Colts have 4th pick (Official Discussion Thread)

[RollerColt]

38 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

I think they draft Will Anderson Jr and attempt to sign Payne to a large contract 

What WRs are the best blockers in draft?

Jaxon Smith from Ohio State maybe? 6-1 200lbs. 

[danlhart87]

2 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Jaxon Smith from Ohio State maybe? 6-1 200lbs. 

He's my favorite in this class but no chance he falls to 2nd

[coltsfanatic24]

Stroud just check all the boxes for what this team needs. Great arm talent, athleticism, pocket awareness,  size, and accuracy.  I was very high on Justin Herbert as well entering the draft and I think Stroud has a higher upside. 
 

 

What I love the most about Stroud is that although he’s very athletic and can run, he prefers to stay in the pocket and throw. Stroud is a Blue Chip prospect and would be a great fit for this Colts team. 

[chad72]

2 hours ago, csmopar said:

Yes how much was the cost for Allen and Mahomes? I’m betting less than what it’d take today to get to number 1. 

Mahomes trade involved a future 1st:

 

WHAT THE CHIEFS RECEIVED

No. 10 pick (Patrick Mahomes)

 

WHAT THE BILLS RECEIVED

No. 27 pick, 2017 third-round pick (No. 91 overall), 2018 first-round pick

 

Josh Allen trade:

 

It took two trades to get into position to select Allen with the first being a move with the Cincinnati Bengals that sent Cordy Glenn and the 21st overall pick to the Bengals for the 12th overall pick.

Unfortunately, it still had them too far back to select Josh Allen and on draft night, Beane (GM) made another move that sent the 12th overall pick along with two second round picks (53rd and 56th overall) for the seventh overall pick and the 255th overall pick.

 

Its like the Colts giving up Braden Smith, top of Round 2 tackle that Corey Glenn was.

 

So both teams gave up plenty but in the end, it was worth it. Essentially swapping a first round pick and giving a future 1st rounder is the going rate for moving that high.

 

However it’s different than the ridiculous RG3 trade from No.6 to No.2 that Washington did:

 

In 2012, the Redskins sent three first-round picks and a second-round pick to the Rams to move up four spots from No.6 to No.2 and get the opportunity to select Robert Griffin III. It was an exorbitant price.

 

If Ballard gives up a future 1st and tops a current 3rd, it would be a fair trade

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

11 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Mahomes trade involved a future 1st:

 

WHAT THE CHIEFS RECEIVED

No. 10 pick (Patrick Mahomes)

 

WHAT THE BILLS RECEIVED

No. 27 pick, 2017 third-round pick (No. 91 overall), 2018 first-round pick

 

Josh Allen trade:

 

It took two trades to get into position to select Allen with the first being a move with the Cincinnati Bengals that sent Cordy Glenn and the 21st overall pick to the Bengals for the 12th overall pick.

Unfortunately, it still had them too far back to select Josh Allen and on draft night, Beane (GM) made another move that sent the 12th overall pick along with two second round picks (53rd and 56th overall) for the seventh overall pick and the 255th overall pick.

 

Its like the Colts giving up Braden Smith, top of Round 2 tackle that Corey Glenn was.

 

So both teams gave up plenty but in the end, it was worth it. Essentially swapping a first round pick and giving a future 1st rounder is the going rate for moving that high.

 

However it’s different than the ridiculous RG3 trade from No.6 to No.2 that Washington did:

 

In 2012, the Redskins sent three first-round picks and a second-round pick to the Rams to move up four spots from No.6 to No.2 and get the opportunity to select Robert Griffin III. It was an exorbitant price.

 

If Ballard gives up a future 1st and tops a current 3rd, it would be a fair trade

 

 

Looking back seems like bills got a steal now we know what Allen has become. Know one will complain about lost draft picks if your winning.

[chad72]

6 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Looking back seems like bills got a steal now we know what Allen has become.

So did the Chiefs who had to move 17 spots and made the wild card round in 2017 with Alex Smith thus giving up a high first rounder only. 
 

The only reason Bills didn’t give up a future 1st rounder is because they gave up 2 second rounders and a very good tackle. But yes, the Bills gave less than the Chiefs but the Chiefs were moving 17 spots, Bills only had to move 5. The player allowed the first move of 9.

 

So unless we are moving to only No.3, we have to give a future 1st and haggle on the rest (3rd vs 2nd).

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, chad72 said:

So did the Chiefs who had to move 17 spots and made the wild card round in 2017 with Alex Smith thus giving up a high first rounder only. 
 

The only reason Bills didn’t give up a future 1st rounder is because they gave up 2 second rounders and a very good tackle. But yes, the Bills gave less than the Chiefs but the Chiefs were moving 17 spots, Bills only had to move 5. The player allowed the first move of 9.

I like what bills did. They knew it would take Allen a couple years so they didn’t mind getting rid of players. They decided we will just reload and buy the time Allen is ready they would be set.

[chad72]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I like what bills did. They knew it would take Allen a couple years so they didn’t mind getting rid of players. They decided we will just reload and buy the time Allen is ready they would be set.

Yep. That’s why Ballard should try giving up No.4, Pittman, Kenny Moore, current and future 2nd to see if the Bears will take it without costing a future 1st. 

[danlhart87]

I know both are high but I fully expect the asking price for 1 to be high 

 

Which would you accept if you were Bears GM

 

Colts get 2023 1st 

 

Bears gets 2023 1st, 2023 4th, 2024 1st and Michael Pittman Jr

 

 

...

 

 

 

Texans get 2023 1st

 

Bears get 2023 1st 2023 2nd 2024 2nd and Laremy Tunsil

[csmopar]

23 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Mahomes trade involved a future 1st:

 

WHAT THE CHIEFS RECEIVED

No. 10 pick (Patrick Mahomes)

 

WHAT THE BILLS RECEIVED

No. 27 pick, 2017 third-round pick (No. 91 overall), 2018 first-round pick

 

Josh Allen trade:

 

It took two trades to get into position to select Allen with the first being a move with the Cincinnati Bengals that sent Cordy Glenn and the 21st overall pick to the Bengals for the 12th overall pick.

Unfortunately, it still had them too far back to select Josh Allen and on draft night, Beane (GM) made another move that sent the 12th overall pick along with two second round picks (53rd and 56th overall) for the seventh overall pick and the 255th overall pick.

 

Its like the Colts giving up Braden Smith, top of Round 2 tackle that Corey Glenn was.

 

So both teams gave up plenty but in the end, it was worth it. Essentially swapping a first round pick and giving a future 1st rounder is the going rate for moving that high.

 

However it’s different than the ridiculous RG3 trade from No.6 to No.2 that Washington did:

 

In 2012, the Redskins sent three first-round picks and a second-round pick to the Rams to move up four spots from No.6 to No.2 and get the opportunity to select Robert Griffin III. It was an exorbitant price.

 

If Ballard gives up a future 1st and tops a current 3rd, it would be a fair trade

 

 

An extra 1st is okay, but what’s being rumored by the Chicago media is they want MULTIPLE 1s. Or combination of extra 1s AND players. 
 

now that’s media reports but let’s pretend they’re true. That cost is way too risky and way too high for 3 spots for a QB class with a crap load of question marks. 
 

A first and a third would be the most I’d consider, unless there was another Manning or Luck there. Which there’s not

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

I know both are high but I fully expect the asking price for 1 to be high 

 

Which would you accept if you were Bears GM

 

Colts get 2023 1st 

 

Bears gets 2023 1st, 2023 4th, 2024 1st and Michael Pittman Jr

 

 

...

 

 

 

Texans get 2023 1st

 

Bears get 2023 1st 2023 2nd 2024 2nd and Laremy Tunsil

Neither. If I’m the bears, knowing Houston has TWO 2023 1sts, that’s what I’m demanding. 

[csmopar]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Yep. That’s why Ballard should try giving up No.4, Pittman, Kenny Moore, current and future 2nd to see if the Bears will take it without costing a future 1st. 

No to Pittman. We need WRs . Why the heck would you give up your best and really only consist weapon when the QB you select is gonna need weapons. 

[chad72]

7 minutes ago, csmopar said:

An extra 1st is okay, but what’s being rumored by the Chicago media is they want MULTIPLE 1s. Or combination of extra 1s AND players. 
 

now that’s media reports but let’s pretend they’re true. That cost is way too risky and way too high for 3 spots for a QB class with a crap load of question marks. 
 

A first and a third would be the most I’d consider, unless there was another Manning or Luck there. Which there’s not

Current first, Future 1st and current 2nd/3rd, is what I had in mind. Otherwise call the Bears bluff and stand pat 

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, csmopar said:

No to Pittman. We need WRs . Why the heck would you give up your best and really only consist weapon when the QB you select is gonna need weapons. 

I was talking something along the Bills Allen trade lines should we have to throw a player in to avoid giving up a 1st.  The Bears however will insist on the future 1st, so give them that and win some games without giving up players  

 

You do realize multiple firsts means a future 1st, right? 

[danlhart87]

If Texans were to offer both their 2023 1st i doubt Ballard could do much to compete with that 

 

 

[Yoshinator]

You only trade up to 1 if A.) You have one of Stroud, Young, or Levis ranked highly above the other 2, and B.) The Texans and/or other teams that can threaten to move up to 1 also like the same QB you do. 

 

The odds of both of these being true are pretty low. I wouldn't trade up to one unless something crazy happens where one of these guys pulls in front of the other in the senior bowl, pro day, combine, and interviews as well as the tape. Trading up to 3 seems more logical though. 

[chad72]

3 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

If Texans were to offer both their 2023 1st i doubt Ballard could do much to compete with that 

 

 

Not for 1 spot when they’re assured 1 of the top 2. They need their 2nd first rounder or early 2nd rounder for Sean Payton 

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

If Texans were to offer both their 2023 1st i doubt Ballard could do much to compete with that 

 

 

There would be nothing he could do. At that point, we'd just have to hope the Texans didn't take our QB, or we'd have to trade up to 2 or 3 at that point if our guy was still there.

[chad72]

Just now, Jared Cisneros said:

You only trade up to 1 if A.) You have one of Stroud, Young, or Levis ranked highly above the other 2, and B.) The Texans and/or other teams that can threaten to move up to 1 also like the same QB you do. 

 

The odds of both of these being true are pretty low. I wouldn't trade up to one unless something crazy happens where one of these guys pulls in front of the other in the senior bowl, pro day, combine, and interviews as well as the tape. Trading up to 3 seems more logical though. 

Yeah, trading up to 3 will cost us just our 2nd rounder in all likelihood.

[csmopar]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

I was talking something along the Bills Allen trade lines should we have to throw a player in to avoid giving up a 1st.  The Bears however will insist on the future 1st, so give them that and win some games without giving up players  

 

You do realize multiple firsts means a future 1st, right? 

Yes. But if the reports are true that they want an RG3 type deal, that’s 3 1sts…

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

There would be nothing he could do. At that point, we'd just have to hope the Texans didn't take our QB, or we'd have to trade up to 2 or 3 at that point if our guy was still there.

That’s what was good about stroud declaring. It now gives them options if that happens.

[Yoshinator]

3 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

That’s what was good about stroud declaring. It now gives them options if that happens.

Yep. It made me very happy. Now we are practically guaranteed one of the 3 QBs if we want to stay at 4, and if we have a preference of two, we only have to trade up to 3. Cost is way down from having to get our guy at 1 now. I can see the Colts going after Levis potentially, so with Stroud declaring, we don't shoot ourselves in the foot by moving up to get him, and can just take him at 4 probably if that's our guy (which I'd be ok with).

[chad72]

6 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Yes. But if the reports are true that they want an RG3 type deal, that’s 3 1sts…

They can kiss trades goodbyes then 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

That fake rumor that was reported here about Pittman was talked about by  Benjamin Albright talking about it a couple days ago. This was recorded before the Harbaugh news so keep that in mind. 
 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Bears need Oline so don’t dismiss bears maybe moving down farther for a OT.  Especially when the edge class is pretty deep. They could however trade with colts then trade again I guess. But if a team like Carolina puts a good enough package together it wouldn’t shock me. I just don’t know how far the tackles will fall and if they will be there at 9.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Another thing to watch for is if colts do not want young then they might have to trade up to insure he is not the one left. But that’s all conjecture they might not want him.

[danlhart87]

1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Another thing to watch for is if colts do not want young then they might have to trade up to insure he is not the one left. But that’s all conjecture they might not want him.

If Young was there at 4 Chris should run to the podium like this

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

If Young was there at 4 Chris should run to the podium like this

 

I think if there is no trade up be the draft then that means Ballard has all 3 on the same level. One didn’t stick out over the other.

[Lurk McGurk]

Hey... Bears fan here.  First of all let me say that I respect this forum you have going here.  You all seem to be very respectful of each other.  If you ever want to see a hot mess of a forum, wander over to the Bears forum and check it out.  At least half the posts are of people bickering or insulting each other.  So kudos to you all.

 

I've been looking at some of your thoughts on the draft situation and I wanted to provide a couple of mine:

 

I saw some people mentioning that no quarterback is worth trading up to #1 for since there are no generational QB's like Manning or Luck in this draft.  There is no trading up for a generational QB.  You wouldn't be able to convince a team to trade away that spot.  For example, if Caleb Williams is viewed to be a generational QB when the 2024 draft comes around, the only way you're getting him is if you have the #1 pick.  The thought of accumulating first round picks to be able to go up and get one is nice, but it's almost certainly not going to happen.

 

This is exactly the type of draft that you trade up for a QB in.  There are currently 2 QB's considered to be at the top of the class, and are highly ranked on the big board for any position (with Levis seemingly being viewed as the 3rd QB, but obviously teams will have their own opinions).  They aren't generational talents, but that's what makes it a possibility to trade for them.  They are viewed as very good prospects though, and there is going to be a lot of interest for teams to move up and get them.  Recent drafts of the past should show us that is very likely.  Houston is going to take a QB at #2.  The Bears are huge favorites to trade out of #1.  This means that if a team doesn't trade up to #1, they will be looking at the possibility of taking what's left over of the top 3 QB's.  It is possible that teams view those 3 QB's as being of fairly equal value, but when you consider the fit for the team, and the importance of the QB position, it's much more likely that teams will have a significant preference for one of them.  Even more so because teams will be facing the very real possibility that their top TWO preferences will be gone with the first 2 picks, not just their top preference.  

 

After you clear that hurdle, then there's the reality that once 2 QB's go with the first 2 picks, if the 3rd QB is considered to be considerably better than the rest that are left, the Cardinals at #3 are going to be getting phone calls to move up for their pick as well.  There's a shot that the first 3 picks are QB's.  While it may seem preferable to only trade up to #3 with the Cardinals for the Colts, they may get outbid for that pick as well, and it may very well be the 3rd QB on their board at that point anyway.  Is it really worth saving a first round pick to draft the 3rd QB on your board instead of the 1st QB on your board, while also keeping that QB away from a division rival?  I doubt most GM's would think so.

 

It's not very realistic to think the Colts could move to #1 without giving up a first rounder next year either.  The Bears are very likely to get offered multiple firsts from teams drafting behind the Colts, so not getting any from the Colts would be a problem.  Yes the Bears would probably like to pick at 4 instead of farther back, and I would like them to as well, but any package from any team other than Houston would almost surely include a first rounder.

 

There's also the scenario where the Bears make a trade with Houston, and then also trade out of the #2 slot as well.  With there being 2 highly coveted QB's in this class I think that's a possibility.  It's what I'm hoping for personally.  I saw some posters suggesting the Bears trade with Houston and then draft Anderson/Carter at #2, but it's probably more likely they would make another trade than make that pick. 

 

In regard to Bryce Young, he's the odds on favorite to be drafted #1 overall.  He is not slipping out of the top 10 or dropping to the second round.  Here are the odds right now for who gets drafted at #1:

Young: -125

Stroud +220

Anderson +500

Carter +700

Levis +900

 

[rockywoj]

Amidst all this speculation of the Colts giving up a fortune (wrongfully in my eyes), I must ask this question of you draftniks, just how much of a talent difference is there really amongst the top 4, top 6 QBs in this draft?

 

To me, at this point anyway, I simply do not see any one candidate being heads and shoulders above the others.  Hence, I think all of these crazy trade prices being bandied about are foolhardy, which if the QB gotten fails, will be a terrible price to pay that will set this franchise back at least three years and lead to the firing of a Ballard.  
 

Based on the draft evaluations I currently know, just no way I am giving up anything to move up.

[Fluke_33]

1 hour ago, chad72 said:

Mahomes trade involved a future 1st:

 

WHAT THE CHIEFS RECEIVED

No. 10 pick (Patrick Mahomes)

 

WHAT THE BILLS RECEIVED

No. 27 pick, 2017 third-round pick (No. 91 overall), 2018 first-round pick

 

Josh Allen trade:

 

It took two trades to get into position to select Allen with the first being a move with the Cincinnati Bengals that sent Cordy Glenn and the 21st overall pick to the Bengals for the 12th overall pick.

Unfortunately, it still had them too far back to select Josh Allen and on draft night, Beane (GM) made another move that sent the 12th overall pick along with two second round picks (53rd and 56th overall) for the seventh overall pick and the 255th overall pick.

 

Its like the Colts giving up Braden Smith, top of Round 2 tackle that Corey Glenn was.

 

So both teams gave up plenty but in the end, it was worth it. Essentially swapping a first round pick and giving a future 1st rounder is the going rate for moving that high.

 

However it’s different than the ridiculous RG3 trade from No.6 to No.2 that Washington did:

 

In 2012, the Redskins sent three first-round picks and a second-round pick to the Rams to move up four spots from No.6 to No.2 and get the opportunity to select Robert Griffin III. It was an exorbitant price.

 

If Ballard gives up a future 1st and tops a current 3rd, it would be a fair trade

 

 

Moving 4 to 1 costs more than 6 to 2 if you use the standard value chart.  I’ll vomit if it’s 3 1s and a 2.  

[Yoshinator]

2 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Amidst all this speculation of the Colts giving up a fortune (wrongfully in my eyes), I must ask this question of you draftniks, just how much of a talent difference is there really amongst the top 4, top 6 QBs in this draft?

 

To me, at this point anyway, I simply do not see any one candidate being heads and shoulders above the others.  Hence, I think all of these crazy trade prices being bandied about are foolhardy, which if the QB gotten, will be a terrible price to pay that will set this franchise back at least three years and lead to the firing of a Ballard.  
 

Based on the draft evaluations I currently know, just no way I am giving up anything to move up.

I think Stroud and Young are close, then Levis, then Richardson, and then Hooker with other QBs afterwards. They will probably all go in the 1st round. Levis and Richardson are the ones who will probably go overdrafted a bit because of the desperation for a QB.

 

I wouldn't move up unless it was to 3 to get whomever is left over from Stroud and Young. Otherwise, stay put at 4 and take Levis. 

[chad72]

8 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

Moving 4 to 1 costs more than 6 to 2 if you use the standard value chart.  I’ll vomit if it’s 3 1s and a 2.  

Browns outlier of QB contract, Washington outlier for RG3 trade, Mike Ditka giving up all draft picks for Ricky Williams, Herschel Walker trade are in infamy for a reason, they are serious OUTLIERS that other teams won’t repeat.

 

Mahomes trade is the typical one. Moving from 3 to 6 got us two 2nd rounders in 2018 draft plus 2nd rounder in 2019 from Jets. That’s realistic for a trade. Also tells you if Ballard were on the moving up end, we know what to expect, he won’t overpay. Rest assured Colts fans. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Browns outlier of QB contract, Washington outlier for RG3 trade, Mike Ditka giving up all draft picks for Ricky Williams, Herschel Walker trade are in infamy for a reason, they are serious OUTLIERS that other teams won’t repeat.

 

Mahomes trade is the typical one. Moving from 3 to 6 got us two 2nd rounders in 2018 draft plus 2nd rounder in 2019 from Jets. That’s realistic for a trade. Also tells you if Ballard were on the moving up end, we know what to expect, he won’t overpay. Rest assured Colts fans. 

That jets  trade I think is a good one to look at to compare because they did take a QB. I think it would all depend on how many teams want to move up for these QB. More teams more expensive it could get.

[Fluke_33]

1 minute ago, chad72 said:

Browns outlier of QB contract, Washington outlier for RG3 trade, Mike Ditka giving up all draft picks for Ricky Williams, Herschel Walker trade are in infamy for a reason, they are serious OUTLIERS that other teams won’t repeat.

 

Mahomes trade is the typical one. Moving from 3 to 6 got us two 2nd rounders in 2018 draft plus 2nd rounder in 2019 from Jets. That’s realistic for a trade. Also tells you if Ballard were on the moving up end, we know what to expect, he won’t overpay.

I hope you are right.  I think the giants picked 4th when they traded for manning.  They gave up a 3rd and the next years 1st and 5th.  I could swallow that and not vomit. Lol. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Where Carr goes could also effect how many teams are there. Do bears want Anderson or carter that bad? Or do they want a OT so willing to move down that farther? 

[chad72]

1 minute ago, Fluke_33 said:

I hope you are right.  I think the giants picked 4th when they traded for manning.  They gave up a 3rd and the next years 1st and 5th.  I could swallow that and not vomit. Lol. 

Thats 2004, Eli Manning.

 

My 2019 Colts-Jets trade is far more real and same amount of spots to jump like the Jets did except the No.1 pick requires a future 1st without a doubt. So two 2nds won’t cut it. Current and future 1st and current 3rd, I’d be ok with

[craigerb]

6 minutes ago, chad72 said:

Mahomes trade is the typical one. Moving from 3 to 6 got us two 2nd rounders in 2018 draft plus 2nd rounder in 2019 from Jets. That’s realistic for a trade. Also tells you if Ballard were on the moving up end, we know what to expect, he won’t overpay. Rest assured Colts fans. 

How did  Mahomes trade get us anything?

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

3 minutes ago, Fluke_33 said:

I hope you are right.  I think the giants picked 4th when they traded for manning.  They gave up a 3rd and the next years 1st and 5th.  I could swallow that and not vomit. Lol. 

Wasn’t that a little different though since they got rivers in return.

[Yoshinator]

1 minute ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Where Carr goes could also effect how many teams are there. Do bears want Anderson or carter that bad? Or do they want a OT so willing to move down that farther? 

Bears will be replacing Robert Quinn, so Anderson or Carter is definitely an option.

[chad72]

2 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Where Carr goes could also effect how many teams are there. Do bears want Anderson or carter that bad? Or do they want a OT so willing to move down that farther? 

Are the Raiders willing to give up two 1sts and two 2nds and possibly a 3rd? Are the Falcons or Panthers willing to give up three firsts? If yes, Bears would gladly move back that far  

 

 

2 minutes ago, craigerb said:

How did  Mahomes trade get us anything?

Follow the conversation from the beginning, don’t have time to explain