Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Peter King FMIA article tells Colts draft plans?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

 

The Best Star Ship Captain ever.....but he had a excellent crew too.

Spock, best first officer in fleet.

Scotty, best engineer I ever seen. He knew more about the warp engines than the designers. :applause:

A couple asked me to settle their argument of which was the better janeway or Picard.   Neither.  It’s Kirk all the way.   

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I don't see that value at 21 for Dend. I'm sticking to corner lol

Given the comments from the Colts about Turay and Lewis, I would not be surprised if Ballard waited until the 4th round to take a DE.  Let Turay and Lewis have the seniority and the new guy be the apprentice.  I think that's how Ballard might look at it since he already has two young guys to take over for the old guys that left...Turay for Houston and Lewis for Autry.  I don't think its a coincidence that those are the two most prominent players to not have resigned.

 

Maybe one of the two players from PITT or Cam Sample, Elerson Smith, Chauncey Golston.....

 

Sure, if a real playmaking edge drops to 21, who knows, but look for OT in the first round then Move TE at 54.  A slight trade back from either 21 or 54 would not change that strategy.

 

We can't devote capital to the WR corps since both Campbell and TY might do well.  But giving Wentz another weapon makes sense to me.  I don't think there is any question that we are adding a TE this draft.  Maybe its Ertz somehow.  But no way we go into May with only one-year-left Doyle and MAC.   OT, TE, and DE are pretty thin.

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

Given the comments from the Colts about Turay and Lewis, I would not be surprised if Ballard waited until the 4th round to take a DE.  Let Turay and Lewis have the seniority and the new guy be the apprentice.  I think that's how Ballard might look at it since he already has two young guys to take over for the old guys that left...Turay for Houston and Lewis for Autry.  I don't think its a coincidence that those are the two most prominent players to not have resigned.

 

Maybe one of the two players from PITT or Cam Sample, Elerson Smith, Chauncey Golston.....

 

Sure, if a real playmaking edge drops to 21, who knows, but look for OT in the first round then Move TE at 54.  A slight trade back from either 21 or 54 would not change that strategy.

 

We can't devote capital to the WR corps since both Campbell and TY might do well.  But giving Wentz another weapon makes sense to me.  I don't think there is any question that we are adding a TE this draft.  Maybe its Ertz somehow.  But no way we go into May with only one-year-left Doyle and MAC.   OT, TE, and DE are pretty thin.

I agree with all of this with the exception of not taking a WR.  Can't count on TY after this year.  I think they need to take one in this strong class.  

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

I agree with all of this with the exception of not taking a WR.  Can't count on TY after this year.  I think they need to take one in this strong class.  

It depends upon how they use the Move TE.  I think the future of the outside spots are Pittman and Campbell.  We need a bully slot type and that could be a big WR like Nico Collins or a small TE like Brevin Jordan, Tremble, or Tre McKitty.

 

Campbell is the unknown, but I don't think we look for that home run outside guy this year.  They tend to be expensive and we have other expensive positions to fund this year.

 

Edit:  If you take my above post and replace TE with "Nico Collins", that would work too, which I think is also consistent with a mock draft a Colts beat writer made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Zoltan said:

 

Since I expect something like this to happen, I'll have to step outside and see if I can hear you lol

 

I'm glad I will be out in the woods camping Thursday night!  Don't need to worry about any of this until I get back after the weekend.  I can wait until Monday to find out who we drafted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, gspdx said:

 

I'm glad I will be out in the woods camping Thursday night!  Don't need to worry about any of this until I get back after the weekend.  I can wait until Monday to find out who we drafted.

No cell reception or radio?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, DougDew said:

It depends upon how they use the Move TE.  I think the future of the outside spots are Pittman and Campbell.  We need a bully slot type and that could be a big WR like Nico Collins or a small TE like Brevin Jordan, Tremble, or Tre McKitty.

 

Campbell is the unknown, but I don't think we look for that home run outside guy this year.  They tend to be expensive and we have other expensive positions to fund this year.

 

Edit:  If you take my above post and replace TE with "Nico Collins", that would work too, which I think is also consistent with a mock draft a Colts beat writer made.

Yes I saw that mock draft with Collins and his selection made a lot of sense in the write up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Myles said:

No cell reception or radio?

 

I hope not!  When I am out I don't like the electronic distractions and I will be in North Idaho.

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

Given the comments from the Colts about Turay and Lewis, I would not be surprised if Ballard waited until the 4th round to take a DE.  Let Turay and Lewis have the seniority and the new guy be the apprentice.  I think that's how Ballard might look at it since he already has two young guys to take over for the old guys that left...Turay for Houston and Lewis for Autry.  I don't think its a coincidence that those are the two most prominent players to not have resigned.

 

Maybe one of the two players from PITT or Cam Sample, Elerson Smith, Chauncey Golston.....

 

Sure, if a real playmaking edge drops to 21, who knows, but look for OT in the first round then Move TE at 54.  A slight trade back from either 21 or 54 would not change that strategy.

 

We can't devote capital to the WR corps since both Campbell and TY might do well.  But giving Wentz another weapon makes sense to me.  I don't think there is any question that we are adding a TE this draft.  Maybe its Ertz somehow.  But no way we go into May with only one-year-left Doyle and MAC.   OT, TE, and DE are pretty thin.

This is a pretty decent analysis. I could see the move TE and DE slots being switched, especially if Ballard can procure a 3rd rounder in a trade down from #21. I like Elerson Smith and the fact that he was an alpha performer at the Sr. Bowl makes him a potential Ballard target. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Hoose said:

This is a pretty decent analysis. I could see the move TE and DE slots being switched, especially if Ballard can procure a 3rd rounder in a trade down from #21. I like Elerson Smith and the fact that he was an alpha performer at the Sr. Bowl makes him a potential Ballard target. 

I guess Ballard has shown interest in Nico Collins and Tommy Tremble, FWIW.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, craigerb said:

For those who don't get it: "BPA for a need" is just the same as a draft for need.

Kind of since most teams will feel they drafted the best player for a need.  I just think most experts view "draft for a need" as being the glaring need a team has.   That would be like LT, Edge and TE for the Colts.   However if a great corner (Jaycee Horn) would fall to 21, they could be the BPA on the board and Ballard could draft him even though CB is not one of the top needs of the team.     

Link to post
Share on other sites

The deviation in grades is crazy this year.  So trust your board.  Colts need to take the best LT option they have and not mess around.  You can trade back say 10 picks then see 3 or 4 guys go right off the board because there just aren't enough human beings who can do what they do.

 

There are a lot of options.  Now maybe they're gonna be picky and if so ok then move up and get a guy you really love.  Trading up isn't in vogue but it does provide you more certainty than the other options.  They have to hit on LT.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

The deviation in grades is crazy this year.  So trust your board.  Colts need to take the best LT option they have and not mess around.  You can trade back say 10 picks then see 3 or 4 guys go right off the board because there just aren't enough human beings who can do what they do.

 

There are a lot of options.  Now maybe they're gonna be picky and if so ok then move up and get a guy you really love.  Trading up isn't in vogue but it does provide you more certainty than the other options.  They have to hit on LT.

 

That's just it... There are tiers... 

A lot of boards have 

 

Tier 1

Sewell - prototypical LT

Slater - some project him at G due to lack of length

 

Tier 1.5

Darrisaw - prototypical LT

Jenkins - many project him at G due to arms.

 

Tier 2

Leatherwood - projected at G or T. Better at run blocking than pass pro

Stone Forsythe - better at pass pro than run blocking. Gotta love the name though.

Liam Eichenberg - polished, but not high ceiling traits guy. Some project him to move to RT

Sam Cosmi - many analysts expected more out of 3 year starter, but solid LT prospect. Better pass pro than run

Dillon Radunz - small school G or T prospect that will need some time and S&C

Spencer Brown - another small school guy who has played RT, but many think he can move to LT with S&C. Great traits.

Walker Little - was considered Sewell level (#1 LT) prior to injury and opting out

Jalen Mayfield - good traits, needs technique

 

This is NFL.com's read out or stack, but it's similar to many others. And teams will all have their spins on prospects.

 

But overall my thoughts are 

  • Sewell and Darrisaw, the two no-brainer prototypical LTs will be gone by 21.
  • Slater and Jenkins probably gone too, but even if they are not, many project them at G.
  • After those 4, you have a mix of solid not elite prospects from big schools, a few high ceiling and potentially elite guys (with time), and a guy like Little who was considered elite, but hasn't played in 2 years.

 

So in short, if you're not getting Darrisaw or Sewell, you have basically 10 guys that could be ranked differently on a any team's board, but are all sort of "debatable" where they should fall in the board ranks. 

 

To the first bolded in your post, there are likely to be several graded near the same, and if they like a guy, or guys, who THEY think is the best fit for our situation might be available later, they may choose to "mess around" and wait.

 

To the second bolded. Sure they want to hit. That doesn't mean they can't take a guy they think might need a little time. They have options. You may not like the options, but they have options. Moving Q or Smith are options. Starting Tevi for a short while, or picking up a vet FA (there are still a few available like Okung, Villanueva) are options. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, EastStreet said:

You may not like the options, but they have options.

Just throwing out my opinion.  Never said the team would agree.  And I don't consider moving Q to be an option.  They're not going to do that.

 

I also think there are a lot of sites that have flawed lists this year so I'm going mostly off what I'm seeing on game tape.  There is also more deviation between team boards than probably any draft in recent memory too.  This is going to be a wild west draft.  And there are quite a few OT names being thrown around that aren't really fits for the Colts' LT need.

 

There are a lot of RT types in this draft who may be able to move over.  But none of those guys step in year one and play LT in this offense.  All of them will require some time but the Colts need someone to start year one.

 

That's my perspective.  Not saying you're wrong by any means.  But some of the options like Q moving over are not really things they will consider.  Rather what is going to happen is they will target one of a few really nice options at LT and take one of them.  Those options IMO:

 

1. Radunz.  No significant concerns but has all the tools.  This means he will go far earlier than my are listing him.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

2. Little.  Lack of game film is a significant concern but he's going to play LT in the NFL.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts..

 

3. Eichenberg.  He's a guy whose own coach said will be a RT due to his arms but his film is so good I consider him to be a true LT.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

Not really considering the guys who go earlier.  It's not realistic to get into those top 3 they won't make 21.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Boondoggle said:

Just throwing out my opinion.  Never said the team would agree.  And I don't consider moving Q to be an option.  They're not going to do that.

 

I also think there are a lot of sites that have flawed lists this year so I'm going mostly off what I'm seeing on game tape.  There is also more deviation between team boards than probably any draft in recent memory too.  This is going to be a wild west draft.  And there are quite a few OT names being thrown around that aren't really fits for the Colts' LT need.

 

There are a lot of RT types in this draft who may be able to move over.  But none of those guys step in year one and play LT in this offense.  All of them will require some time but the Colts need someone to start year one.

 

That's my perspective.  Not saying you're wrong by any means.  But some of the options like Q moving over are not really things they will consider.  Rather what is going to happen is they will target one of a few really nice options at LT and take one of them.  Those options IMO:

 

1. Radunz.  No significant concerns but has all the tools.  This means he will go far earlier than my are listing him.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

2. Little.  Lack of game film is a significant concern but he's going to play LT in the NFL.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts..

 

3. Eichenberg.  He's a guy whose own coach said will be a RT due to his arms but his film is so good I consider him to be a true LT.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

Not really considering the guys who go earlier.  It's not realistic to get into those top 3 they won't make 21.

Agree with your concept here.  The Colts need a LT who is pretty ready from day one.  Could start maybe after the bye.  The guys who qualify, IMO, would be consistent starters at the LT position in college AND have NFL LT traits.

 

The players that fit those attributes that should be available are Radunz, Leatherwood, and Cosmi. 

 

Jenkins and Brown fall a bit short. 

 

Little seems like too big of a ? to actually rely on him stepping up season 1.

 

Pass on Eichenberg.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

Just throwing out my opinion.  Never said the team would agree.  And I don't consider moving Q to be an option.  They're not going to do that.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just pointing out it's not a crystal clear picture after only a few prototypical guys (both likely gone by 21). As far as Q goes, I hope they don't, but it is an option, and they did use him already at LT last year. 

4 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

 

I also think there are a lot of sites that have flawed lists this year so I'm going mostly off what I'm seeing on game tape.  There is also more deviation between team boards than probably any draft in recent memory too.  This is going to be a wild west draft.  And there are quite a few OT names being thrown around that aren't really fits for the Colts' LT need.

 

There are a lot of RT types in this draft who may be able to move over.  But none of those guys step in year one and play LT in this offense.  All of them will require some time but the Colts need someone to start year one.

There are varying opinions on a lot of guys, but the better big boards are somewhat consistent. How I summarized them is pretty consistent across most BBs. 

 

And I disagree on some being able to step in year one. Having Q at LG creates somewhat of an environment that allows for a bit of imperfection or error early. Having Q to your right allows a newbie LT concentrate more on the edge in pass pro. 

4 hours ago, Boondoggle said:

 

That's my perspective.  Not saying you're wrong by any means.  But some of the options like Q moving over are not really things they will consider.  Rather what is going to happen is they will target one of a few really nice options at LT and take one of them.  Those options IMO:

 

1. Radunz.  No significant concerns but has all the tools.  This means he will go far earlier than my are listing him.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

2. Little.  Lack of game film is a significant concern but he's going to play LT in the NFL.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts..

 

3. Eichenberg.  He's a guy whose own coach said will be a RT due to his arms but his film is so good I consider him to be a true LT.  Starts at LT year one for the Colts.

 

Not really considering the guys who go earlier.  It's not realistic to get into those top 3 they won't make 21.

Radunz is one of the guys that will need time. But I do think he could step in and start year one given Q is at his side. Little will have rust and need a little time, but he'll be fine. Eichenberg is polished enough to go early, but will likely never be a wow kind of LT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 6:43 AM, DougDew said:

Given the comments from the Colts about Turay and Lewis, I would not be surprised if Ballard waited until the 4th round to take a DE.  Let Turay and Lewis have the seniority and the new guy be the apprentice.  I think that's how Ballard might look at it since he already has two young guys to take over for the old guys that left...Turay for Houston and Lewis for Autry.  I don't think its a coincidence that those are the two most prominent players to not have resigned.

 

Maybe one of the two players from PITT or Cam Sample, Elerson Smith, Chauncey Golston.....

 

Sure, if a real playmaking edge drops to 21, who knows, but look for OT in the first round then Move TE at 54.  A slight trade back from either 21 or 54 would not change that strategy.

 

We can't devote capital to the WR corps since both Campbell and TY might do well.  But giving Wentz another weapon makes sense to me.  I don't think there is any question that we are adding a TE this draft.  Maybe its Ertz somehow.  But no way we go into May with only one-year-left Doyle and MAC.   OT, TE, and DE are pretty thin.

I agree. They need OT,TE and corner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 12:05 PM, craigerb said:

What your best overall score? Mine is B+

B + is really good. Think the ratings are a little off base. Its skewed to address what the program perceives to be addressing need only. I have gotten an overall A grade a few times but I was only picking up a few positions that included 3DL or 3Ol. Not realistic IMO. 1018011984_pff_mock_results(18).png.98278b1c05540092440db8645c4d13df.png1018011984_pff_mock_results(18).png.98278b1c05540092440db8645c4d13df.png1018011984_pff_mock_results(18).png.98278b1c05540092440db8645c4d13df.png

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

There are varying opinions on a lot of guys, but the better big boards are somewhat consistent. How I summarized them is pretty consistent across most BBs. 

 

And I disagree on some being able to step in year one. Having Q at LG creates somewhat of an environment that allows for a bit of imperfection or error early. Having Q to your right allows a newbie LT concentrate more on the edge in pass pro. 

I think it's much more likely I am wrong re: who can start LT year one than that I'm wrong re: needing someone who can start year one. 

 

Re: rankings what you've been seeing the past few weeks is sites moving guys to limit the differences.  Radunz for example has been climbing of late, probably due to these sites hearing that their boards are off on this guy or that guy.  Pretty sure GBN had him in the 50s recently as last week but he's at 40 now and 30 range with Draft Network and PFF.  But in a normal draft there's a ton more consensus on guys than there is this year and there are obvious reasons for that.  It's a known issue this year and some teams, the teams who do better diligence on the players, really stand to benefit.

 

The reason I disregard Q is because he is so much better where he is.  You don't mess with that.  He's a fallback but with this year's OT options it won't be necessary to go that route.

 

Vera-Tucker is probably the guy I waffle on the most.  I really love his film but it's hard to say he's gonna be able to play that blind side.  I'd love to see their scouting report on him.  He reminds me of Moton who could probably play LT but is at RT in the NFL.

 

Thankfully we're gonna find out soon too.  This year the wait has really killed me.

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

    • Taking NE and Brady out of this because I think what they did was unique.   My observation is that the teams with the elite QB have more success BEFORE that QB gets paid his contract than after he gets paid.   SB teams have won, IMO, because they have gotten elite play from some players at the same time not compensating those players for the elite play.  They produce more than what the team pays them that season.   SEA was better when Russell Wilson was playing near elite QB before his contract. PITT was better when Ben was younger not being paid. I know injuries played a part, but the early Grigson Luck years were much better for the Colts than the $125M years. KC rode an elite Mahomes on a rookie contract to domination over recent seasons. BUFF is enjoying Allen's low pay day relative to his talent and play.  What will happen to them when he gets paid?   (and another version of that formula, even though Denver paid PM, they got a huge boost from an elite Von Miller playing an impactful position on a cheap rookie contract)   We made our bed when we picked a G at 6, and will pay him elite Olineman money.  I don't see where we are going to be putting the ball in our QBs hands every play and ask him to win the game when we are paying a G to also run block at an elite level.  We will probably always be more of a running team than the average playoff team because of our investment in our G.  Taking the ball out of our QBs hands means that we will not also be able to afford that top guy.   And we will win with Wentz if he outplays what has been invested in him.  If he plays like a 3rd rounder and future 1st (just for starting, IOW, because he happens to be the best QB on the roster) then we probably wont go deep into the playoffs.   Maybe we should have taken Fields and hoped he gave us elite play on the cheap before we'd have to decide between him and Nelson.   
    • I know what a strange baseball season so far. The Cubs have a good team overall, we are like all the other good teams in the NL basically. We have our ups and downs but that is baseball with a 162 game season. The only team in the NL right now that can say they have played great are the Giants at 45-25. Looking at all the good teams in the NL, they are all 8 games above .500 with the exception of the Dodgers who are 42-27. Cubs are 39-31, Padres 40-32, and Mets 35-27. So the other teams fans feel our misery when a loss happens as well. We really need to just start playing more consistent. It needs to start tomorrow with the Marlins who we are much better than.   If someone told me before the season started that we would be in 1st place in the NL Central through 70 games on June 19th, I would take it. That is the extreme positive way to look at this.
    • Who wouldve guessed that the only win for NL Central tonight would be the Pirates beating the Indians 
    • Brewers just lost to the Rockies again , we are still in 1st place in the NL Central. Cards lost as well and the Reds are down 5-2 to the Padres.
    • It was that comebacker. That seemed to effect his play after. Hopefully he's alright and returns back to before 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...