOT the way it works.    Wison may be tied in grade with over 30-something other players,  but at some point,  you have to rank them in order of preference   And Zierlein ranks has him at 64.  He could've been ranked at any of the other spots.   But he wasn't.   He was slotted at 64.   That's how this works.   

 

And while you  can call it "all over the map"  a number of good evaluators have him with a first round grade.   The worst was Kiper with a mid-3rd round grade.   We took Wilson right in the middle of the range of rankings.   Mid-40's.    There isn't an issue with where we took him.   Tabor may have been CB1 for Florida,  but he was not a better NFL prospect.   He tested badly and slipped.   Wilson was the youngest player in the draft.   The size of a safety.   He had better upside and long range potential.  Unfortunately,   he wasn't mature enough and it hasn't worked out for him at any stop.   But he was drafted roughly where he should have been.   

 

Carrie may or may not have been a good solid back-up,  but he was a BIG disappointment in Cleveland.   He was signed to a big deal.   $8 mill per.    That's starter money, not back-up.   Cut after two years.    And no one was interested until late in the process.   Ballard found value in the discount isle.

 

The gamble regarding Rhodes was this....    what if he didn't work out?    We signed him to be no less than CB2, and CB1 if things went well.    The $$ cost may not have been much.   But now imagine how this forum would look at Ballard if Rhodes was a bust and his play cost us a playoff spot?   The gamble was signing someone on a cheap deal.   People would be screaming that Ballard got what he paid for and why didn't he sign someone better to a bigger deal?   It would've been a lost opportunity to do better.

 

Again....  I'm not clearing Ballard of blame.   But no one bats 1,000 in this business.   A first rounder is considered by some to be a 50-50 proposition.   On balance, I think Ballard has done well.   Hope you'll note my post from the other day where I disagreed with Greg Rosenthal calling Ballard the best GM when it comes to the draft.   I think that's wrong and I explained why.

 

We will have a better idea by the end of this season.  Guys like Turay and Lewis from the 18 class,  plus the first four from the 19 class...   RYS, BB,  Parris and Oke.   If those guys come through,  Ballard's drafting will look even better.    And if not, we will see when the winter of 22 comes around.

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

 

Sorry,  long response.   Much to respond to.

 

To the Wilson ranking....   sorry, no.    That's NOT the way it works.    Wison may be tied in grade with over 30-something other players,  but at some point,  you have to rank them in order of preference   And Zierlein ranks has him at 64.  He could've been ranked at any of the other spots.   But he wasn't.   He was slotted at 64.   That's how this works. 

 

You're reaching here. NFL.com has always done tiers or buckets. NZ graded him the same as as a bunch of other guys at 6.2 which is "Good backup who could become starter".  Not 6.21, not 6.19... 6.2, the same as 30+ other guys. 

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

 

And while you  can call it "all over the map"  a number of good evaluators have him with a first round grade.   The worst was Kiper with a mid-3rd round grade.   We took Wilson right in the middle of the range of rankings.   Mid-40's.    There isn't an issue with where we took him.   Tabor may have been CB1 for Florida,  but he was not a better NFL prospect.   He tested badly and slipped.   Wilson was the youngest player in the draft.   The size of a safety.   He had better upside and long range potential.  Unfortunately,   he wasn't mature enough and it hasn't worked out for him at any stop.   But he was drafted roughly where he should have been.   

You call them evaluators. They are talking heads. And as I mentioned, Ballard said he doesn't care what those guys think. It's his board. He missed, plain and simple. 

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Carrie may or may not have been a good solid back-up,  but he was a BIG disappointment in Cleveland.   He was signed to a big deal.   $8 mill per.    That's starter money, not back-up.   Cut after two years.    And no one was interested until late in the process.   Ballard found value in the discount isle.

He was cut because he had starter money. We picked him up on the rebound for cheap as a backup. Good signing for depth, but it's not genius. 

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

The gamble regarding Rhodes was this....    what if he didn't work out?    We signed him to be no less than CB2, and CB1 if things went well.    The $$ cost may not have been much.   But now imagine how this forum would look at Ballard if Rhodes was a bust and his play cost us a playoff spot?   The gamble was signing someone on a cheap deal.   People would be screaming that Ballard got what he paid for and why didn't he sign someone better to a bigger deal?   It would've been a lost opportunity to do better.

At worst he would have been CB2. Again, not genius. It worked out. He was a past pro-bowler for goodness sakes. Good signing on the cheap, and worked out well for our zone.

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Again....  I'm not clearing Ballard of blame.   But no one bats 1,000 in this business.   A first rounder is considered by some to be a 50-50 proposition.   On balance, I think Ballard has done well.   Hope you'll note my post from the other day where I disagreed with Greg Rosenthal calling Ballard the best GM when it comes to the draft.   I think that's wrong and I explained why.

 

We will have a better idea by the end of this season.  Guys like Turay and Lewis from the 18 class,  plus the first four from the 19 class...   RYS, BB,  Parris and Oke.   If those guys come through,  Ballard's drafting will look even better.    And if not, we will see when the winter of 22 comes around.

Nobody is saying everyone bats 1000. My only comment was he hasn't been good at CBs in the draft. You then proceeded to drive it off a cliff. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, DiogoSales said:

CB and DE, not good.

 

Ballard is a top 5 GM for sure, but those positions have been a issue at draft, and we're trying to solve by FA the last 2 years

Yup. I've always said there are 7 positions (below) you need to hit well in the draft if you want a healthy roster. All expensive, and all vital to success. The rest of the positions are cheaper and easier to fill in FA, or mid/late rounds. We've only hit on one in Ballard's years so far (current roster) and that's WILL. We've covered two long term via FA (Wentz, Buckner), have been covering 2 short term via FA, have one open hole (LT), and one aging vet (WR1). It would be really nice to get long term LT and Edge1 answers this coming draft.

 

QB

LT

WR1

Edge1

3T

CB1

WILL

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

Yup. I've always said there are 7 positions (below) you need to hit well in the draft if you want a healthy roster. All expensive, and all vital to success. The rest of the positions are cheaper and easier to fill in FA, or mid/late rounds. We've only hit on one in Ballard's years so far (current roster) and that's WILL. We've covered two long term via FA (Wentz, Buckner), have been covering 2 short term via FA, have one open hole (LT), and one aging vet (WR1). It would be really nice to get long term LT and Edge1 answers this coming draft.

 

QB

LT

WR1

Edge1

3T

CB1

WILL

Agreed. And we can all say that we need Money to pay our guys, but a Carl Lawson type of deal was possible and not done. 

 

Again, great GM, but still human, just as Polian was. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

Agreed. And we can all say that we need Money to pay our guys, but a Carl Lawson type of deal was possible and not done. 

 

Again, great GM, but still human, just as Polian was. 

Great so far. I've said many times, easier to be great improving a bad roster. Harder to maintain and improve a decent/good roster. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

Agreed. And we can all say that we need Money to pay our guys, but a Carl Lawson type of deal was possible and not done. 

 

Again, great GM, but still human, just as Polian was. 

Ballard didn’t like him. Just because fans think he would of been a good fit doesn’t mean Ballard did.

 

What happens if Turay and Lewis have monster years. We need to extend them on top of all the others we need to extend. We have a lot of money going out for this 2018 draft class. Hines also. This is going to be a very expensive draft class to re-sign.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

Agreed. And we can all say that we need Money to pay our guys, but a Carl Lawson type of deal was possible and not done. 

 

Again, great GM, but still human, just as Polian was. 

 

I mean it seemed the Bengals didn't care to keep Lawson either since they signed hendrickson to a similar deal that Lawson got (4 year 60 million vs 3 year 45 million). Granted the deal is slightly different with the Bengals having an out on the hendrickson deal after the first year and the Jets having an out after the 2nd year.

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

 

I mean it seemed the Bengals didn't care to keep Lawson either since they signed hendrickson to a similar deal that Lawson got (4 year 60 million vs 3 year 45 million). Granted the deal is slightly different with the Bengals having an out on the hendrickson deal after the first year and the Jets having an out after the 2nd year.

It's just an example, we had Money and edge free agents, TB with no money resign Barret. Those types of "no movement" is something that I don't like. Remember when we wasted some Manning years with horrible defenses? Yes, sometimes agressive FA pays up.

2 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

Ballard didn’t like him. Just because fans think he would of been a good fit doesn’t mean Ballard did.

 

What happens if Turay and Lewis have monster years. We need to extend them on top of all the others we need to extend. We have a lot of money going out for this 2018 draft class. Hines also. This is going to be a very expensive draft class to re-sign.

Lawson was a example. Expect turay and Lewis to have breakout years is hope, not plan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

CB and DE, not good.

 

Ballard is a top 5 GM for sure, but those positions have been a issue at draft, and we're trying to solve by FA the last 2 years

I'm confused. He has not been good at drafting DEs or CBs.  Isn't that the core to any good defense? The only good Dlinemen has acquired is thru a trade. Ballard is not the drafting genius that people want to assume he is. I would actually give more credit to Reich than Ballard for this teams success.  Go ahead and pile on me.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Surprised he’s back.  I thought he was brought in last year because of Tell opting out but i am not mad or disappointed he’s back.

I believe he was. However, this is like year 2 of Tell's contract and development, so bringing Carrie back will give him an additional year to develop. Maybe he makes the team, maybe he gets placed on the practice squad. I have a feeling he isn't going to be expected to play too much this year unless he proves it in OTA's and preseason, or unless there are a couple injuries. 

 

Plus, Kenny Moore plays slot and TJ Carrie is a backup slot CB. So if Moore is specifically hurt, Carrie could probably fill in Moore's spot 75% as good as he could. That alone is worth $2 million this year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I'm confused. He has not been good at drafting DEs or CBs.  Isn't that the core to any good defense? The only good Dlinemen has acquired is thru a trade. Ballard is not the drafting genius that people want to assume he is. I would actually give more credit to Reich than Ballard for this teams success.  Go ahead and pile on me.

I'll pile on you here. Ballard has put together a great team since taking over in 2017. We lost Luck (I blame a combination of Grigson and Luck himself for this), and that ruined 2019 and stunted our growth in 2020 with a one-year stopgap in Rivers. We have Wentz now. He's 28 years old. We'll get a decade out of him to compete if he's above-average or better. He has the chemistry with Reich.

 

Remember, if Ballard hadn't built a solid team before getting Wentz after Luck retired, we'd be back to 2012. However, because Ballard did the foundation first, we can now try and compete again for a decade with Wentz immediately. We have a few weaknesses, but we have the draft and the rest of the offseason to fill them. We do need to improve our DEs. We can still sign Houston back and/or draft an EDGE in the first two rounds. CBs we re-signed Rhodes and Carrie, and Ballard has shown interest in Newsome, Farley, and Asante Samuel. We could easily take a CB at 21, or trade down and get one. We will get a couple starters out of the draft. 

 

I wanted an EDGE too, and thought it was a mistake to sign Hilton back and not an EDGE in FA, but we have to re-sign our own as well, and a 5 year deal to an EDGE for 12-15 million a year will take away money short and long-term. We have a reduced salary cap this year. The rest of that money will go towards draft picks, offseason depth signings after the draft and UDFA's, and Braden Smith, Darius Leonard, and Quenton Nelson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, DiogoSales said:

It's just an example, we had Money and edge free agents, TB with no money resign Barret. Those types of "no movement" is something that I don't like. Remember when we wasted some Manning years with horrible defenses? Yes, sometimes agressive FA pays up.

Lawson was a example. Expect turay and Lewis to have breakout years is hope, not plan.

I was talking more about money. If they have break our years they will need paid. Ballard I think wants to see what the younger guys can do in contract years. They need the playing time to see. It’s either going to be bad or they will step up. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I'm confused. He has not been good at drafting DEs or CBs.  Isn't that the core to any good defense? The only good Dlinemen has acquired is thru a trade. Ballard is not the drafting genius that people want to assume he is. I would actually give more credit to Reich than Ballard for this teams success.  Go ahead and pile on me.

Leonard, Walker, Okereke, Blackmon, Willis, a good part of our defense are draft picks and way better than most of our last 5-8 years guys at those positions. It's not that good, but it's not that bad either, for sure well above average

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Wentzszn said:

I was talking more about money. If they have break our years they will need paid. Ballard I think wants to see what the younger guys can do in contract years. They need the playing time to see. It’s either going to be bad or they will step up. 

I can understand the thinking, but I cannot agree. To see whats players have you have otas, training camp, pra season, practice. We you do a Project and want to check concept, you do a pilot (practice), you dont go live with hope.

 

We can build tru draft, but some pieces are too important to not have plan A and B, DE is one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard has put together a great team since taking over in 2017. We lost Luck (I blame a combination of Grigson and Luck himself for this), and that ruined 2019

 

We have Wentz now. He's 28 years old. We'll get a decade out of him to compete if he's above-average or better. He has the chemistry with Reich.

 

Remember, if Ballard hadn't built a solid team before getting Wentz after Luck retired, we'd be back to 2012. However, because Ballard did the foundation first, we can now try and compete again for a decade with Wentz immediately. We have a few weaknesses, but we have the draft and the rest of the offseason to fill them. We do need to improve our DEs. We can still sign Houston back and/or draft an EDGE in the first two rounds. CBs we re-signed Rhodes and Carrie, and Ballard has shown interest in Newsome, Farley, and Asante Samuel. We could easily take a CB at 21, or trade down and get one. We will get a couple starters out of the draft. 

Well said. 

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

I can understand the thinking, but I cannot agree. To see whats players have you have otas, training camp, pra season, practice. We you do a Project and want to check concept, you do a pilot (practice), you dont go live with hope.

 

We can build tru draft, but some pieces are too important to not have plan A and B, DE is one of them.

We all know practice doesn’t mean much. It does no good for Turay or Banogu if they don’t get time to evaluate them. I don’t think we will be bad. We will add a DE or two in the draft to go along with what we have and possibility sign Houston . I am more worried about the backup 3t with Autry gone. We seen what happened when Buckner and Autry both missed the TN game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2021 at 9:52 AM, DiogoSales said:

Expect turay and Lewis to have breakout years is hope, not plan.

Then every single draft is "hope and not a plan". Successful development is a part of every, single, well constructed NFL team.

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

    • His breakout game came against the Eagles mid way through his rookie season.  Indy was a big underdog that day and killed the Eagles in Philly. 
    • For those that didn't see it, here's the exclusionary flow chart of the surgeries from 1958 - 2016       I count two studies (one with 95 cases, the other with 80, one of which Dr.Parekh was involved in) having a nearly identical average of a 72.5% return to sport rate-   "One previous study investigated RTS and postoperative performance for players who underwent Achilles tendon repair in the NFL. The prior study demonstrated an RTS of 72.5% in 80 NFL athletes. The RTS from this prior study is nearly identical to the results of the present study with an RTS of 72.4% in 95 NFL athletes." "Following Achilles tendon repair, less than 75% of players returned to the NFL. Postoperative career length was 1 season shorter than matched controls. No difference was observed in the number of games per season played com-pared to matched controls. Postoperative performance scores were significantly worse for RBs and LBs compared to preoperative, and LBs had significantly worse postoperative performance when compared to matched controls."   and the very small PARS mini open study at 78%.   I see a trend of some surgeons trying to move from open technique to a limited or mini-open technique (as opposed to a pure percutaneous repair).   Dr. Purekh:   “but the problem with a pure percutaneous solution is that you can’t see anything, so you can actually pierce the nerve.” The miniature-open technique requires only a 3 cm incision while the traditional approach of surgically treating Achilles tendon ruptures required an 8 cm to 12 cm incision. “One of the biggest issues with the traditional model was long-term immobilization, and there was about an 8% to 10% chance of an infection or wound healing problem,” he notes. “The benefit of doing the mini-open technique is that your incisions are much smaller, so your wound complication rate postoperatively is under 1% or 0.5%."   This minimally invasive miniature-open technique is heavily dependent on special tools (PARS Achilles Jig System by Anthrex, Inc.: Naples, FL; Achillon Achilles Tendon Suture System by Integra LifeSciences Corp.: Plainsboro, NJ), and can add in costs up to $800 to 1,000 per use.   Dr. Selene G. Parekh, of Duke University, has pioneered a minimally invasive mini-open technique that does not use specialized equipment, and has adapted the miniature-open technique to require only standard operating room tools, such as surgical clamps and forceps, etc. to be able to grab the Achilles tendon and pass suture.   “You don't have to worry about a special instrument lining up properly in order to grab the tendon, so the whole procedure now takes about 20 to 30 minutes whereas traditionally it took 45 minutes to an hour,” he says.   While mini-open repair is available at Duke (and elsewhere), only Dr. Parekh is performing Achilles repair via this new technique without the need of special instruments.  I'm interested to see what types of improved outcomes become apparent besides the time and cost savings up front.      
    • What did I say?  What did I say?  Didn't I say it was bad luck to change your number?  And it's not like your already behind the eight ball, being from Ohio State.  OMG.  *facepalm*
    • I really like the Vaughn's  kid think he will be a Hakeem knicks type player who can catch in traffic  
  • Members

    • cdgacoltsfan

      cdgacoltsfan 686

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • HOZER

      HOZER 3,763

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • PeterBowman

      PeterBowman 1,492

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Archer

      Archer 727

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DiogoSales

      DiogoSales 108

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BeanDiasucci

      BeanDiasucci 194

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • il vecchio

      il vecchio 117

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • mirobi48

      mirobi48 38

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • KB

      KB 319

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Les Poulains

      Les Poulains 10

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