Colts have 4th pick (Official Discussion Thread)

[Nesjan3]

20 hours ago, Dingus McGirt said:

A shot?  

I you cant see that him saying that to the national media is not a subtle shot at the Colts organization then I dont know what to tell you.

[Lurk McGurk]

17 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I still think bears will value carter or Anderson more then a couple extra draft picks that Carolina can give because there is no way to know where those future picks will land. 

Let me ask you this... If the Colts are picking at #9, would you be in favor of them trading away a 1st and 2nd round pick to move up to #4 to draft Carter/Anderson?  That's a conservative estimate of what the additional draft capital would look like for the Bears to move back to #9 instead of #4.  I'm seriously curious how you would feel about the Colts making that move.   Yes the draft position is unknown, but the play of Carter/Anderson in the NFL is also unknown.  The unknowns have to be factored in on both sides of it.

[Dingus McGirt]

1 minute ago, Nesjan3 said:

I you cant see that him saying that to the national media is not a subtle shot at the Colts organization then I dont know what to tell you.

It’s common sense.  Not a “shot.”

[PRnum1]

12 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

AR15 Anthony Richardson 

Who are you talking about 

Oh sorry Aaron Rodgers

[Nesjan3]

6 minutes ago, Dingus McGirt said:

It’s common sense.  Not a “shot.”

Ok so then he is saying the Colts Org lacks common sense

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

8 minutes ago, Lurk McGurk said:

Let me ask you this... If the Colts are picking at #9, would you be in favor of them trading away a 1st and 2nd round pick to move up to #4 to draft Carter/Anderson?  That's a conservative estimate of what the additional draft capital would look like for the Bears to move back to #9 instead of #4.  I'm seriously curious how you would feel about the Colts making that move.   Yes the draft position is unknown, but the play of Carter/Anderson in the NFL is also unknown.  The unknowns have to be factored in on both sides of it.

 No 

10 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

I you cant see that him saying that to the national media is not a subtle shot at the Colts organization then I dont know what to tell you.

He knows him wanting wentz made him part of the issue too.

[csmopar]

4 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

Ok so then he is saying the Colts Org lacks common sense

Well to be fair by his own words, if you actually watch the entire thing, he was a part of the reason for the QB carousel. Twice.

[csmopar]

https://fox59.com/sports/colts/casting-a-vote-for-shane-steichen-or-brian-callahan-for-colts-new-head-coach-offensive-mind/

[Lurk McGurk]

9 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

 No 

I was hoping the Bears would end up as #4 as well.  But when really thinking it over I'm leaning towards it may be more valuable to move back farther and get the extra premium picks.  Obviously it all depends on how valuable the Bears think Carter/Anderson are compared to the next tier of players.

[NewColtsFan]

18 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Why is that a shot? Every teams strives for security at the qb position. That's  a fact and not a shot

Not only are you correct, but Frank is NOT a take a shot type of person.   
 

Plus, there’s no shot to take as he was part of the decision making team involved in the constant search for a better QB.  If he’s taking a % at the Colts he’s taking a shot at himself.   

Im sure he was asked about 5 QBs in 5 years and he’s stating the obvious.   You need stability at the most important position in the sport. 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, Lurk McGurk said:

I was hoping the Bears would end up as #4 as well.  But when really thinking it over I'm leaning towards it may be more valuable to move back farther and get the extra premium picks.  Obviously it all depends on how valuable the Bears think Carter/Anderson are compared to the next tier of players.

What premium picks? What if Carolina ends  up with the 23rd pick in the first next year. My point was carter or Anderson is basically almost a given so that would basically be their first round pick in 24.  So instead of a projection of what they might get in 24 they get a guy that is guaranteed to help them this year. So basically getting a better deal by trading to four then to 9. I know they can also get someone at 9 that can help them right away but the farther they move down the more chance there is.

[Lurk McGurk]

28 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What premium picks? What if Carolina ends  up with the 23rd pick in the first next year. My point was carter or Anderson is basically almost a given so that would basically be their first round pick in 24.  So instead of a projection of what they might get in 24 they get a guy that is guaranteed to help them this year. So basically getting a better deal by trading to four then to 9. I know they can also get someone at 9 that can help them right away but the farther they move down the more chance there is.

You don't think pick #23 is a premium pick?  I would say that would be about as bad as it could be reasonably expected to be and would still be very much premium.  Even if we assume that Anderson/Carter are a given, which they aren't, a given for what?  A solid starter?  A few pro bowls?  A HOF'er?  From what I hear they are expected to be at least solid NFL players most likely, but there is definitely not any certainty to them being perennial pro bowlers.  26 players in the NFL had 9+ sacks this year.  If Anderson is a 9-10 sack guy is he worth not having who you got at #9 along with a future #23 and a 2nd rounder?  There's as much uncertainty about the careers of Carter/Anderson as there is about where those future picks would land.  Also, while fixing the defense is important for the Bears, making sure the OL and weapons around Fields is improved is a much bigger priority (primarily because they have to make a decision on his future after this year).  I don't think the Bears are going to be as sold on staying top 4 as I or others initially thought.  Obviously that's just my opinion.

 

With all of these decisions there's projection involved.  You make a projection of what you expect the value of future picks to be.  You make a projection of what the value of the player you pick at #4 and #9 would be.  You can be right and you can be wrong, but that is absolutely what they should and will do.  I can easily see it being projected as moving to #9 being considered more valuable.

[danlhart87]

11 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

What premium picks? What if Carolina ends  up with the 23rd pick in the first next year. My point was carter or Anderson is basically almost a given so that would basically be their first round pick in 24.  So instead of a projection of what they might get in 24 they get a guy that is guaranteed to help them this year. So basically getting a better deal by trading to four then to 9. I know they can also get someone at 9 that can help them right away but the farther they move down the more chance there is.

The Bears issue is they have lots of weaknesses so they want as many picks as possible to maximize help

 

They need help at

 

OL

Front 7

WR

 

etc

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

21 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

The Bears issue is they have lots of weaknesses so they want as many picks as possible to maximize help

 

They need help at

 

OL

Front 7

WR

 

etc

They also have a ton of cap space where they can get proven young players coming off first contract.  Draft picks dont equal proven players. I understand the point. I just don’t see them wanting to trade down that far and I don’t see a team in that 7-9 range giving up that many mort picks. I have always said I think bears are at the mercy of colts and Texans whether I think they trade down.  That rap report also said he thinks carolina could go after a vet like Carr because of where they draft at. Who knows some of these teams after colts could also be in position to get the third or fourth QB. It’s going to be Interesting to see what happens. We won’t have to wait long on Carr because I think he has to be traded in next couple of weeks. They still haven’t given him permission to look for a trade.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

32 minutes ago, Lurk McGurk said:

You don't think pick #23 is a premium pick?  I would say that would be about as bad as it could be reasonably expected to be and would still be very much premium.  Even if we assume that Anderson/Carter are a given, which they aren't, a given for what?  A solid starter?  A few pro bowls?  A HOF'er?  From what I hear they are expected to be at least solid NFL players most likely, but there is definitely not any certainty to them being perennial pro bowlers.  26 players in the NFL had 9+ sacks this year.  If Anderson is a 9-10 sack guy is he worth not having who you got at #9 along with a future #23 and a 2nd rounder?  There's as much uncertainty about the careers of Carter/Anderson as there is about where those future picks would land.  Also, while fixing the defense is important for the Bears, making sure the OL and weapons around Fields is improved is a much bigger priority (primarily because they have to make a decision on his future after this year).  I don't think the Bears are going to be as sold on staying top 4 as I or others initially thought.  Obviously that's just my opinion.

 

With all of these decisions there's projection involved.  You make a projection of what you expect the value of future picks to be.  You make a projection of what the value of the player you pick at #4 and #9 would be.  You can be right and you can be wrong, but that is absolutely what they should and will do.  I can easily see it being projected as moving to #9 being considered more valuable.

My point was when your picking in top five those are almost always elite players that teams know are going to be good. The farther you go down in the first the more risk there is. 
 

I don’t know what is going happen. It’s just a gut that I have they won’t want to move past 4. They also probably won’t get as much as people think to move down to 4.  I have seen enough speculation that they probably won’t want to move past 4. Remember they decimated their defense this season and got rid of some good dline guys. Which was them probably looking at what’s in the draft. Eberflus loves 3 techs too. More then edge.

[gspdx]

2 hours ago, Nesjan3 said:

I you cant see that him saying that to the national media is not a subtle shot at the Colts organization then I dont know what to tell you.

Well, then he is also taking a shot at himself.  I  am sure he was part of those decisions. 

[danlhart87]

What in your opinion is the worst thing Colts could do at 4 and try to be specific

[Boss7894]

7 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

What in your opinion is the worst thing Colts could do at 4 and try to be specific

More often than not I’m not a big fan of trading back 

[Stephen]

5 hours ago, BProland85 said:

I’d be happy with Young on the Colts so long as he knows how to avoid getting hit. He seems to have that pocket presence. 

Young steps behind center and Ultra instinct theme plays.

[danlhart87]

2 hours ago, Boss7894 said:

More often than not I’m not a big fan of trading back 

That for me depends who is available 

[Nate!]

5 hours ago, Lurk McGurk said:

You don't think pick #23 is a premium pick?  I would say that would be about as bad as it could be reasonably expected to be and would still be very much premium.  Even if we assume that Anderson/Carter are a given, which they aren't, a given for what?  A solid starter?  A few pro bowls?  A HOF'er?  From what I hear they are expected to be at least solid NFL players most likely, but there is definitely not any certainty to them being perennial pro bowlers.  26 players in the NFL had 9+ sacks this year.  If Anderson is a 9-10 sack guy is he worth not having who you got at #9 along with a future #23 and a 2nd rounder?  There's as much uncertainty about the careers of Carter/Anderson as there is about where those future picks would land.  Also, while fixing the defense is important for the Bears, making sure the OL and weapons around Fields is improved is a much bigger priority (primarily because they have to make a decision on his future after this year).  I don't think the Bears are going to be as sold on staying top 4 as I or others initially thought.  Obviously that's just my opinion.

 

With all of these decisions there's projection involved.  You make a projection of what you expect the value of future picks to be.  You make a projection of what the value of the player you pick at #4 and #9 would be.  You can be right and you can be wrong, but that is absolutely what they should and will do.  I can easily see it being projected as moving to #9 being considered more valuable.

Late to the convo, but no, a late first is not a premium pick.  Pretty sure history shows late first hit rate isn’t all that good.  Talent wise pretty sure generally regarded that late firsts are more similar in value as the second round vs being similar in value with the picks preceding them.  Huge tier drops early and then a flattening 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Colts have to make up around 1800 points if they traded to one.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Wonder if a draft trade could happen right before FA. That way teams would know if they need to go sign a vet.

[danlhart87]

57 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Wonder if a draft trade could happen right before FA. That way teams would know if they need to go sign a vet.

A trade if at all would most likely happen post FA

[Bearzzz]

6 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

My point was when your picking in top five those are almost always elite players that teams know are going to be good. The farther you go down in the first the more risk there is. 
 

I don’t know what is going happen. It’s just a gut that I have they won’t want to move past 4. They also probably won’t get as much as people think to move down to 4.  I have seen enough speculation that they probably won’t want to move past 4. Remember they decimated their defense this season and got rid of some good dline guys. Which was them probably looking at what’s in the draft. Eberflus loves 3 techs too. More then edge.

Good point but what if Anderson or Carter don't pan out? Bears roster is weak. I feel Poles will accumulate picks like he did last year, maximizing his chances. Last year he entered the draft with 6 picks and finished with 11 players selected. Even if they trade down to 4, I think he will try to trade back again. The Bears have tried the strong defense route for several years and it hasn't worked. Time to build around the QB.

[danlhart87]

Taken from Texans Reddit 

 

[MikeCurtis]

17 hours ago, joeb said:

 Bryce is very elusive. I like that.

One of the talking heads remarked that Bryce was always aware, and never seemed to take on a direct hit

 

He will need that in the pros

 

I would be VERY happy with QB1 or QB2

 

If they are both gone.....  I would go with AR15...... too early, but we need a QB for the future

 

Do your best and keep building for 2024

 

IF we go with AR15....... Garropolo seems like a good fit until he is ready

[MikeCurtis]

9 hours ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Colts have to make up around 1800 points if they traded to one.

From past history, people dont seem to use the point system for a QB in the top 2-3 picks

 

They WAY overpay.

 

 

[MikeCurtis]

13 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

What in your opinion is the worst thing Colts could do at 4 and try to be specific

Get a guard

 

 

[Jason_]

17 hours ago, Nesjan3 said:

I you cant see that him saying that to the national media is not a subtle shot at the Colts organization then I dont know what to tell you.

 

why?  do you not know enough of the english language to put into words a semi-competent reasoning to validate your point?  It's ok if you have to use small words

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

King of colts said on his podcast a little birdie told him right now colts don’t see much of a difference in 3 of the quarterbacks. But that can change with the HC hire and once they start evaluating.  Hope that is just not Ballard being indecisive and not being proactive. He thinks colts should get the 3rd QB at then least. They both said bears are not going to miss out on carter or AndersoN. So he thinks bears only trade with Texans or colts or stay at 1. 

[Nesjan3]

3 hours ago, J@son said:

 

why?  do you not know enough of the english language to put into words a semi-competent reasoning to validate your point?  It's ok if you have to use small words

Do you do anything on this forum other than go cherry pick peoples post you dont agree with and throw personal shots. Does it make you feel validated or tough that you can demeane people from behind a keyboard without reprucution? Typical sad internet warrior of the new age. 

[Jason_]

 

 

 

Quote

Does it make you feel validated or tough that you can demeane people from behind a keyboard without reprucution?

 

See, here's what's funny.  That's basically what you did too.  I simply avoided the subtlety. 

 

 

 

[Nesjan3]

7 minutes ago, J@son said:

 

 

 

 

See, here's what's funny.  That's basically what you did too.  I simply avoided the subtlety. 

 

 

 

Sure. Me disagreeing with someone who says Franks words were not a subtle shot at the Colts org. is the same as insinuating someone doesn't know english. Whatever you want to tell yourself.

[Jason_]

2 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

Sure. Me disagreeing with someone who says Franks words were not a subtle shot at the Colts org. is the same as insinuating someone doesn't know english. Whatever you want to tell yourself.

 

Nothing to do with disagreeing with someone, but rather how you did it.  

 

"If you can't see that what I said is right then I just don't know what to tell you"  is incredibly condescending.  Just like what I said to you was incredibly condescending.  

 

 

 

[Nesjan3]

1 minute ago, J@son said:

 

Nothing to do with disagreeing with someone, but rather how you did it.  

 

"If you can't see that what I said is right then I just don't know what to tell you"  is incredibly condescending.  Just like what I said to you was incredibly condescending.  

 

 

 

Spin it however you want to. Ive seen so have many others how you go after people on this forum with the personal attacks. Its no secret your a keyboard warrior. Have fun!

[Lurk McGurk]

16 hours ago, Nate! said:

Late to the convo, but no, a late first is not a premium pick.  Pretty sure history shows late first hit rate isn’t all that good.  Talent wise pretty sure generally regarded that late firsts are more similar in value as the second round vs being similar in value with the picks preceding them.  Huge tier drops early and then a flattening 

It seems a little pedantic to take issue with calling a first round pick premium.  I don't think GM's view it the same way.  I referred to a first round pick being premium in reference to trade compensation (as opposed to later round picks) and somehow calling it premium is disputed?  You can look at the value on a draft chart to know that there's a huge drop off in value from #1 overall on down.  That's common sense.  I don't think it's really debatable that 1st round picks in the NFL are viewed as premium, and that teams/GM's treat them as such.  The 5th year option being part of that.

 

You could much more easily pick apart your statement since it's much more specific.  Referring to #23 as a late first, and comparing it to a 2nd round pick, even though there's 9 more 1st round picks before the 2nd round even begins.  How far back in the 2nd round does your comparison go?  Are we talking 20 picks after #23?  Maybe 30 picks after?  Is there a premium on the difference between #23 and #53? 

 

Help me out, what pick #'s should I be referring to when I use the term premium pick going forward?

[Jason_]

 

2 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

Spin it however you want to.

 

Back at ya 

[crazycolt1]

11 hours ago, danlhart87 said:

Taken from Texans Reddit 

 

I kinda feel that way. The talent level is not that much different between the top 3 QBs imo. Stay at #4 and go from there.  If there is no QB at #4 the Colts want take the BPA or trade out of it. 

[Lurk McGurk]

14 hours ago, Bearzzz said:

Good point but what if Anderson or Carter don't pan out? Bears roster is weak. I feel Poles will accumulate picks like he did last year, maximizing his chances. Last year he entered the draft with 6 picks and finished with 11 players selected. Even if they trade down to 4, I think he will try to trade back again. The Bears have tried the strong defense route for several years and it hasn't worked. Time to build around the QB.

Agreed.  I don't think the Bears will feel like they have to stay top 4 like so many people are saying, and I think it's the right approach strategically too.  There's a lot to be said about trading back further than #4 and coming away with help on the offensive side of the ball as opposed to defensively.