Quenton Nelson

[GoHorse1992]

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

[Jason_]

4 minutes ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

 

It's have to be a great offer for me to even consider it. 

[lollygagger8]

10 minutes ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

 

 

[Smonroe]

Not that we really have a say in it, but it has to be a tough call for the Colts.

 

He is, when healthy, probably the best G in the league.  He brings an attitude to the line and team that's hard to quantify.  And he's a guy we love.

 

Then on the other hand, a guy like Reed is serviceable.  Does the team really hurt when he's in the lineup as opposed to Q?

 

I'm not a big "We need draft picks" guy.  Even first rounders aren't sure things.  Q is a sure thing.  But is he worth the expense for what his position provides?  Could that money and draft pick(s) improve the team?

 

I'm glad I'm not a GM.

[MPStack]

Has a OG ever been traded to another team, for at least  a 1st? Honestly, I have no idea, but leans towards no. 

[Shadow_Creek]

20 minutes ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

looks like the Trolls are starting early this morning 

[MB-ColtsFan]

You don't find linemen like Q every generation, much less every few years.  I don't think we get anything close to what he's worth in return via trade.  We better resign him.

 

We don't know what he was asking for before his injury, BUT, now that he has missed his first start in his career and is now on IR one would have to think that the price is a bit less if not at least slightly more negotiable.  Hopefully we can agree on something that both can live with.  I trust CB.

 

 

[Shive]

1 minute ago, Shadow_Creek said:

looks like the Trolls are starting early this morning 

[GoHorse1992]

2 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

looks like the Trolls are starting early this morning 

Honestly not trying to be a troll! Just threw it out there! What if we pay him and his back gets so bad that he retires or is forced to retire! It’s valid to consider….not that I want to get rid of Q

[DougDew]

If we would trade him because we are concerned about his back, why would another team not be as concerned about his back?

 

The ship has sailed.  We drafted him #6.  He's played great.  You sign your best players.  We will move forward with one of our best players being a LG.  

[MPStack]

1 minute ago, MB-ColtsFan said:

You don't find linemen like Q every generation, much less every few years.  I don't think we get anything close to what he's worth in return via trade.  We better resign him.

 

We don't know what he was asking for before his injury, BUT, now that he has missed his first start in his career and is now on IR one would have to think that the price is a bit less if not at least slightly more negotiable.  Hopefully we can agree on something that both can live with.  I trust CB.

 

 

I doubt his price tag drops with the injury. Nelson, has not shown any past or concerning injury history. He’s going to be expensive to resign, and has earned it being a top 6 pick. No way the Colts are letting him go. 
 

Fire away @DougDew lol

[GoHorse1992]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

If we would trade him because we are concerned about his back, why would another team not be as concerned about his back?

 

The ship has sailed.  We drafted him #6.  He's played great.  You sign your best players.  We will move forward with one of our best players being a LG.  

Yes that is true but teams make dumb trades all the time. Someone would bite on the chance for Q in hopes that the back problems aren’t as bad as thought. I hope I am wrong and he goes on to have a long, prosperous career with the Colts. But lineman and back issues just doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.

[DougDew]

Just now, GoHorse1992 said:

Yes that is true but teams make dumb trades all the time. Someone would bite on the chance for Q in hopes that the back problems aren’t as bad as thought. I hope I am wrong and he goes on to have a long, prosperous career with the Colts. But lineman and back issues just doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.

They don't give me the warm fuzzies either.  They also don't give GMs the warm fuzzies.

 

If Ballard wanted to trade Q, it would be because he didn't think Q was worth the money given his position and his injury risk.  I don't see why another team would not think along those same lines as Ballard would be thinking.  I don't see another team biting if Ballard is making serious overtures about it.  Maybe if another team approached him with a big offer, sure, he'd think about it I guess.

[GoHorse1992]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

They don't give me the warm fuzzies either.  They also don't give GMs the warm fuzzies.

 

If Ballard wanted to trade Q, it would be because he didn't think Q was worth the money given his position and his injury risk.  I don't see why another team would not think along those same lines as Ballard would be thinking.  I don't see another team biting if Ballard is making serious overtures about it.  Maybe if another team approached him with a big offer, sure, he'd think about it I guess.

I guess that’s what I’m really thinking. I don’t think Ballard should actively shop him but if a team approaches and throws an awesome offer our way…what do you do knowing what you know? There’s risk either way….it just comes down to what Ballard thinks is best for the team in the long haul

[NannyMcafee]

Q is worth a top 10 draft pick. 

[MPStack]

5 minutes ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I guess that’s what I’m really thinking. I don’t think Ballard should actively shop him but if a team approaches and throws an awesome offer our way…what do you do knowing what you know? There’s risk either way….it just comes down to what Ballard thinks is best for the team in the long haul

If, a team offered multiple first for Q. (unlikely) l’d seriously consider it, due the $ Nelson is going to get at a non-premium position. Not going happen though. 

[ruf]

37 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Not that we really have a say in it, but it has to be a tough call for the Colts.

 

He is, when healthy, probably the best G in the league.  He brings an attitude to the line and team that's hard to quantify.  And he's a guy we love.

 

Then on the other hand, a guy like Reed is serviceable.  Does the team really hurt when he's in the lineup as opposed to Q?

 

I'm not a big "We need draft picks" guy.  Even first rounders aren't sure things.  Q is a sure thing.  But is he worth the expense for what his position provides?  Could that money and draft pick(s) improve the team?

 

I'm glad I'm not a GM.

Q is a sure thing so we keep him we have missed on high picks too much think of Hooker and those #2 picks

[Colt.45]

It's never going to happen. This is the path Chris Ballard has chosen. This is exactly what he wants, and he is 99.9999999% going to reward Q with the monster deal when the time comes.

 

Philosophically, i disagree with it, however once you're down the path, you're not suddenly going to turn back. You  follow through on what you started. I'd not have picked a guard at 6 but once that path was selected, and the player has proven to be everything you expected, you follow through, period.

[Tsarquise]

36 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

Not that we really have a say in it, but it has to be a tough call for the Colts.

 

He is, when healthy, probably the best G in the league.  He brings an attitude to the line and team that's hard to quantify.  And he's a guy we love.

 

Then on the other hand, a guy like Reed is serviceable.  Does the team really hurt when he's in the lineup as opposed to Q?

 

I'm not a big "We need draft picks" guy.  Even first rounders aren't sure things.  Q is a sure thing.  But is he worth the expense for what his position provides?  Could that money and draft pick(s) improve the team?

 

I'm glad I'm not a GM.

What exactly are people basing this on? How do you know he brings an attitude that affects all of the team? How would you know this unless you're in the locker room? I know you said it is hard to quantify, but I have seen this said often, and I am not sure why.

 

This certainly didn't seem to be the case when he has been out there this year. 

[EastStreet]

He's not going anywhere.

 

And highly doubt anyone would give up multiple 1sts for an OG regardless of stature. 

It's rare for an OG to be taken in the first, super rare top 10. How many in the past?

At least we were able to ride the cheap years. 

Any team that would be willing to trade, wouldn't get the cheap rook years.

Then throw in he has what the FO called chronic or lingering back issues.

 

Love Q, I'm an ND homer, and he's my favorite player. And I'm glad he's here. It was not however the most strategic use of draft capital. We could have probably traded back again with Buffalo and still got Q at 12 (while picking up more draft capital).

 

 

[Myles]

9 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

What exactly are people basing this on? How do you know he brings an attitude that affects all of the team? How would you know this unless you're in the locker room? I know you said it is hard to quantify, but I have seen this said often, and I am not sure why.

 

This certainly didn't seem to be the case when he has been out there this year. 

You haven't watched him play on the field apparently.  

[Smonroe]

8 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

What exactly are people basing this on? How do you know he brings an attitude that affects all of the team? How would you know this unless you're in the locker room? I know you said it is hard to quantify, but I have seen this said often, and I am not sure why.

 

This certainly didn't seem to be the case when he has been out there this year. 

To your first point, that’s been said by every coach and player when they talk about him. You can look up any interview and see.

 

To you second point “when healthy” is the key.  He hasn’t been.  

[DougDew]

54 minutes ago, MPStack said:

Has a OG ever been traded to another team, for at least  a 1st? Honestly, I have no idea, but leans towards no. 

They are generally either drafted or signed as FA. 

 

Back in the day, I think the Colts acquired G Ron Solt and T Chris Hinton and QB Mark Pagel in the John Elway trade, but that's the only trade I can think of where a G was construed to be in a trade of a first round pick.

[Shive]

5 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

What exactly are people basing this on? How do you know he brings an attitude that affects all of the team? How would you know this unless you're in the locker room? I know you said it is hard to quantify, but I have seen this said often, and I am not sure why.

 

This certainly didn't seem to be the case when he has been out there this year. 

It has been evident from the moment he started his first game for us. Inserting him into the OL instantly elevated the play of everyone else on the line and you could tell there was a nastiness about them all of a sudden.

 

Our OL probably hasn't shown that same level of nastiness due to the numerous injuries so far this season.

[EastStreet]

11 minutes ago, Tsarquise said:

What exactly are people basing this on? How do you know he brings an attitude that affects all of the team? How would you know this unless you're in the locker room? I know you said it is hard to quantify, but I have seen this said often, and I am not sure why.

 

This certainly didn't seem to be the case when he has been out there this year. 

He's a nasty dude. Has been since college.

This is one thing both the eye test and his grades easily support even if you aren't aware of his career dating back to ND.

He doesn't have to be a cheerleader or vocal leader. All he has to do is bring the nasty every game. 

The dude likely has twice as many pancakes as sacks given up (3) in 4 years. 

[MPStack]

16 minutes ago, DougDew said:

They are generally either drafted or signed as FA. 

 

Back in the day, I think the Colts acquired G Ron Solt and T Chris Hinton and QB Mark Pagel in the John Elway trade, but that's the only trade I can think of where a G was construed to be in a trade of a first round pick.

Hinton was included in the trade for Elway and the Colts used a first to select Solt. 

[EastStreet]

Just FYI, based on a quick google... 

 

Highest Gs taken the last 30-40 years...

 

2018 Nelson at #6

2013 Jonathan Cooper #7, bounced between LG and RG, kind of a bust, traded.

1986 Jim Dombrowski #6, but was a G/T, and taken to fill a hole at LT, but moved to LG the next year.

[Goatface Killah]

I got it! Ive finally figured out how to improve the team!

 

Lets trade our best players for unproven draft picks!!!!!

 

Genius!!!

[richard pallo]

If he is traded I think it's more likely for an excellent starting player like himself.  My guess would likely be WR, CB, or ER.  Both teams could include picks in the deal as well if needed. 

[NannyMcafee]

52 minutes ago, Colt.45 said:

It's never going to happen. This is the path Chris Ballard has chosen. This is exactly what he wants, and he is 99.9999999% going to reward Q with the monster deal when the time comes.

 

Philosophically, i disagree with it, however once you're down the path, you're not suddenly going to turn back. You  follow through on what you started. I'd not have picked a guard at 6 but once that path was selected, and the player has proven to be everything you expected, you follow through, period.

 

The line was in shambles and Andrew was getting hurt. It was the only logical choice at the time. 

[DougDew]

2 minutes ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

The line was in shambles and Andrew was getting hurt. It was the only logical choice at the time. 

Yep.  Immediate need and probably BPA overall, so it was logical.  Long term positional value was probably not high on the list of criteria at the time.

[csmopar]

1 hour ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

[IndyEric07]

If Q can continue to play like he has since being drafted, he’s a surefire possibly 1st ballot HOFer! Would you trade a player like that away??? Not me! If the back issue is chronic, and he can only play at a 75-80% level the rest of his career, hes still a top 5 OG in the league!

[Zoltan]

1 hour ago, GoHorse1992 said:

I mentioned this in another thread but thought it might deserve its own topic. This is purely a hypothetical scenario and I am not saying this should happen. I love me some Q. He came in and has been a dominant force that has completely changed our OL identity (at least before this year). His back concerns me though and I am not sure it would be prudent to pay him if the back will linger for the rest of his career. What are all your thoughts on this:

 

We trade Q for a first round pick and a player/or additional first round pick(might be a second with the back concerns). This would guarantee that we could re-coup the first that we may lose to the Eagles and potentially give us 2 first round picks. 

 

Again, not saying I am banging the table for this to happen as Q is such a big part of what we do and our identity. Just something to think about…

 

Makes sense, get multiple picks, that could be used to get a LT, not have to pay him huge money (which would allow us to have more flexibility in the offseason), and we have a serviceable player in Reed to replace him with. If this was madden I would totally do it, but I don't think it will ever happen.

[John Hammonds]

No matter how much we may debate it, or whatever decisions CB may make in the future, I think that history will remember the 2018 draft as THE decision of the Ballard tenure.

We had the #3 pick.  In a draft that featured now fewer than 5 first round quality QB's.

Yes, we had Andrew Luck.  A generational talent at QB, but who had a series of devastating injuries that could possible compromise any future he had in the NFL.  We could have chosen Sam Darnold at #3, walked away from Luck, and nobody would have blamed us.  (Okay, plenty of people at least on these boards would have.  But that's the world we live in.)  Or, instead, we could have chosen a quality DE, who was also on our board.

We didn't do either of those things.  Our front office thought it through and thought it through and thought it through.

We traded down from #3 to #6, and drafted a HOF guard in Nelson, drafted a multi-Pro Bowl LB in Leonard, and a good right tackle in Smith.

And we never looked back.

And we shouldn't.  THIS was the decision that created the Ballard Colts.  And we should play this hand out.  Completely.

[hoosierhawk]

Although I don't think it will happen, I think it is up for a reasonable discussion. I agree that no team would give up 2 1st rounders for an OG but someone may be dumb enough to offer a young very good DB plus a 1st rounder or something like that. As I stated, will never happen but not an unreasonable subject for discussion. Oh, and I also love Q.

[chad72]

Too much of a knee jerk reaction to the knee jerk sentiments following our 1-3 record, IMO.

 

OL is a position that takes time to mature, even for the highest draft picks in the NFL. For someone to come in right away and play at the highest level that Q has done for several years, is nothing short of amazing. You don't give up on it due to an out-of-character injury spell, it is downright illogical, at least not from the Colts' end unless some other end wows you with an offer of multiple 1st round picks, which typically only happens with trading QBs. 

 

A few more wins and we will be singing a different tune, that is just how it goes. Glad Polian did not give up on Bob Sanders coming back and making a difference for our SB run, now THAT was a player made of glass we could have given up on. Q's impact permeates through the rest of the OL, IMO. OL and DL are cornerstone positions that can last us a decade and provide stability, just like QB. On the other hand, DBs, WRs, after their second contract, typically fade away because their twitch declines over time faster. OL and DL, the elite ones, contribute at a high level longer, IMO. That is why you don't see highly touted OL and DL easily signable in the FA market and are expensive. You have one, keep him, period.

 

Like Polian said, "if you listen to the fans' sentiment, you will be sitting with them". I rest my case.

 

[BlackTiger]

I would do it for two firsts or maybe a first and good player.  I doubt any one would offer that for a LG

 

I still want to see him at LT and think this is the year to try it.

[Four2itus]

 

Remember when Peyton.....got beat 41-0 in the first round of the playoffs.................a, a, a, and a thread was started just like this to trade him?

 

 

[joecolts]

This isn't even a conversation, IMHO.  Best G in the NFL and, contradictory to a poster above may see, brings a NASTY attitude towards those on the other side of the ball.  He, when healthy, sets the tone for our line.  There is not fair market trade value to even discuss nor, is this something worth wasting space on to bring up.