Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Safeties in the draft


Recommended Posts

I know a free safety is a very important draft in the C3 that Gus Bradley plays.

 

Given the depth of WRs in this draft, would any of you think that our pick No. 42 would be a safety if we are not able to land a safety in FA?

 

Daxton Hill of Michigan is who I covet at No. 42. He has the speed, the twitch, the range, the fluid ability to change directions (6.57 3 cone drill number is insane, reminds me a bit of Kyle Dugger from last year) and the tackling skills Gus Bradley needs. The bonus, he does have 32 inch plus arms. :) 

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/dax-hill/32004849-4c16-4994-7b99-e93ebbf2d838

 

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Daxton-Hill-DB-Michigan

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/daxton-hill-michigan-s-nfl-draft-scouting-report-2022/

 

Thoughts???

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Kerby Joseph from Illinois. 33 1/8 inch arms. Great closing speed, plays that deep safety role very well. He stayed away from the 3 cone. He has some things to clean up but the talent is there. 5 INTs last year

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, chad72 said:

I know a free safety is a very important draft in the C3 that Gus Bradley plays.

 

Given the depth of WRs in this draft, would any of you think that our pick No. 42 would be a safety if we are not able to land a safety in FA?

 

Daxton Hill of Michigan is who I covet at No. 42. He has the speed, the twitch, the range, the fluid ability to change directions (6.57 3 cone drill number is insane, reminds me a bit of Kyle Dugger from last year) and the tackling skills Gus Bradley needs. The bonus, he does have 32 inch plus arms. :) 

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/dax-hill/32004849-4c16-4994-7b99-e93ebbf2d838

 

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Daxton-Hill-DB-Michigan

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/daxton-hill-michigan-s-nfl-draft-scouting-report-2022/

 

Thoughts???

 

Since 2004 when the Colts selected Sanders at Round 2/44 overall, they have only picked 3 safeties in the first three rounds...

2016 - T.J. Green 2/57

2017 - Malik Hooker 1/15

2020 - Julian Blackmon 3/85

 

It is interesting that from 2000-2010, the Colts selected 13 DB's in the first 3 rounds. In the last 11 years.....6.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that’s too high for a position not in need of an upgraded starter.  There are a lot of good athletes at the position later on.  Check out this Scott Nelson out of Wisconsin.  He had good stats and intangibles, so I was watching him for a late round pick.  Then he did this at his pro day:

 

https://www.si.com/college/wisconsin/.amp/badgers-in-the-nfl/results-pro-day-wisconsin-nfl-badgers
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Archer said:

I think that’s too high for a position not in need of an upgraded starter.  There are a lot of good athletes at the position later on.  Check out this Scott Nelson out of Wisconsin.  He had good stats and intangibles, so I was watching him for a late round pick.  Then he did this at his pro day:

 

https://www.si.com/college/wisconsin/.amp/badgers-in-the-nfl/results-pro-day-wisconsin-nfl-badgers
 

 

Yes, the safety position has eroded in importance over time. 

 

I do remember the Jaguars drafting Walker Little last year and there was a run on solid OTs in Round 2. I did wonder if Ballard had that in mind when he swapped picks with the Commanders in Round 2. From a positional importance point of view, an OT or CB at No.42 would trump safety, no doubt. However, a top notch system fit cannot be ignored and if the safety available is far greater value than a WR or OT at pick No.42, you have to consider it, IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Yes, the safety position has eroded in importance over time. 

 

I do remember the Jaguars drafting Walker Little last year and there was a run on solid OTs in Round 2. I did wonder if Ballard had that in mind when he swapped picks with the Redskins in Round 2. From a positional importance point of view, an OT at No.42 would trump safety, no doubt. However, a top notch system fit cannot be ignored and if the safety available is far greater value than a WR or OT at pick No.42, you have to consider it, IMO.

Commanders 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PuntersArePeopleToo said:

Commanders 

 

When it is ingrained in your memory, hard to erase it overnight, my bad. But is that the only thing you saw in my entire post? Just asking. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Ballard has shown that BPA is everything to him. If he loves a safety and they are the tops at 42 then absolutely he takes them. I still think Mathieu is in play for us. We have freed cap and can bring him in for at least 2 years. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, chad72 said:

I know a free safety is a very important draft in the C3 that Gus Bradley plays.

 

Given the depth of WRs in this draft, would any of you think that our pick No. 42 would be a safety if we are not able to land a safety in FA?

 

Daxton Hill of Michigan is who I covet at No. 42. He has the speed, the twitch, the range, the fluid ability to change directions (6.57 3 cone drill number is insane, reminds me a bit of Kyle Dugger from last year) and the tackling skills Gus Bradley needs. The bonus, he does have 32 inch plus arms. :) 

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/dax-hill/32004849-4c16-4994-7b99-e93ebbf2d838

 

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Daxton-Hill-DB-Michigan

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/daxton-hill-michigan-s-nfl-draft-scouting-report-2022/

 

Thoughts???

 

My thoughts are we just became best friends. I just wrote about how much I like him earlier today. His tape and testing numbers are absurd. I’m on record as saying the Colts top priority is pass catchers, but given the fall off in talent after the first 6 receivers (Olave, Wilson, London, Dahtson, Burks, and Williams) I just think it could wait a round or two. Especially if Hill is there. Hill is a plug and play starter. He reminds me of Jamal Adams but way better in coverage.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

My thoughts are we just became best friends. I just wrote about how much I like him earlier today. His tape and testing numbers are absurd. I’m on record as saying the Colts top priority is pass catchers, but given the fall off in talent after the first 6 receivers (Olave, Wilson, London, Dahtson, Burks, and Williams) I just think it could wait a round or two. Especially if Hill is there. Hill is a plug and play starter. He reminds me of Jamal Adams but way better in coverage.

I like Hill a lot. He has very good range and playing in a zone I think he would excel even more. I e seen scouts say he could play CB at the pro level as well but he has everything needed to be dynamic for our Cover 3. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

I like Hill a lot. He has very good range and playing in a zone I think he would excel even more. I e seen scouts say he could play CB at the pro level as well but he has everything needed to be dynamic for our Cover 3. 

He could 100% play corner full time. On the outside too. He played a bunch of Nickel at Michigan. But it would be somewhat a waste of his talents. He’s so good at playing over the top, roaming over the middle, blitzing, etc… it wouldn’t allow him to show what he can do. He’s super versatile. Best thing would be to let him roam. I think that’s a pick where you sprint to turn the card in.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

He could 100% play corner full time. On the outside too. He played a bunch of Nickel at Michigan. But it would be somewhat a waste of his talents. He’s so good at playing over the top, roaming over the middle, blitzing, etc… it wouldn’t allow him to show what he can do. He’s super versatile. Best thing would be to let him roam. I think that’s a pick where you sprint to turn the card in.

If we draft him it’s to be the prime FS our Cover 3 needs. I don’t see Gus wasting him at corner unless we are desperate their. I am super curious of how our scouts and Ballard feel about him. How high is he on the board, you know?
 

I do believe we want Mathieu still but I also believe Ballard thinks we have starting safeties already and need depth more than anything. I hope Gus is in his ear about key fits for him and not just Ballard seeing his own vision. Pure speculation by me there though. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DaColts85 said:

If we draft him it’s to be the prime FS our Cover 3 needs. I don’t see Gus wasting him at corner unless we are desperate their. I am super curious of how our scouts and Ballard feel about him. How high is he on the board, you know?
 

I do believe we want Mathieu still but I also believe Ballard thinks we have starting safeties already and need depth more than anything. I hope Gus is in his ear about key fits for him and not just Ballard seeing his own vision. Pure speculation by me there though. 

The Colts will have done some homework on him considering they drafted Paye last year. But he checks off a lot of the Ballard boxes. He seems like a Ballard pick to me. Only thing is he wasn’t a team captain lol.

 

Yeah I also hope Gus is telling him we need a true cover-3 FS. Blackmon is more SS when healthy, but he’s coming off his second major injury in 2 years. Longevity is a legitimate concern. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2022 at 10:19 AM, chad72 said:

I know a free safety is a very important draft in the C3 that Gus Bradley plays.

 

Given the depth of WRs in this draft, would any of you think that our pick No. 42 would be a safety if we are not able to land a safety in FA?

 

Daxton Hill of Michigan is who I covet at No. 42. He has the speed, the twitch, the range, the fluid ability to change directions (6.57 3 cone drill number is insane, reminds me a bit of Kyle Dugger from last year) and the tackling skills Gus Bradley needs. The bonus, he does have 32 inch plus arms. :) 

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/dax-hill/32004849-4c16-4994-7b99-e93ebbf2d838

 

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Daxton-Hill-DB-Michigan

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/daxton-hill-michigan-s-nfl-draft-scouting-report-2022/

 

Thoughts???

 

 

 We NEED a good LT prospect and an extremely good FS talent from this draft!  Hill looks like that guy ... from this NFL prospects read.
 IMO, CB WILL be aggressive as needed to fill these spots in the draft.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2022 at 7:19 AM, chad72 said:

I know a free safety is a very important draft in the C3 that Gus Bradley plays.

 

Given the depth of WRs in this draft, would any of you think that our pick No. 42 would be a safety if we are not able to land a safety in FA?

 

Daxton Hill of Michigan is who I covet at No. 42. He has the speed, the twitch, the range, the fluid ability to change directions (6.57 3 cone drill number is insane, reminds me a bit of Kyle Dugger from last year) and the tackling skills Gus Bradley needs. The bonus, he does have 32 inch plus arms. :) 

 

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/dax-hill/32004849-4c16-4994-7b99-e93ebbf2d838

 

https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Daxton-Hill-DB-Michigan

 

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/daxton-hill-michigan-s-nfl-draft-scouting-report-2022/

 

Thoughts???

 


Ballard spent a 3 on Blackman and two fours on Willis.    I don’t see him using our first overall pick on a player that I think Ballard believes can be filled with a later pick. 

 

Perhaps a Day 3 pick….  
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, holeymoley99 said:

Brisker, we need a FS as we have SS covered and Brisker is an elite FS (He can actually play any db spot well). Will he fall to us is the question.

Hill is my draft crush but I actually really like Brisker too. He’s got a little more pop behind his pads in the run game. He’s an alpha on the field too. Would be fine with either tbh.

 

41 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Ballard spent a 3 on Blackman and two fours on Willis.    I don’t see him using our first overall pick on a player that I think Ballard believes can be filled with a later pick. 

 

Perhaps a Day 3 pick….  
 

 

He spent an early two on Rock and still traded him when CB depth was already thin. I wouldn’t put anything past him. He also spent a combined four 2nd round picks on edge rushers from 2017-2020 and still drafted 2 last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Hill is my draft crush but I actually really like Brisker too. He’s got a little more pop behind his pads in the run game. He’s an alpha on the field too. Would be fine with either tbh.

 

He spent an early two on Rock and still traded him when CB depth was already thin. I wouldn’t put anything past him. He also spent a combined four 2nd round picks on edge rushers from 2017-2020 and still drafted 2 last year.


My hunch with Rock is that we offered to extend his contract and he wanted far more than we were willing to pay.   Which surprises me.    
 

But why else would we trade Rock,  with a year left and potentially a 3-year extension for Ngokwe who doesn’t stay in any place longer than a year or two?   I get that a pass rushing DE is badly needed.   But this is potentially a 1-year rental for a guy we could’ve kept for 4-years.   Unless Rock looked like we couldn’t re-sign him and so it was just a potential 1-year DE for a 1-year corner.   And I’ll make that trade most every time.   I think we traded Rock because we knew we’d lose him.   Glad we got a good pass rusher. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


My hunch with Rock is that we offered to extend his contract and he wanted far more than we were willing to pay.   Which surprises me.    
 

But why else would we trade Rock,  with a year left and potentially a 3-year extension for Ngokwe who doesn’t stay in any place longer than a year or two?   I get that a pass rushing DE is badly needed.   But this is potentially a 1-year rental for a guy we could’ve kept for 4-years.   Unless Rock looked like we couldn’t re-sign him and so it was just a potential 1-year DE for a 1-year corner.   And I’ll make that trade most every time.   I think we traded Rock because we knew we’d lose him.   Glad we got a good pass rusher. 

My point is that if he’s willing to trade a guy who was coming off a good season, at an already thin position group, you really think he wouldn’t draft another safety because he spent a 3rd and two 4th round picks on Blackmon and Willis?

 

I know everyone always has their reasons as to why Ballard does it, but he’s shown time and time again he’s willing to draft upgrades over players who have either played well or he spent high round picks on.

 

Unless you’re Leonard, Buckner, Smith, Nelson, etc…no one is safe. Building a roster is about getting the best 52 every year. If you have an average player at a position, you should try and get a hood player at the position. If you have a good player, you should be trying to get a great one.

 

Right now we have just slightly below average safety play. That shouldn’t  prevent us from drafting elite safeties. That’s why Ballard an other GM’s always talk about drafting BPA. It’s way better to have an elite safety prospect as opposed to reaching for an average WR prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

My point is that if he’s willing to trade a guy who was coming off a good season, at an already thin position group, you really think he wouldn’t draft another safety because he spent a 3rd and two 4th round picks on Blackmon and Willis?

 

I know everyone always has their reasons as to why Ballard does it, but he’s shown time and time again he’s willing to draft upgrades over players who have either played well or he spent high round picks on.

 

Unless you’re Leonard, Buckner, Smith, Nelson, etc…no one is safe. Building a roster is about getting the best 52 every year. If you have an average player at a position, you should try and get a hood player at the position. If you have a good player, you should be trying to get a great one.

 

Right now we have just slightly below average safety play. That shouldn’t  prevent us from drafting elite safeties. That’s why Ballard an other GM’s always talk about drafting BPA. It’s way better to have an elite safety prospect as opposed to reaching for an average WR prospect.


Wouldn't draft another safety?    Huh?

 

I never said that.   I’m saying we wouldn’t use our pick 41 to do it.  Especially when I believe we have other more pressing needs.    I think Ballard believes he can find a safety in R’s 3-5.    Off the top of my head he’s done it three straight years. That’s where I think he will find one again this year.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, chad72 said:

This is a very good write up on the safeties we should be mostly looking at:

 

https://www.bigblueview.com/2022/3/28/22998855/making-the-case-daxton-hill-lewis-cine-jaquan-brisker

 


To take any of these three safeties, I believe we’d have to use our pick 42 to do it.   I don’t think they will be around for our pick 73.   I want a safety in this draft, but I don’t want to spend our pick 42 on one.   Too rich for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


To take any of these three safeties, I believe we’d have to use our pick 42 to do it.   I don’t think they will be around for our pick 73.   I want a safety in this draft, but I don’t want to spend our pick 42 on one.   Too rich for me. 

 

If there is a possibility of us not having the guy we want on the board at No.42, and us moving back to say No.50 (KC gives No.50 and No.94), given an extra 3rd rounder, it can possibly happen, IMO.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like both Brisker and Hill are good candidates to be our deep safety in Gus Bradley's C3 defense.... the only reasons I doubt we will draft one of them is - 1. they both will probably be gone before our pick... and... 2. Blackmon. Ballard loves Blackmon. Hell, he calls him a future all pro. No idea if the injury has changed someting in his mind, but if he still views Blackmon in a similar light... I kind of doubt he would draft another player to upstage him this high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, stitches said:

I feel like both Brisker and Hill are good candidates to be our deep safety in Gus Bradley's C3 defense.... the only reasons I doubt we will draft one of them is - 1. they both will probably be gone before our pick... and... 2. Blackmon. Ballard loves Blackmon. Hell, he calls him a future all pro. No idea if the injury has changed someting in his mind, but if he still views Blackmon in a similar light... I kind of doubt he would draft another player to upstage him this high. 

My only thought is Ballards love for Blackmon might not be shared by Gus. Maybe that’s why Mathieu has been in the conversation for us. Gus has something more he likes and wants Blackmon to be more SS type. Again, all speculation. Personally I like the two we have but Mathieu would be a great piece to add. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

I feel like both Brisker and Hill are good candidates to be our deep safety in Gus Bradley's C3 defense.... the only reasons I doubt we will draft one of them is - 1. they both will probably be gone before our pick... and... 2. Blackmon. Ballard loves Blackmon. Hell, he calls him a future all pro. No idea if the injury has changed someting in his mind, but if he still views Blackmon in a similar light... I kind of doubt he would draft another player to upstage him this high. 

I’ve learned to take Ballard with a grain of salt. He will pretty much over-praise everyone and then move on and upgrade them if the opportunity arises.
 

As for our safeties, Blackmon is coming off his 2nd major injury. A torn Achilles tendon after blowing out his ACL in college. Not sure how much long term value he has. Even so, our safety room is mediocre (CB is worse though). A guy like Brisker could play in the box full time and is better than Khari Willis and has more upside than Blackmon. Plus this is a new scheme with Bradley. The FS is very important.

 

I don’t think Cine, Hill, and Brisker will all be gone by our pick. If you include Hamilton, that’s 4 safeties. I can’t recall the last time 4 safeties went in the top 50 picks. Right now from what I’m hearing, Hill is the one most likely not to be at 42. His measurables and versatility are off the charts to the point where people think he can play corner full time. This is actually a really good safety class though. Hamilton, Cine, Hill, Brisker, Cross, etc… are all long, fast, versatile, and have good tape. Based on how Ballard drafts BPA and how I think the draft will play out, I can see a safety being the pick at 42.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaColts85 said:

My only thought is Ballards love for Blackmon might not be shared by Gus. Maybe that’s why Mathieu has been in the conversation for us. Gus has something more he likes and wants Blackmon to be more SS type. Again, all speculation. Personally I like the two we have but Mathieu would be a great piece to add. 

I don't think Blackmon is a good candidate for SS and I don't think Mathieu is a great deep safety at this stage of his career. He looks much more like a versatile moveable chess piece to me than a consistent deep safety. That's his appeal - that you can move him around the field and he won't be out of place anywhere. He played both safety positions for the Chiefs, he played slot corner and he even played about 20% of his snaps in the box as a ILB. In fact he's been best as a slot in the last few years. That's kind of why I am surprised we have such strong interest in him. Kenny doesn't have the same versatility but he's best at the thing Mathieu is best at. 

 

I guess we will see soon enough whether we sign with him or not... 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I’ve learned to take Ballard with a grain of salt. He will pretty much over-praise everyone and then move on and upgrade them if the opportunity arises.
 

As for our safeties, Blackmon is coming off his 2nd major injury. A torn Achilles tendon after blowing out his ACL in college. Not sure how much long term value he has. Even so, our safety room is mediocre (CB is worse though). A guy like Brisker could play in the box full time and is better than Khari Willis and has more upside than Blackmon. Plus this is a new scheme with Bradley. The FS is very important.

 

I don’t think Cine, Hill, and Brisker will all be gone by our pick. If you include Hamilton, that’s 4 safeties. I can’t recall the last time 4 safeties went in the top 50 picks. Right now from what I’m hearing, Hill is the one most likely not to be at 42. His measurables and versatility are off the charts to the point where people think he can play corner full time. This is actually a really good safety class though. Hamilton, Cine, Hill, Brisker, Cross, etc… are all long, fast, versatile, and have good tape. Based on how Ballard drafts BPA and how I think the draft will play out, I can see a safety being the pick at 42.

This safety class is definitely one of the strongest in recent years.  IMO it's totally possible all 4 of them go before our pick... 

 

You are right on Blackmon though... those injuries are no joke and very few players return the same after multiple serious injuries like that. No idea what Ballard thinks of him right now and how willing he is to replace him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stitches said:

This safety class is definitely one of the strongest in recent years.  IMO it's totally possible all 4 of them go before our pick... 

 

You are right on Blackmon though... those injuries are no joke and very few players return the same after multiple serious injuries like that. No idea what Ballard thinks of him right now and how willing he is to replace him. 

 

Yes, that is why for someone who values his draft picks so much to get the best talent out there possible, Ballard would not shy away from considering safety in Round 2, IMO. If we had Marcus Williams on our roster, I might say "no chance Ballard goes safety" but given the fact that Cover 3 CBs might be easier to draft than that stellar free safety for GB's defensive scheme, plus the fact that OT quality goes down as we get past Day 1, all signs point towards BPA without being pigeon holed into a specific position. The safeties mentioned here are not only very good athletes but also productive college players from good FBS programs.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, chad72 said:

 

Yes, that is why for someone who values his draft picks so much to get the best talent out there possible, Ballard would not shy away from considering safety in Round 2, IMO. If we had Marcus Williams on our roster, I might say "no chance Ballard goes safety" but given the fact that Cover 3 CBs might be easier to draft than that stellar free safety for GB's defensive scheme, plus the fact that OT quality goes down as we get past Day 1, all signs point towards BPA without being pigeon holed into a specific position. The safeties mentioned here are not only very good athletes but also productive college players from good FBS programs.

I’d also argue that as badly as we want a WR or TE, the value may not be there at 42. There are 7 teams with more than one first round pick this year. There’s a real chance that Wilson, Olave, London, Williams, Dotson, and Watson are all gone. Also while I love the depth of this TE class, even the top guys are late 2nd-3rd round guys at the earliest.

 

So if the LT’s fall off after the 1st, the WR talent drops off, and it’s too early for a TE, where does that leave you? We 100% will not be drafting a RB that early. You start to realize that safety isn’t so far fetched. Ballard loves his guys with traits, character, and elite RAS scores and almost every single one of the top 6 safeties have that and the proven production. You can’t say that about the WRs, OT’s, and TE’s that will be there at 42. And even the one or two that might be close, are they the better player?

 

Like does anyone objectively think that David Bell is a better prospect than Daxton Hill?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I’d also argue that as badly as we want a WR or TE, the value may not be there at 42. There are 7 teams with more than one first round pick this year. There’s a real chance that Wilson, Olave, London, Williams, Dotson, and Watson are all gone. Also while I love the depth of this TE class, even the top guys are late 2nd-3rd round guys at the earliest.

 

So if the LT’s fall off after the 1st, the WR talent drops off, and it’s too early for a TE, where does that leave you? We 100% will not be drafting a RB that early. You start to realize that safety isn’t so far fetched. Ballard loves his guys with traits, character, and elite RAS scores and almost every single one of the top 6 safeties have that and the proven production. You can’t say that about the WRs, OT’s, and TE’s that will be there at 42. And even the one or two that might be close, are they the better player?

 

Like does anyone objectively think that David Bell is a better prospect than Daxton Hill?

 

This is what is being overlooked. I can't sit here and say that if one of those 3 safeties (Hill, Cine, Brisker) were there at No.42 with all the top 5 or 6 OTs and WRs gone, that we won't give a look at a premium safety there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:


 

I like him a lot too. He was also a team captain in high school and at Penn State

 

 

Hes got an incredible story too, very similar to Darius Leonard.

 

 

He's got Colt written all over him to me.  I'd take him in a minute.   Kid is a football player.

I like Hill too though.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

I’d also argue that as badly as we want a WR or TE, the value may not be there at 42. There are 7 teams with more than one first round pick this year. There’s a real chance that Wilson, Olave, London, Williams, Dotson, and Watson are all gone. Also while I love the depth of this TE class, even the top guys are late 2nd-3rd round guys at the earliest.

 

So if the LT’s fall off after the 1st, the WR talent drops off, and it’s too early for a TE, where does that leave you? We 100% will not be drafting a RB that early. You start to realize that safety isn’t so far fetched. Ballard loves his guys with traits, character, and elite RAS scores and almost every single one of the top 6 safeties have that and the proven production. You can’t say that about the WRs, OT’s, and TE’s that will be there at 42. And even the one or two that might be close, are they the better player?

 

Like does anyone objectively think that David Bell is a better prospect than Daxton Hill?

But what about the cornerbacks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, krunk said:

But what about the cornerbacks?

 

I am afraid getting a project like Tariq Woolen who has played cornerback just for 2 years gives me Ben Banogu vibes, but for the CB position. 

 

Elam, Gordon, McCreary, all guys that could be there at No.42 all have less than 32 inch arms, some even less than 31 inch arms. Not happening with Ballard and the Cover 3 GB wants to play. Joshua Williams with Fayetteville State University, Alontae Taylor of TN and Vincent Gray of Michigan, who are probably rated Round 3 would be the next ones in range for us with 32 inch arms. 

 

However, most of those safeties mentioned above, Dax Hill, Brisker and Lewis Cine have 32 inch plus arms. It is a confluence of so many factors that I keep coming back to safety at this spot at No. 42 are rated higher than the Round 3 CBs mentioned above.

 

I would not mind at all if we went safety, then cornerback in this draft. Then the forum will get antsy for our second 3rd round pick to be a WR, LOL. :) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • MAC was a basketball project, so they signed him knowing he'd take time. If it didn't work out, not much lost.    His first two years on the roster (he was injured and on the PS in 2017) were also on a team with and unquestioned starter (Doyle, who had 2017 and 2019 Pro Bowl years), and Ebron (who was Pro Bowl in 2018). So wasn't going to get a lot of opportunity.    So Woods probably has a clearer path to PT that when Mo joined Indy. Just depends on how much he improves as a blocker, or how much Reich is willing to turn a blind eye to his blocking deficiencies.    But I agree that 400-500 is overly optimistic though. If I had to guess, I'd say 200-300.     
    • Couple comments... I think the biggest X factor on O is if Campbell can stay healthy. If he can, our pass catching unit ranks go up a lot. It was very obvious he and Ryan have good chemistry in OTAs.  Even with the Moore situation, I think the biggest mystery on D is FS. Gus's system requires a true centerfielder. Not sure Blackmon is that guy. A few depth chart projections have McLeod as the FS to start the year. Not sure if that projection is simply because of Blackmon's injury status (and they know McLeod has experience at FS), or because they think McLeod is simply a better centerfielder prospect.  McLeod's age worries me a bit, but his grade history gives me some confidence.  I'm not all that worried about our schedule, in terms of the passing Os we'll face. Chargers will be an elite O, Broncos will be very good and well rounded. KC will take a step back IMO without Hill, but probably get going later in the season once some of the young guys and new FAs start to gel. Glad we get them early. Dallas will be good, but Prescott is a mixed bag. There are some other mixed bag Os on our schedule, but we play a lot of bad Os too. At least 8 or 9. 
    • Before last season Smith was a stud at RT.  He had a down year last year (like the whole line did) and was still good.   I would leave him there.  
    • Because he was a guard originally and may be one of the best RG in the league. Plus, Pryor seems to be better at right tackle. It might be our best combination as a group.
    • As Colts fans we are spoiled rotten  . People really need to realize this. Baltimore days we had Unitas and then Bert Jones, then Jimmy Harbaugh in Indy - got robbed in 1995, Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, Philip Rivers, and now Matt Ryan. Ok, only 2 SB wins but 2 is still great. We actually have 4 Championships counting Unitas's in 1958 and 1959. Since the 2002 realign of the divisions we have more wins than any franchise + the SB win in 2006 except for the Pats.   Pats ruined it for everyone because they won 6 SB's from 2001-2018. They made it look it easy, so they have many people duped in believing that winning SB's is easy. What is funny is, Peyton is 3-1 vs Brady in AFC Title Games and Eli is 2-0 in SB's vs Brady. Nobody ever talks about that. Also if the Seahawks coaching staff had half a brain and didn't get cute, the Pats lose that SB. I blame the Falcons SB loss on coaching too, just run it 3 times and take the FG, then you are up 31-20 = game over. Matt has his ring.   We are blessed to have Matt Ryan now and lucky. I never seen this scenario playing out when we were searching for a QB. I kept hearing Baker, Mariotta, Trubisky, draft one. I was like we are screwed. Then we pull some magic and get Matt, great stuff by a top 10 franchise of all-time. - Matt Ryan will have me breaking the ol' Cigar out many Sunday's.   We will not only win on opening day, we will win something like 40-10. I am calling it.
  • Members

    • Nickster

      Nickster 1,986

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Coltsfan1953

      Coltsfan1953 183

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Shepman

      Shepman 313

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • ShowMeTheLayups

      ShowMeTheLayups 2

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Solid84

      Solid84 671

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • masterlock

      masterlock 258

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • DynaMike

      DynaMike 84

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • cjrichard

      cjrichard 76

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • EastStreet

      EastStreet 18,933

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CR91

      CR91 9,681

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