Venturi tells the truth

[Superman]

On 1/12/2024 at 3:22 PM, Goatface Killah said:

No I think sacks are their own thing and more pressures dont always equal more sacks. Sacks are a clear win. Usually it means your first move was effective. I think we got more sacks this year because Dayo and Kwity developed and were just better with their initial move. I also think Ebukam was really good for us and when he win, he won early. Some guys just dont get off blocks very well. Thats what seperates great rushers from good rushers, they win early and late.

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39310757/detroit-lions-win-wild-card-game-los-angeles-rams-matthew-stafford-jared-goff-puka-nacua-ford-field

 

There's a little note at the end of this article that illustrates why I'm harping on pressures and pressure rate.

 

Quote

Biggest hole in the game plan: Goff was a perfect 22-of-22 for 277 yards and a touchdown when he was not pressured. That is the most such attempts without an incompletion in a playoff start since ESPN began tracking pressures in 2009. On the flip side, Goff was 0-of-5 with three sacks when pressured. Those eight dropbacks under pressure without a completion are tied for Goff's career high. 

 

Not only does pressure lead to sacks, but pressure can turn a really efficient and capable QB into a complete disaster. To be clear, sacks are more valuable, but pressure still matters. Even if you don't see our sack conversion rate as unsustainable, we still need to be better than 19.6% pressure rate.

[NewColtsFan]

21 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Apparently Martendale could be available.  Make the call. I have a lot of faith in Steichen but his retention of Bradley is a real head scratcher for me unless there are things going on behind the scenes we don't know about. Does continuity refer to the scheme rather than keeping the coach? I don't know but heading into next season with the same old coach, talent and scheme on defense is just going to lead to the same results. 8 years watching this defence tells me it is broken from the  coaching, talent, and scheme. It is time to make a change. Also not being talked about is this. Steichen reportedly is a very bright man. He had to see what is going on, he had to. In keeping Gus, if he does, is this his first shot stating he believes the problems with the D is more talent than coaching?  If he retains Gus, that's what it's telling me. I still have to believe there is more going on behind the scenes

 

For what it’s worth…..

 

I agree that Martindale is a very good DC.   That said, the stories I read about him and his approach to working with other coaches is not good at all.   I’ll be making a post about the incredible drama with the Giants.   It’ll be in the NFL section later today. 

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I finished listening to this interview from JMV last night. Venturi said colts don’t play match. I have seen so many breakdowns and film reviews from Zach hicks showing they do. I think he just doesn’t know what he is talking about.

[Goatface Killah]

20 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39310757/detroit-lions-win-wild-card-game-los-angeles-rams-matthew-stafford-jared-goff-puka-nacua-ford-field

 

There's a little note at the end of this article that illustrates why I'm harping on pressures and pressure rate.

 

 

Not only does pressure lead to sacks, but pressure can turn a really efficient and capable QB into a complete disaster. To be clear, sacks are more valuable, but pressure still matters. Even if you don't see our sack conversion rate as unsustainable, we still need to be better than 19.6% pressure rate.

I agreed we need more pressure. I never said we didnt. 

 

This all started as a response to moose who claimed our pass rush was awful. It isnt. The sack production proves that. If our pressure rate matched pur sack output, we would be undeniably elite. 

 

We are somewhere between those 2 extremes. 

[Solid84]

11 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

I agreed we need more pressure. I never said we didnt. 

 

This all started as a response to moose who claimed our pass rush was awful. It isnt. The sack production proves that. If our pressure rate matched pur sack output, we would be undeniably elite. 

 

We are somewhere between those 2 extremes. 

Sacks are a product of pressure, pressure isn't a product of sacks. That's why the pressure rate matters so much because more pressure is more opportunities to impact the play (with sacks among other ways).

 

It's not two separate things. Sacks is a subcategory of pressure.

[chad72]

17 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Sacks are a product of pressure, pressure isn't a product of sacks. That's why the pressure rate matters so much because more pressure is more opportunities to impact the play (with sacks among other ways).

 

It's not two separate things. Sacks is a subcategory of pressure.

 

It just tells me we are highly efficient with our limited pressures that a lot of them result in sacks. But the pressure rate can still improve overall.

[Superman]

41 minutes ago, Goatface Killah said:

I agreed we need more pressure. I never said we didnt. 

 

This all started as a response to moose who claimed our pass rush was awful. It isnt. The sack production proves that. If our pressure rate matched pur sack output, we would be undeniably elite. 

 

We are somewhere between those 2 extremes. 

 

Yeah, definitely don't lump me in with moose. But I'm not impressed by our pass rush, I think we feasted on bad offenses for the most part.

 

Quote

It just tells me we are highly efficient with our limited pressures that a lot of them result in sacks. But the pressure rate can still improve overall.

 

The competition is why I'm not sold on this. Statistically, you're correct. But whenever we played a QB with any kind of pocket presence, the pressures and sacks went down significantly. The Bengals game is an example -- 11.5% pressure rate, three total pressures, zero sacks. And that's just Jake Browning.

 

Good talk. Didn't mean to backtrack, just saw that blurb and thought it was a good example of what I was talking about earlier.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

Sacks are a product of pressure, pressure isn't a product of sacks. That's why the pressure rate matters so much because more pressure is more opportunities to impact the play (with sacks among other ways).

 

It's not two separate things. Sacks is a subcategory of pressure.

 

We know the Colts faced a very easy schedule on defense. I believe I saw it was the #28 SOS, based on season-long EPA of those offenses.

 

But in reality, it's likely closer to #32 than #28 because of some favorable circumstances of certain games:

• Played HOU in Week 2 with most of their starting OL out. HOU's OL got healthier, Stroud got better and their offense took off, which improved their season-long EPA. 
• Played BAL Week 3 in bad weather with key OL starters out. Clearly, that team got healthy and was far better as the season went on, with a much higher EPA. 
• Played CLE with Phillip Walker instead of the Joe Flacco, who vastly improved their offense and EPA over the back half.
• Played PIT with Mitch Trubisky instead of Kenny Pickett/Mason Rudolph. PIT avg'd 13 ppg with Trubisky and were flat out terrible. 

IND put up 14 sacks in 3 of those games (HOU, BAL and PIT). They added another 21 sacks against CAR (bad OL and bad rookie QB), NE (bad OL and bad QB), TB (bad OL) and TEN (bad OL and bad QB).

 

That accounts for 35 of their 51 sacks in only 7 games, all with either very favorable circumstances/bad opponents/bad OLs/bad QBs.

 

They allowed 13 ppg in those 7 games too. 

 

In the other 10 games combined, they had 16 sacks.

 

They also allowed 32.4 ppg in those 10 games (which would have been #32 in the NFL by ~2 ppg).

 

Looking at that huge disparity (#1 defense in 7 games vs. #32 defense in 10 games), it's reasonable to suggest that they weren't really that effective as a pass rush unit overall (as the sack totals indicate) and they overachieved on sacks, mainly due to circumstances. And because they were given enough opportunity to do so, it skewed the entire season total.

 

It's also fair to suggest that the other 10 games are likely more indicative of what to expect with their low pressure rate.

 

Those 10 games are a larger sample size and probably a fairer indication of the play of the defense this year too. Maybe not the #32 defense, but certainly not a good one. And those games are more in line with what a normal SOS would look like for a team.

 

So I have a hard time trusting these overly positive narratives around certain players and the defense overall. 

 

 

[Solid84]

57 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

It just tells me we are highly efficient with our limited pressures that a lot of them result in sacks. But the pressure rate can still improve overall.

We have been this season. I'm just not ready to crown the Dline in any way, because there have been no changes that suggest this should be a thing. Ebukam? Had about the same pressure/sacks as Ngakoue. Ebukam is just better against the run, but that of course doesn't impact our pass rush.

 

Also our sack rate (precentage of pressures that are sacks) is off the charts. Literally the highest in the league by some margine. Why? There's nothing suggesting this should be a thing. Only team remotely close to us is the Chiefs, everyone else is quite a bit behind us.

 

I don't mean to diss our Dline, it's great to get a lot of sacks. But, I've seen people refer to our sacks and say our pass rush is fine and I disagree.. a lot.

[Solid84]

5 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

We know the Colts faced a very easy schedule on defense. I believe I saw it was the #28 SOS, based on season-long EPA of those offenses.

 

But in reality, it's likely closer to #32 than #28 because of some favorable circumstances of certain games:

• Played HOU in Week 2 with most of their starting OL out. HOU's OL got healthier, Stroud got better and their offense took off, which improved their season-long EPA. 
• Played BAL Week 3 in bad weather with key OL starters out. Clearly, that team got healthy and was far better as the season went on, with a much higher EPA. 
• Played CLE with Phillip Walker instead of the Joe Flacco, who vastly improved their offense and EPA over the back half.
• Played PIT with Mitch Trubisky instead of Kenny Pickett/Mason Rudolph. PIT avg'd 13 ppg with Trubisky and were flat out terrible. 

IND put up 14 sacks in 3 of those games (HOU, BAL and PIT). They added another 21 sacks against CAR (bad OL and bad rookie QB), NE (bad OL and bad QB), TB (bad OL) and TEN (bad OL and bad QB).

 

That accounts for 35 of their 51 sacks in only 7 games, all with either very favorable circumstances/bad opponents/bad OLs/bad QBs.

 

They allowed 13 ppg in those 7 games too. 

 

In the other 10 games combined, they had 16 sacks.

 

They also allowed 32.4 ppg in those 10 games (which would have been #32 in the NFL by ~2 ppg).

 

Looking at that huge disparity (#1 defense in 7 games vs. #32 defense in 10 games), it's reasonable to suggest that they weren't really that effective as a pass rush unit overall (as the sack totals indicate) and they overachieved on sacks, mainly due to circumstances. And because they were given enough opportunity to do so, it skewed the entire season total.

 

It's also fair to suggest that the other 10 games are likely more indicative of what to expect with their low pressure rate.

 

Those 10 games are a larger sample size and probably a fairer indication of the play of the defense this year too. Maybe not the #32 defense, but certainly not a good one. And those games are more in line with what a normal SOS would look like for a team.

 

So I have a hard time trusting these overly positive narratives around certain players and the defense overall. 

 

 

I think this is precisely why our numbers are what they are and why we can't really use said numbers as a meassure of how good our pass rush is. You have to dive into it and look at each game.

[Superman]

14 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

Looking at that huge disparity (#1 defense in 7 games vs. #32 defense in 10 games), it's reasonable to suggest that they weren't really that effective as a pass rush unit overall (as the sack totals indicate) and they overachieved on sacks, mainly due to circumstances. And because they were given enough opportunity to do so, it skewed the entire season total.

 

Thanks for doing this. That breakdown is eye opening. I didn't expect that big of a disparity.

 

In the seven games you separated out, we averaged 5 sacks/game. In the other ten games, 1.6 sacks/game. That's massive. I'm tempted to go through and break out the pressures/game also, but I think we can assume that there's a similar disparity at work.

[Solid84]

33 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Thanks for doing this. That breakdown is eye opening. I didn't expect that big of a disparity.

 

In the seven games you separated out, we averaged 5 sacks/game. In the other ten games, 1.6 sacks/game. That's massive. I'm tempted to go through and break out the pressures/game also, but I think we can assume that there's a similar disparity at work.

Using PFF numbers:

 

Week 1 Jacksonville: 10

Week 2 Houston: 28

Week 3 Baltimore: 16

Week 4 Rams: 14

Week 5 Titans: 22

Week 6 Jacksonville: 10

Week 7 Browns: 15

Week 8 Saints: 5

Week 9 Carolina: 29

Week 10 New England: 20

Week 12 Buccaneers: 14

Week 13 Titans: 29

Week 14 Bengals: 8

Week 15 Pittsburgh: 20

Week 16 Faclcons: 13

Week 17 Raiders: 16

Week 18 Houston: 12

 

7 high sack weeks: 156 total pressures - 22.29 avg. pressures per week

11 remaining weeks: 125 total pressures - 11.36 avg. pressures per week

 

Edit because we don't have 18 weeks in a season (yet?):

10 remaining weeks: 125 total pressures - 12.5 avg. pressures per week

[shasta519]

26 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

I think this is precisely why our numbers are what they are and why we can't really use said numbers as a meassure of how good our pass rush is. You have to dive into it and look at each game.

 

ESPN has the Colts #5 for pass rush win rate, although they only have DeFo (#5 for DT pass rush win rate) and Ebukam (#16 for EDGE pass rush win rate) even ranked in the top 20 for IDL or ERs. 

 

I suppose if we buy that stat, then we have to buy that the OL was bad bad in pass pro (#26 in pass block win rate). But I am sure PFF would you tell that the Colts OL is elite at pass blocking with how they grade them, so who knows with these advanced stats.

 

Still, even if the Colts were #5 in PRWR, it could still be largely due to those 7 games, where they had an extremely high win rate that turned into sacks. 

 

I agree that the numbers are largely circumstantial. Not that the Colts are the only team that does this, but I think this year is a bit of an outlier in terms of the schedule and the overall QB play. Next year will likely be a very different story. If the Colts are giving up 30+ PPG to CLE (with a backup), NO, CIN (with a backup), ATL (with a backup)...then what happens when those teams become BUF, MIA, DET, GB, MIN.

[chad72]

38 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

We know the Colts faced a very easy schedule on defense. I believe I saw it was the #28 SOS, based on season-long EPA of those offenses.

 

But in reality, it's likely closer to #32 than #28 because of some favorable circumstances of certain games:

• Played HOU in Week 2 with most of their starting OL out. HOU's OL got healthier, Stroud got better and their offense took off, which improved their season-long EPA. 
• Played BAL Week 3 in bad weather with key OL starters out. Clearly, that team got healthy and was far better as the season went on, with a much higher EPA. 
• Played CLE with Phillip Walker instead of the Joe Flacco, who vastly improved their offense and EPA over the back half.
• Played PIT with Mitch Trubisky instead of Kenny Pickett/Mason Rudolph. PIT avg'd 13 ppg with Trubisky and were flat out terrible. 

IND put up 14 sacks in 3 of those games (HOU, BAL and PIT). They added another 21 sacks against CAR (bad OL and bad rookie QB), NE (bad OL and bad QB), TB (bad OL) and TEN (bad OL and bad QB).

 

That accounts for 35 of their 51 sacks in only 7 games, all with either very favorable circumstances/bad opponents/bad OLs/bad QBs.

 

They allowed 13 ppg in those 7 games too. 

 

In the other 10 games combined, they had 16 sacks.

 

They also allowed 32.4 ppg in those 10 games (which would have been #32 in the NFL by ~2 ppg).

 

Looking at that huge disparity (#1 defense in 7 games vs. #32 defense in 10 games), it's reasonable to suggest that they weren't really that effective as a pass rush unit overall (as the sack totals indicate) and they overachieved on sacks, mainly due to circumstances. And because they were given enough opportunity to do so, it skewed the entire season total.

 

It's also fair to suggest that the other 10 games are likely more indicative of what to expect with their low pressure rate.

 

Those 10 games are a larger sample size and probably a fairer indication of the play of the defense this year too. Maybe not the #32 defense, but certainly not a good one. And those games are more in line with what a normal SOS would look like for a team.

 

So I have a hard time trusting these overly positive narratives around certain players and the defense overall. 

 

 

 

 

Excellent breakdown!!! Maybe when we play a tough schedule and end up paying the price for Bradley's schemes, Steichen and Ballard's eyes might be opened. I am sure it won't be before the 2024 season ends. 

[chad72]

4 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

If the Colts are giving up 30+ PPG to CLE (with a backup), NO, CIN (with a backup), ATL (with a backup)...then what happens when those teams become BUF, MIA, DET, GB, MIN.

 

We better have AR and some bullets/weapons loaded up for answers, that is all I am going to say. Our best defense will be a very good offense.

 

For those 10 games charted where you felt it was reflective of a typical SOS, if you look at the offense, we can paint a better middle of the road picture if not a Top 10 picture, with Minshew though we ended up close to Top 10 in ppg offensively if I am not mistaken. Steichen and the offense will be our best bets moving forward till Bradley's schemes are done, IMO.

[shasta519]

42 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

We know the Colts faced a very easy schedule on defense. I believe I saw it was the #28 SOS, based on season-long EPA of those offenses.

 

But in reality, it's likely closer to #32 than #28 because of some favorable circumstances of certain games:

• Played HOU in Week 2 with most of their starting OL out. HOU's OL got healthier, Stroud got better and their offense took off, which improved their season-long EPA. 
• Played BAL Week 3 in bad weather with key OL starters out. Clearly, that team got healthy and was far better as the season went on, with a much higher EPA. 
• Played CLE with Phillip Walker instead of the Joe Flacco, who vastly improved their offense and EPA over the back half.
• Played PIT with Mitch Trubisky instead of Kenny Pickett/Mason Rudolph. PIT avg'd 13 ppg with Trubisky and were flat out terrible. 

IND put up 14 sacks in 3 of those games (HOU, BAL and PIT). They added another 21 sacks against CAR (bad OL and bad rookie QB), NE (bad OL and bad QB), TB (bad OL) and TEN (bad OL and bad QB).

 

That accounts for 35 of their 51 sacks in only 7 games, all with either very favorable circumstances/bad opponents/bad OLs/bad QBs.

 

They allowed 13 ppg in those 7 games too. 

 

In the other 10 games combined, they had 16 sacks.

 

They also allowed 32.4 ppg in those 10 games (which would have been #32 in the NFL by ~2 ppg).

 

Looking at that huge disparity (#1 defense in 7 games vs. #32 defense in 10 games), it's reasonable to suggest that they weren't really that effective as a pass rush unit overall (as the sack totals indicate) and they overachieved on sacks, mainly due to circumstances. And because they were given enough opportunity to do so, it skewed the entire season total.

 

It's also fair to suggest that the other 10 games are likely more indicative of what to expect with their low pressure rate.

 

Those 10 games are a larger sample size and probably a fairer indication of the play of the defense this year too. Maybe not the #32 defense, but certainly not a good one. And those games are more in line with what a normal SOS would look like for a team.

 

So I have a hard time trusting these overly positive narratives around certain players and the defense overall. 

 

 

 

Edit: I fudged the PPG because I forgot to count TEN:

 

7 Games with 35 sacks: 17 ppg

10 Game with 16 sacks: 29.6 ppg

 

Still a massive disparity as one is a top 3 defense and one is a bottom 3 defense.

[stitches]

Yeah, all those numbers kind of confirm what my subjective view on the performance of the DL has been - that we are still struggling creating pressure and disrupting the pass despite better raw sack numbers this year compared to previous years. We still don't have a legit high level pass-rusher on the EDGEs... and Buckner is just not enough.. 

[shasta519]

37 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Thanks for doing this. That breakdown is eye opening. I didn't expect that big of a disparity.

 

In the seven games you separated out, we averaged 5 sacks/game. In the other ten games, 1.6 sacks/game. That's massive. I'm tempted to go through and break out the pressures/game also, but I think we can assume that there's a similar disparity at work.

 

Naturally, we see a similar disparity with the sack totals from the trio of ERs:

 

Kwity Paye (7 games): 6.5 sacks

Kwity Paye (10 games): 2 sacks

 

Ebukam (7 games): 7 sacks

Ebukam (10 games): 2 sacks

 

Dayo (7 games): 6 sacks (3 in one game)

Dayo (10 games): 2 sacks

 

That trio combined for 19.5 sacks came in 7 games, while accounting for only 6 sacks in the other 10 games. THREE players.

 

DeFo is the only one to "buck" that trend, as 5/8 sacks came outside of those games.

 

Again, just a hard time believing in this narratives about the pass rush and ERs. 

[chad72]

13 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, all those numbers kind of confirm what my subjective view on the performance of the DL has been - that we are still struggling creating pressure and disrupting the pass despite better raw sack numbers this year compared to previous years. We still don't have a legit high level pass-rusher on the EDGEs... and Buckner is just not enough.. 

 

This is also why I am not ruling out a good pass rusher at No.15 if we get our hands on one that is rated Top 10 that drops slightly. 

[shasta519]

18 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

We better have AR and some bullets/weapons loaded up for answers, that is all I am going to say. Our best defense will be a very good offense.

 

For those 10 games charted where you felt it was reflective of a typical SOS, if you look at the offense, we can paint a better middle of the road picture if not a Top 10 picture, with Minshew though we ended up close to Top 10 in ppg offensively if I am not mistaken. Steichen and the offense will be our best bets moving forward till Bradley's schemes are done, IMO.

 

Yep. Steichen was a great hire. Both he and Minshew navigated a ridiculously tough SOS on offense. I don't think Minshew gets enough credit, as I see lots of people on Colts Twitter disparaging him.

 

And I don't fully buy the offense would have been better with AR this year. First of all, they were pretty damn good as it is. Second, it was Minshew, not AR, who faced down those tough defenses. We just don't know what that might have looked like with AR. 

 

Next year is a different story of course. And I would certainly take AR over Minshew. I just don't get why Minshew doesn't get more credit. It wasn't always pretty, but it could have been far worse (like we saw last year).

[harrisoncolts88]

I'm not disagreeing with the group here and think the Colts need an Elite DE still as I think all their current DE's are high end complimentary pieces (which I'm glad they are on the Colts). But with the sack totals numbers being discussed above, don't we also need to include how many times the opponent ran in those games, reducing sack chances? How well our offense had the ball, meaning our defense got rest and whatnot. I can't argue with the numbers above as they are the facts, but sometimes the lack of pressures could be the result of other indirect things

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Just now, shasta519 said:

 

Yep. Steichen was a great hire. Both he and Minshew navigated a ridiculously tough SOS on offense. I don't think Minshew gets enough credit, as I see lots of people on Colts Twitter disparaging him.

 

And I don't fully buy the offense would have been better with AR this year. First of all, they were pretty damn good as it is. Second, it was Minshew, not AR, who faced down those tough defenses. We just don't know what that might have looked like with AR. 

 

Next year is a different story of course. And I would certainly take AR over Minshew. I just don't get why Minshew doesn't get more credit. It wasn't always pretty, but it could have been far worse (like we saw last year).

They barely threw it 20 yards down field. Thst wouldn’t have happened with AR. Just to watch highlights of AR and it’s so obvious how much better the offense was. Colds couldn’t score in the red zone with Minshew. With the short time with AR they were 75%.

[chad72]

5 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Yep. Steichen was a great hire. Both he and Minshew navigated a ridiculously tough SOS on offense. I don't think Minshew gets enough credit, as I see lots of people on Colts Twitter disparaging him.

 

And I don't fully buy the offense would have been better with AR this year. First of all, they were pretty damn good as it is. Second, it was Minshew, not AR, who faced down those tough defenses. We just don't know what that might have looked like with AR. 

 

Next year is a different story of course. And I would certainly take AR over Minshew. I just don't get why Minshew doesn't get more credit. It wasn't always pretty, but it could have been far worse (like we saw last year).

 

Minshew started like a tease, the good, the bad and the ugly showed up early on, then more good than bad and ugly showing up as the season went on and he knew how to put the team in good spots to win. That roller coaster is probably what people held on to but you could definitely tell his turnovers and decisions got better as the season went on. One just had to temper expectations like not expecting Minshew to hit someone in stride all the time for YAC, not expecting Minshew to read blitzes like the best of them etc. and once the expectations were re-aligned, he exceeded those backup QB expectations considerably.

 

Certain limitations were amplified and kept showing up, so like I said, revised expectations would have kept folks happier overall w.r.t Minshew, IMO.

[GoColts8818]

I think this is a case where you can use stats to tell you what you want to hear.  
 

Personally I would say the sacks are great and shouldn’t be dismissed but they need to do a better job consistently getting to the QB and getting to the QB in key moments.  This group did a good job of pretty much just being a bunch of guys in terms of rushing the passer.  They could 100% use that superstar like Freeney or Mathis was but other than QB that’s probably the hardest thing to find in football.  That’s why if Ballard likes one of the pass rushers in this draft and they are there around 15 I think he will make sure he gets him.  It doesn’t matter if it’s weak class for them if your guy hits.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, GoColts8818 said:

I think this is a case where you can use stats to tell you what you want to hear.  
 

Personally I would say the sacks are great and shouldn’t be dismissed but they need to do a better job consistently getting to the QB and getting to the QB in key moments.  This group did a good job of pretty much just being a bunch of guys in terms of rushing the passer.  They could 100% use that superstar like Freeney or Mathis was but other than QB that’s probably the hardest thing to find in football.  That’s why if Ballard likes one of the pass rushers in this draft and they are there around 15 I think he will make sure he gets him.  It doesn’t matter if it’s weak class for them if your guy hits.  

As long as Ballard thinks they are elite. If he sees their ceiling at what we already have then he should pass and take a different position. It’s more than just liking one. You are exactly right the kind of edge everyone wants are rare.

[shasta519]

Just now, harrisoncolts88 said:

I'm not disagreeing with the group here and think the Colts need an Elite DE still as I think all their current DE's are high end complimentary pieces (which I'm glad they are on the Colts). But with the sack totals numbers being discussed above, don't we also need to include how many times the opponent ran in those games, reducing sack chances? How well our offense had the ball, meaning our defense got rest and whatnot. I can't argue with the numbers above as they are the facts, but sometimes the lack of pressures could be the result of other indirect things

 

Counting numbers like sacks and pressures can certainly be skewed by game script. But I don't think that is the case here.

 

7 games: 34.6 passes/game; 28.1 rushes/game

10 games: 33.4 passes/game; 28.3 passes/game

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

JMV on the radio a few minutes ago trashing colts for not taking stroud. I am getting really sick of his angry middle aged angry takes.

[csmopar]

41 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

We better have AR and some bullets/weapons loaded up for answers, that is all I am going to say. Our best defense will be a very good offense.

 

For those 10 games charted where you felt it was reflective of a typical SOS, if you look at the offense, we can paint a better middle of the road picture if not a Top 10 picture, with Minshew though we ended up close to Top 10 in ppg offensively if I am not mistaken. Steichen and the offense will be our best bets moving forward till Bradley's schemes are done, IMO.

Just hear me out here. We all know  Ballard likes to play the long game. What if, huge what if, he’s decided to finally focus on getting weapons for AR and has realized that you gotta score big points to win in this league these days? If you buy this, then it makes sense to keep Gus Bradley for one more season. Less holes and less to rebuild in an entire offseason. You focus on the Offense this year, fire Bradley if/when he defense continues to give up huge numbers and you reload with talent that the new DC wants in 2025 already having (hopefully) improved your Offense. 

[harrisoncolts88]

10 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Counting numbers like sacks and pressures can certainly be skewed by game script. But I don't think that is the case here.

 

7 games: 34.6 passes/game; 28.1 rushes/game

10 games: 33.4 passes/game; 28.3 passes/game

 

I'm playing devils advocate as you can see and amazed at the numbers you are getting (I'm too lazy to go gather all that). But even those numbers don't tell me time of possession or other things I could probably nitpick at. Did those runs come at the end of the game, etc? End of the day, my eye test is telling me what you are saying though, I would love to have a dominate edge rusher and why I said in another thread (shoot it might even be in this one haha), that if Josh Allen (Jaguards DE) became available, then I would swing to sign him.

[KB]

18 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

JMV on the radio a few minutes ago trashing colts for not taking stroud. I am getting really sick of his angry middle aged angry takes.

He is just an angry guy. No matter if something good or bad happens, he is going to bash the colts for it. 

[lester]

29 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

JMV on the radio a few minutes ago trashing colts for not taking stroud. I am getting really sick of his angry middle aged angry takes.

 

I don't listen to sports talk radio. I just don't. So, how did mister JMV expect us to have been able to acquire the rights to CJ Stroud?

 

[harrisoncolts88]

Just now, lester said:

 

I don't listen to sports talk radio. I just don't. So, how did mister JMV expect us to have been able to acquire the rights to CJ Stroud?

 

Probably to significantly overpay the Bears like the Panthers did, to jump the Texans. And then we could have all heard that for the year, that even though the Colts got Stroud, the Colts now don't have the capital in future drafts to help him. The power of negativity

[stitches]

50 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

This is also why I am not ruling out a good pass rusher at No.15 if we get our hands on one that is rated Top 10 that drops slightly. 

Yeah, I've been looking at some mock drafts and at least on paper(haven't watched them yet) in a lot of them there seem to be some very good pass-rushers available. 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, I've been looking at some mock drafts and at least on paper(haven't watched them yet) in a lot of them there seem to be some very good pass-rushers available. 

 

Seems like the top of the draft will skew toward offensive players this year.

[shasta519]

7 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

They barely threw it 20 yards down field. Thst wouldn’t have happened with AR. Just to watch highlights of AR and it’s so obvious how much better the offense was. Colds couldn’t score in the red zone with Minshew. With the short time with AR they were 75%.

 

They would have had more chances for explosive plays, but I don't buy the hypothetical that they are definitely a  much better offense with AR this year. Have to get to the RZ for RZ % to matter first of all.

 

And even with that RZ %, they hardly scored more points with AR on the field per drive. The difference was like .1 points/drive...and that's with Gay sucking and missing 7 FGs.

 

AR's EPA/play of .057 is certainly better, but not that much higher than Minshew (.022). Success rate is identical too.  

 

Those differences are not enough to make it obvious that the offense would have been far better with AR than Minshew, especially as they began to actually play good defenses and there was more tape of AR.

 

For reference, AR played the #13, #14 (for 1.5 quarters), #20 and #28 (for 1.5 quarters) defenses.

 

Minshew also played the #13 and #14 teams...and played 7 games against defenses better than any AR faced (including the #1, #2, #5, #7, #8, #9). 

 

I think it's presumptive to assume that AR would wouldn't have struggled against better defenses. Yes, he can throw downfield, but so could Wentz. And most of the big pass plays we saw were in one half of that LAR game when they were trying to make a comeback. The sample size is just really small. 

 

Teams adjust to tape and find weaknesses, especially with rookie QBs. Minshew has his own weaknesses too, but he also has experience and familiarity. Ultimately, I don't think we see an appreciably better offense with AR than Minshew this season.

 

But it doesn't matter because AR didn't even last 4 games. That's another reason why I think Minshew should get more credit...availability. Some teams were on their 3rd and 4th QBs, but the was out there every Sunday. And yet, he's criticized from weirdos like Zack Hicks. 

 

 

[shasta519]

39 minutes ago, harrisoncolts88 said:

 

I'm playing devils advocate as you can see and amazed at the numbers you are getting (I'm too lazy to go gather all that). But even those numbers don't tell me time of possession or other things I could probably nitpick at. Did those runs come at the end of the game, etc? End of the day, my eye test is telling me what you are saying though, I would love to have a dominate edge rusher and why I said in another thread (shoot it might even be in this one haha), that if Josh Allen (Jaguards DE) became available, then I would swing to sign him.

 

I know. I just think it's really hard to poke holes in this narrative, especially as we saw it play it out.

 

I mean...we could delve into time to throw, aDOT, blitz rate (though we know Gus doesn't do that), but I just think this is a case where the stats, eye test, circumstances...all align.

[harrisoncolts88]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

I know. I just think it's really hard to poke holes in this narrative, especially as we saw it play it out.

 

I mean...we could delve into time to throw, aDOT, blitz rate (though we know Gus doesn't do that), but I just think this is a case where the stats, eye test, circumstances...all align.

Yep I agree, we may be fans, but the eye test tells a lot. It's just going to be hard to get what I would think is needed. Another WR, a DE, and a FS for this team that is desperately needed. Not unless we can sign Jaguars DE Josh Allen, trade this years first and next years first for Malik Nabers (or maybe this years first and next years second or third to move up for Odunze). And the whatever can be done to package (either next years first/second and this years second) for Cooper DeJean...

[shasta519]

18 minutes ago, lester said:

 

I don't listen to sports talk radio. I just don't. So, how did mister JMV expect us to have been able to acquire the rights to CJ Stroud?

 

 

There's some hindsight with Stroud now. But there also was a path.

 

The Colts held the #4 pick in the draft. CHI had the #1 pick and was open for business. Moving from #4 to #1 is not that crazy of a leap.

 

And IF the Colts wanted Stroud, they could have become a pretty attractive trade partner for CHI, as they wouldn't have had to move all the way to #9 (however, it has worked out in their favor).

 

But it would still would have been a huge deal...unlike anything we have seen Ballard do. 

 

The move he should have made was trading up and drafting Jordan Love back in 2020...right, @stitches? It's been a long time, but vindication is finally ours!

[shasta519]

Just now, harrisoncolts88 said:

Yep I agree, we may be fans, but the eye test tells a lot. It's just going to be hard to get what I would think is needed. Another WR, a DE, and a FS for this team that is desperately needed. Not unless we can sign Jaguars DE Josh Allen, trade this years first and next years first for Malik Nabers (or maybe this years first and next years second or third to move up for Odunze). And the whatever can be done to package (either next years first/second and this years second) for Cooper DeJean...

 

I think the only way to do it would be to let some of the free agents walk, make a couple splashing signings...and just hope you can replace your outgoing FAs with draft picks on the cheap

[stitches]

1 minute ago, shasta519 said:

 

There's some hindsight with Stroud now. But there also was a path.

 

The Colts held the #4 pick in the draft. CHI had the #1 pick and was open for business. Moving from #4 to #1 is not that crazy of a leap.

 

And IF the Colts wanted Stroud, they could have become a pretty attractive trade partner for CHI, as they wouldn't have had to move all the way to #9 (however, it has worked out in their favor).

 

But it would still would have been a huge deal...unlike anything we have seen Ballard do. 

 

The move he should have made was trading up and drafting Jordan Love back in 2020...right, @stitches? It's been a long time, but vindication is finally ours!

I guess the top move would have been to trade up and get Herbert(and according to Ballard they were considering such a move that year before they traded the #13 pick for Buckner), but yeah... I liked Love a lot. I thought he was a high level QB prospect. He's been pretty good this year... can you imagine what getting the chance to actually play can do for a talented player?