Chris Ballard on Pat McAfee Show about the draft

[Yoshinator]

Just now, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Player pressers today. How in the world is speed almost 29 already? LB could become a real need soon with both speed and Franklin approaching 30.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure we'll draft one next year. I know that Jaylon Carlies is going to be a LB for us from this draft.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

1 minute ago, Yoshinator said:

Yeah, I'm pretty sure we'll draft one next year. I know that Jaylon Carlies is going to be a LB for us from this draft.

That’s one position I don’t worry about because Ballard has always been good at drafting linebackers. It’s not a premium position so it’s not hard to find good ones in the middle of later in the draft. 
 

Hard to believe that speed has been here that long. I remember when people were like who did colts just draft and there was no tape on him. Worked hard and has turned into such a good player.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Something else noticeable is how mature Josh Downs is. He was great in his presser today.

[NewColtsFan]

13 hours ago, DougDew said:

 

 

Ranked on their draft boards or ranked in terms of being an NFL prospect?  Yes, those aren't the same things.   In terms of NFL prospects, yes, I think all teams have pretty much the same 250 players ranked in pretty much the same order.  That's what the "Top 100 prospects means".  Its prospects.  Of course, they are more certain about the players they have ranked highly than the players they have ranked lower.  The margin of error for the lower players is higher than it is for the higher players, so there is a chance that a player with a 7th round grade by one team gets selected in the 5th round by another, over a 5th round ranking guy getting selected in the 3rd round by another.  I'd wager that teams have their top 25 ranked pretty much the same.   I'm speaking in terms of understanding the players' attributes, talents, Character risks, and abilities to play in the NFL...which is NOT the same as their draft boards...meaning who they might want to actually draft.

 

Draft boards would be based upon those attributes combined with the uniqueness of the teams,  So even though a team may think Marvin Harrison is the number 1 prospect, they may choose to pick their number 12 ranked prospect guy JJ McCarthy.  Knowing talent and needs, they probably have JJ higher on their Draft board than MHJ. 

 

But no, I do not think that each team knows how the other 31 teams have their draft boards ranked, with any degree of certainty.

 

I think every GM had ADM ranked as a prospect the same as every other, in terms of risks, talents, etc.  The team that actually picked him has unique reasons for picking him.  And if you put almost ay other GM in the place of Ballard at the time, who understands the Colts, he would have picked ADM for the Colts too.  And they too would have felt lucky that their, say, 35th ranked prospect was still available at pick 52.  Ballard said that "nobody has any idea how this stuff plays out"  Its not my opinion to argue with.  I'm trying to help those on the forum understand what he's saying, even if it conflicts with the opinions they've held for years.

 

 

 

So you judge the validity of a post based upon consensus?  That's all you got?  Yeah, ok, the consensus apparently does not agree with me.  Big deal.

Consensus?  Huh?   I have no idea what that means?   I offered MY opinion.  That’s all.   
 

But I can’t keep up with you.  You just wrote a very long post about how 32 teams have very similar looking Big Boards.   If I had $1 for every time in 13 years I’ve posted that there are 32 teams and 32 completely different looking big boards, I’d be filthy RICH!!  
 

In any given year 32 teams may all agree on the top player, but that the further you get away from the first pick the big boards look very very different.   The exact opposite of what you speculated.  I didn’t agree with one sentence of what you posted here.  You’re entitled to whatever opinion you want but it’s not supported by anything.   
 

I’ve pretty much disagreed with everything you’ve written since the draft started.  But that works to your advantage.  I couldn’t possibly point out all the flaws, so I’ll try to be selective.   
 

Here’s one argument you’ve repeated the last two years.   That Ballard lucked into getting both Woods and Raimann and that he wasn’t even smart enough to realize that Raimann was the better player.  What gets me is that I’ve explained the reasoning to you multiple times and I’ve read other posters explain it to you multiple times.   And we all say the same thing:  That Ballard calculated correctly that because Raimann was 24 and would turn 25 during the season, he stood a better chance of lasting to pick 77 while Woods was taken at 73.   But you keep posting the negative Ballard viewpoint as if NO ONE has explained it to you.  I think it’s both insulting and rude.   It’s what you do when you can’t handle an argument, you just avoid it.  Ballard was smart and right and not only do you not acknowledge it, you try to belittle him every time. 
 

There is sooo much more I could discuss with you but this post is enough.  I’ll be curious if you’ll even respond. 

[throwing BBZ]

16 hours ago, RollerColt said:

For what it’s worth: there are videos of a younger Chris Ballard ranting and cursing about college players getting anonymous negative reports. He really gets heated on that subject. 

 

 Of course and with his, these are just 19-20 year old kids... who wants to be accountable for everything they did at that age.

 AD will forever remember that Ballard passed on him as if he didn’t care if he got him or the next guy.

 Ballard throwing a cussing rant that got some extra playtime was Mandatory. In the end though it all falls on Mitchell to live a good life and work hard. 

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, throwing BBZ said:

AD will forever remember that Ballard passed on him as if he didn’t care if he got him or the next guy.

Disagree. He'll forever remember all the other teams that passed on him. He's a smart kid, and will use that as extra motivation. 

[throwing BBZ]

38 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Disagree. He'll forever remember all the other teams that passed on him. He's a smart kid, and will use that as extra motivation. 

 

  That is a given regarding the other teams. And everytime he looks Ballard in the eye, et tu Ballard? The day AD signs his 2nd contract with our Colts maybe he gets to look Ballard in the eye with an ear to ear grin. Sounds great to me.

 On tape he physically looks like a future Colts Legend. I'm buying!

 It is a good thing though for the young big headed athletes to start out humble. The NFL roll call for variations of "Antonio Brown Syndrome" are legend.

X our fingers.

[RollerColt]

5 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

And everytime he looks Ballard in the eye, eh' tu'.

Seemed pretty grateful on the phone call with Ballard. I know it's probably edited but he seems pretty happy to be a Colt. If I were a wide receiver I'd love to have Reggie Wayne teaching me!

[Superman]

17 hours ago, DougDew said:

Ranked on their draft boards or ranked in terms of being an NFL prospect?  Yes, those aren't the same things.   In terms of NFL prospects, yes, I think all teams have pretty much the same 250 players ranked in pretty much the same order.  That's what the "Top 100 prospects means".  Its prospects.  Of course, they are more certain about the players they have ranked highly than the players they have ranked lower.  The margin of error for the lower players is higher than it is for the higher players, so there is a chance that a player with a 7th round grade by one team gets selected in the 5th round by another, over a 5th round ranking guy getting selected in the 3rd round by another.  I'd wager that teams have their top 25 ranked pretty much the same.   I'm speaking in terms of understanding the players' attributes, talents, Character risks, and abilities to play in the NFL...which is NOT the same as their draft boards...meaning who they might want to actually draft.

 

Draft boards would be based upon those attributes combined with the uniqueness of the teams,  So even though a team may think Marvin Harrison is the number 1 prospect, they may choose to pick their number 12 ranked prospect guy JJ McCarthy.  Knowing talent and needs, they probably have JJ higher on their Draft board than MHJ. 

 

But no, I do not think that each team knows how the other 31 teams have their draft boards ranked, with any degree of certainty.

 

I think every GM had ADM ranked as a prospect the same as every other, in terms of risks, talents, etc.  The team that actually picked him has unique reasons for picking him.  And if you put almost ay other GM in the place of Ballard at the time, who understands the Colts, he would have picked ADM for the Colts too.  And they too would have felt lucky that their, say, 35th ranked prospect was still available at pick 52.  Ballard said that "nobody has any idea how this stuff plays out"  Its not my opinion to argue with.  I'm trying to help those on the forum understand what he's saying, even if it conflicts with the opinions they've held for years.

 

You're not gonna believe this, but I strongly disagree with this perspective. And I'll leave it at that.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Ballard clearly had a few players in mind or he wouldn’t have traded down. He would have just took him at 46. So I wonder who the other players might have been. He didn’t need AD that bad or he wouldn’t have traded down.  

[throwing BBZ]

26 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Seemed pretty grateful on the phone call with Ballard. I know it's probably edited but he seems pretty happy to be a Colt. If I were a wide receiver I'd love to have Reggie Wayne teaching me!

 

 He quickly was on the phone with his college coach who told him yeah keep the chip, but , I forget his exact words but it was about staying on the mission. AD was angry.

 This coach was coming to Indy to support him. I play a psychologist on TV, his coach understands what we might call the maturity issues. It will be very good for him to talk with our people to help make the plan. 

 Reggie has talked in the past regarding at least one of those big, late round prospects that we spent years on and he turned into nothing, Strahan maybe.

 Reggie saying, if I just had that speed. I can only imagine how ecstatic Reg is. We are going to run a lot, and we have so many diverse weapons it will be hard to get 1200 yards and 10+ TD's. Steichen and his staff 

 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 4/30/2024 at 2:24 PM, DougDew said:

Good interview.  Said he got lucky with the AD pick (fell).  "Nobody knows how this stuff is going to play out" 

I thought it was a good interview but kind of odd regarding his response to AD. He said he got lucky with the AD pick but yet he traded back and he was still sitting there for them to pick at 52. He must have felt comfortable that he was still going to be there at 52  if he was  indeed their  pick in the 2nd. Makes one wonder  how come teams passed on this guy and if the Colts wouldn't have pulled the trigger how far would he have fallen? Love the pick with all that being said. I see this guy measurables and the game tape and he could be elite. I would contend that if his production would have matched his skill  set, you would have been talking about his guy in the same conversation with Nabors and Harrison. The tape is outstanding and he is an impressive athlete.  His post draft interviews were interesting in terms of his personality.

[wig]

On 5/1/2024 at 11:38 AM, Superman said:

 

We don't have to rehash this, right? You know where I stand, I know where you stand. My earlier post was tongue in cheek, with the expectation that you could take the joke. 

 

My thinking is that the Colts had several players rated similarly to AD Mitchell, which is why they were comfortable trading back. If they had him as a standout BPA on their board, they probably would have stayed at #46. JMO.

 

Him saying 'he's just too talented to pass up' on With The Next Pick just screams that there was hesitation but he was too talented to pass on

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I thought it was a good interview but kind of odd regarding his response to AD. He said he got lucky with the AD pick but yet he traded back and he was still sitting there for them to pick at 52. He must have felt comfortable that he was still going to be there at 52  if he was  indeed their  pick in the 2nd. Makes one wonder  how come teams passed on this guy and if the Colts wouldn't have pulled the trigger how far would he have fallen? Love the pick with all that being said. I see this guy measurables and the game tape and he could be elite. I would contend that if his production would have matched his skill  set, you would have been talking about his guy in the same conversation with Nabors and Harrison. The tape is outstanding and he is an impressive athlete.  His post draft interviews were interesting in terms of his personality.

His route running tape is eye opening for sure. 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 4/30/2024 at 7:46 PM, BlackTiger said:

Personally I think even with Flowers and Brents we still have one of the worst CB groups in the league.

 

They are both just guys

Where they were drafted would seem to support your view on the corner room. The teams seems high on them but if this failed, there needs to be accountability at the end of the season. I have seen this movie before and it didn't end well lol

[Moosejawcolt]

On 5/1/2024 at 10:29 AM, csmopar said:

This might be the second most shocking post on this entire forum. The more shocking thing is that both Doug and Moosejaw appear to be content with the draft this year!!!

Absolutely. To me it is a draft that showed growth from Ballard.  A rush end that I felt he never would have taken in the past given possible medical concerns. A wr in the 2nd who for some reason was free falling , but Ballard was willing to take him. I think this draft was  Ballard swinging for the fences and if he strikes out so be it. I liked it a lot and that is what I always wanted out of more. To take more  risk and gamble on the guys who have shown they are play makers in college with risk. He has always traded back and hoping to make these elite athletes players . Someone posted what they wanted out of this draft. I said a football player with the tape to back it up!!  I do think that you see Steichen's finger prints on this draft and this is a plus for Ballard to rely on others to assist him in making decisions. I always have said that Steichen was going to bring a little of that Philly drafting philosophy with him. Gamble a little on risky players.  I would rather gamble on a football player who comes with some risk than a player that we hope will turn into a good football player Latu can become that franchise pass rush. Mithcell can become that franchise wr. I never really thought with a bunch of Ballard's previous picks that they would ever become franchise guys because they never really showed it in college.

[chad72]

6 hours ago, Superman said:

 

You're not gonna believe this, but I strongly disagree with this perspective. And I'll leave it at that.

 

He just likes to hear himself talk, so he invents different flavors of coming up with different hypotheticals that takes the current topic off tangent that most of us eventually realize is not close to reality, just hypotheticals cooked in his head, and in the process also moves goal posts. That is the only thing I consistently gather with engaging him.

 

The only thing I agree with him is Ballard spent draft capital on premium value positions in the last few drafts like Polian used to do, on WR, LT, Pass Rusher, QB, CB enough to steer us in the right direction. 

[jvan1973]

49 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Absolutely. To me it is a draft that showed growth from Ballard.  A rush end that I felt he never would have taken in the past given possible medical concerns. A wr in the 2nd who for some reason was free falling , but Ballard was willing to take him. I think this draft was  Ballard swinging for the fences and if he strikes out so be it. I liked it a lot and that is what I always wanted out of more. To take more  risk and gamble on the guys who have shown they are play makers in college with risk. He has always traded back and hoping to make these elite athletes players . Someone posted what they wanted out of this draft. I said a football player with the tape to back it up!!  I do think that you see Steichen's finger prints on this draft and this is a plus for Ballard to rely on others to assist him in making decisions. I always have said that Steichen was going to bring a little of that Philly drafting philosophy with him. Gamble a little on risky players.  I would rather gamble on a football player who comes with some risk than a player that we hope will turn into a good football player Latu can become that franchise pass rush. Mithcell can become that franchise wr. I never really thought with a bunch of Ballard's previous picks that they would ever become franchise guys because they never really showed it in college.

It's been a mixture

Malik Hooker and Q were All Americans 

 

Traded back in 19.  Not so great results 

 

Pittman second team all American 

Taylor 2x unanimous all American.  Doak Walker award winner.

 

Kwitty, solid college player.  But not heralded. 

Dayo, first team all SEC

 

 

Lots of productive college players to go along with some athletic upside guys.   I don't really think you can bag on Ballard for his drafts.   He has done pretty well.  

[Moosejawcolt]

6 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

It's been a mixture

Malik Hooker and Q were All Americans 

 

Traded back in 19.  Not so great results 

 

Pittman second team all American 

Taylor 2x unanimous all American.  Doak Walker award winner.

 

Kwitty, solid college player.  But not heralded. 

Dayo, first team all SEC

 

 

Lots of productive college players to go along with some athletic upside guys.   I don't really think you can bag on Ballard for his drafts.   He has done pretty well.  

Agreed the guys you mentioned had solid tape. He just took a lot of swings on athletic guys hoping they would become good football players.

[DougDew]

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Consensus?  Huh?   I have no idea what that means?   I offered MY opinion.  That’s all.

When you write...Only you have these views...that is singling out me from some group you have in mind.  The word Only does that.  Including the word VIEWS, it suggests that you are singling out my views from a group.  That would be the consensus.  It appears that you don't remember what you wrote.

 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

In any given year 32 teams may all agree on the top player, but that the further you get away from the first pick the big boards look very very different.   The exact opposite of what you speculated.  I didn’t agree with one sentence of what you posted here.  You’re entitled to whatever opinion you want but it’s not supported by anything.

I said that teams have their TOP 250 ranked Prospects pretty much the same, because the evaluation process uses the same inputs and metrics, give or take some weighting, and based upon if its the top 30 prospects or the last 220 to 250 prospects.  I said their draft boards could be different, and gave an example of having their #12 ranked prospect, JJ McCarthy, ahead of their #3 ranked prospect MHJ on their draft boards.  So what you said about draft boards...like anybody pays attention to you over 13 years...probably doesn't disagree with what I said either...so relax.

 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’ve pretty much disagreed with everything you’ve written since the draft started.  But that works to your advantage.  I couldn’t possibly point out all the flaws, so I’ll try to be selective.

This comment seems full of itself.  It doesn't read like a 50/50 disagreement of opinions.  Approaching someone who has a different opinion by TELLING them its has gobs of flaws looks more like an 85/15.  Sorry, but neither I nor many on this board are going to treat you like the 85/15 knowledgeable guy you want to be treated like (and some others here).  You just haven't earned the chops.

 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Here’s one argument you’ve repeated the last two years.   That Ballard lucked into getting both Woods and Raimann and that he wasn’t even smart enough to realize that Raimann was the better player.  What gets me is that I’ve explained the reasoning to you multiple times and I’ve read other posters explain it to you multiple times.   And we all say the same thing:  That Ballard calculated correctly that because Raimann was 24 and would turn 25 during the season, he stood a better chance of lasting to pick 77 while Woods was taken at 73.

Hmm.  You "explained to me"...and so did others?  There goes that 85/15 relationship you...and others...sort of demand.  And you...and others...haven't earned.  And BTW, you didn't even get my opinion right.

 

This thread should not be talking about opinions you think I've had the past two years...not sure why they are relevant.  But you are not representing them correctly so they need to be corrected (I'm sure everybody cares to read it. LOL)

 

As far as Woods:  I never said Ballard got lucky with Woods at 73.  I said Ballard overvalued Woods relative to other teams at 53.  Ballard's own words in his own draft day video showed him debating who to take at 53...AP or JW...and he finally says "lets go with the wide-out".  And then Woods fell to 73, where Ballard stopped him from falling who knows how far by picking him.  So him debating closely to take JW at 53 shows he strongly considered taking him at 53 when he did not have to strongly consider it.

 

As far as Raimann.  I did not ignore the age thing that you..(and others?)...explained to me.  I discarded it for being bad.  Every GM E.V.E.R.Y one of them would have been glad to spend a first round pick on a 25 year old LT who is playing like a top 10 LT and have that player under a rookie contract for 5 years (except the GMs who already had an All-Pro at LT).  EVERY GM who's team needed an LT as badly as the Colts needed an LT probably would have traded up from 53 to get him...if they knew what he would be this early.  Being 25 is completely irrelevant.  LTs have longevity, and teams still have to deal with a second contract if he was 22.  They'll gladly take the top 10 play for the next 5 years (lets see) over the risk of what the situation will be 5 years from now.  The same player evaluation process that prevails throughout the NFL failed Raimann, not an age bias.  And Ballard got lucky that such a good player was able to be picked with his third pick of the draft.

 

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

But you keep posting the negative Ballard viewpoint as if NO ONE has explained it to you.  I think it’s both insulting and rude.   It’s what you do when you can’t handle an argument, you just avoid it.  Ballard was smart and right and not only do you not acknowledge it, you try to belittle him every time. 

 

Hmmm, as if NO ONE explained to me?  Who would that be?  Just another guy on the forum?   Or the ones with 5 figure post counts and a decade of history that feel that their role is to explain stuff to others?  

 

Saying Ballard got lucky is not negative nor is it belittling.  Especially when I also say that ALL GMs get lucky, which I exampled by mentioning Polian/Mathis, Polian/Saturday, NE/Brady, and Lynch/Purdy...etc.   They all get lucky.  I'm sorry that you feel putting Ballard in the same Commoner bucket as all other GMs belittles his Majesty.

 

Which is what Ballard tended to support by his own words that said "nobody knows how this stuff (the draft day activities...rankings, draft board, and draft pick trades) will play out".  

 

Sorry, but for what...7 years...you have been trying to sell this notion of Ballard being Smart and right...like there is a bright line separation between those GMs who are, what, dumb and wrong?  Ballard has sort of deflated the idea that there is a bright line between GMs.  BTW, the great John Lynch sure did mess up that Trey Lance trade up didn't he? Good thing he got lucky with Purdy pick to sort of bail him out of the important QB position issue. 

[DougDew]

12 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 What gets me is that I’ve explained the reasoning to you multiple times and I’ve read other posters explain it to you multiple times.   And we all say the same thing:  That Ballard calculated correctly that because Raimann was 24 and would turn 25 during the season,

To give more clarity to any age issue you may have read from others...or how it impacts draft picks.:  You certainly are aware that players taken in the mid rounds are thought to need some time to develop into starters.  And players taken in the first round less time.  And top 15 picks probably start after 8 games.     All 32 teams and every draft pundit in the professional football industry sees these same trade offs.

 

If GMs let BR slide to 77 (and possibly beyond if it wasn't for Ballard), do you think they were projecting BR to take 2 or 3 seasons to develop into a Starter?  How about a top 10?  Or was it about how old he would be 5 years from now when it would be time to talk new contract?  So yes, if they are going to project BR taking to age 28 to be a top 10 BR, that also impacts his draft value.  The issue is, its hasn't taken BR 3 offseason and 40 starts to be a top 10 player.  Its taken him one rookie offseason and about 10 games to play like a top 10 player.   What team projected him to play that well this soon?  If a GM knew that, would he wait until his third pick of the draft to take that player?  Any GM.

 

So, do the analytics yourself.  If you go into the draft thinking player A will take 3 seasons and 40 games to reach top 10 status, you value him at a certain slot.  If you projected him to only take one offseason and 10 starts, you place a higher value on him...no?  Projecting him to be a top 10 player at age 25 increases his draft value over projecting him to be a top 10 player only when he reached age 28.

 

That's what BRs slot is about.  The fact that nobody thought he could play this well THIS SOON is the reason he wasn't picked earlier.  Its not about how old a top 10 player would be 5 years from now when its time to think about resigning him.  JMO of course, so a contrary view is not something needing to be "explained"

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I thought it was a good interview but kind of odd regarding his response to AD. He said he got lucky with the AD pick but yet he traded back and he was still sitting there for them to pick at 52. He must have felt comfortable that he was still going to be there at 52  if he was  indeed their  pick in the 2nd. Makes one wonder  how come teams passed on this guy and if the Colts wouldn't have pulled the trigger how far would he have fallen? Love the pick with all that being said. I see this guy measurables and the game tape and he could be elite. I would contend that if his production would have matched his skill  set, you would have been talking about his guy in the same conversation with Nabors and Harrison. The tape is outstanding and he is an impressive athlete.  His post draft interviews were interesting in terms of his personality.

Some of us gave our opinions on that already.  Ballard probably had a group of players in mind.  He can't control what offers come in.  The deal is for pick 52 and he feels safe making the trade because he thinks he's going to get a good player at 52.  After all, he doesn't know for sure what teams will pick whom, or what team will trade up to snipe a player, despite his thoughts of teams had needs for another WR.

 

I think if he was actually targeting AD, he probably would have just picked him at 46 rather than try to read the landscape of who might trade up and snipe.  I see Ballard's comments as truly thinking he got lucky with having  player with the prospects of AD (I too think he could be our long desired #1...huge catch radius to go with the metrics), with no other team wanting to draft him before 52.   Ballard finally discarded ADs issues enough at that point.

 

As far as personality, don't all of the #1 NFL WRs have a bit of that diva persona about them?  Not all of them, but its kinda seems like it comes with the territory and has to be sort of expected a bit.  

 

BTW, do you think Ballard got lucky with Latu on the board at 15?  That seems to be the prevailing thought if you read pundit comments about ATL and Penix...how that pick #8 influenced lower teams, for the good and bad (took him away from LVR, who's GM still "has no QB").  Some here will read that as a slam on Ballard (the folks who need a bright line?), but I think it just shows how much the randomness of a card game impacts how good a GMs draft is or is not.  And I think Ballard would acknowledge the same, based on his comments.

[Moosejawcolt]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Some of us gave our opinions on that already.  Ballard probably had a group of players in mind.  He can't control what offers come in.  The deal is for pick 52 and he feels safe making the trade because he thinks he's going to get a good player at 52.  After all, he doesn't know for sure what teams will pick whom, or what team will trade up to snipe a player, despite his thoughts of teams had needs for another WR.

 

I think if he was actually targeting AD, he probably would have just picked him at 46 rather than try to read the landscape of who might trade up and snipe.  I see Ballard's comments as truly thinking he got lucky with having  player with the prospects of AD (I too think he could be our long desired #1...huge catch radius to go with the metrics), with no other team wanting to draft him before 52.   Ballard finally discarded ADs issues enough at that point.

 

As far as personality, don't all of the #1 NFL WRs have a bit of that diva persona about them?  Not all of them, but its kinda seems like it comes with the territory and has to be sort of expected a bit.  

 

BTW, do you think Ballard got lucky with Latu on the board at 15?  That seems to be the prevailing thought if you read pundit comments about ATL and Penix...how that pick #8 influenced lower teams, for the good and bad (took him away from LVR, who's GM still "has no QB").  Some here will read that as a slam on Ballard (the folks who need a bright line?), but I think it just shows how much the randomness of a card game impacts how good a GMs draft is or is not.  And I think Ballard would acknowledge the same, based on his comments.

I actually heard that Falcons tried to trade back into top 10 to get Latua. That's coming from Lombardi

[NewColtsFan]

11 hours ago, DougDew said:

To give more clarity to any age issue you may have read from others...or how it impacts draft picks.:  You certainly are aware that players taken in the mid rounds are thought to need some time to develop into starters.  And players taken in the first round less time.  And top 15 picks probably start after 8 games.     All 32 teams and every draft pundit in the professional football industry sees these same trade offs.

 

If GMs let BR slide to 77 (and possibly beyond if it wasn't for Ballard), do you think they were projecting BR to take 2 or 3 seasons to develop into a Starter?  How about a top 10?  Or was it about how old he would be 5 years from now when it would be time to talk new contract?  So yes, if they are going to project BR taking to age 28 to be a top 10 BR, that also impacts his draft value.  The issue is, its hasn't taken BR 3 offseason and 40 starts to be a top 10 player.  Its taken him one rookie offseason and about 10 games to play like a top 10 player.   What team projected him to play that well this soon?  If a GM knew that, would he wait until his third pick of the draft to take that player?  Any GM.

 

So, do the analytics yourself.  If you go into the draft thinking player A will take 3 seasons and 40 games to reach top 10 status, you value him at a certain slot.  If you projected him to only take one offseason and 10 starts, you place a higher value on him...no?  Projecting him to be a top 10 player at age 25 increases his draft value over projecting him to be a top 10 player only when he reached age 28.

 

That's what BRs slot is about.  The fact that nobody thought he could play this well THIS SOON is the reason he wasn't picked earlier.  Its not about how old a top 10 player would be 5 years from now when its time to think about resigning him.  JMO of course, so a contrary view is not something needing to be "explained"

Doug….   I’ve just read your latest two posts.   And as has been the recent trend, I don’t understand your logic.   So I’ve got a long post to respond to your long post. 
 

So let me ask you an important question:  

 

Have you noticed in the last month or so that I am responding to your posts very slowly?   I’m taking 8, 10, even 12 hours to respond.    I’m doing it deliberately.  I don’t want us to be going back and forth and back and forth while we’re both awake.  I’m trying to slow the pace of communication so things don’t get heated.  So I’m not trying to pick a fight,  I’m trying to AVOID a fight.

 

As to your two posts….   I think your memory is playing tricks with you.  Ballard said “let’s take the wide receiver” this draft for Mitchell.  His quote in 2022 after the Colts had no pick in the first round was this…. “Tomorrow,  wide receiver, tight end, tackle, and safety or corner.”   What did Ballard do?   He took those 4 positions in that order.  But not until he had traded DOWN from 35 to 53 for Pierce.   That was Reich’s personal pick.  Ballard was confident the players would be there and they were.   Not possible if everyone has same info as you assert. 
 

Do you remember the 2019 draft when Ballard took Rock, Benagu, Campbell, and Okereke on Day 2,  that was the first year of the popular video series and the most memorable sound was Frank going around the war room high fiving everyone yelling “Four for Four!  Four for Four!”   Those were the guys Frank wanted, those were the guys Ballard got him.   Not possible if every team sees things the same. 
 

The story of the 21 draft was the Colts picking 21.  And Ballard telling the scouts he had a good feeling that Paye, who the Colts ranked 10th on their board, would fall to the Colts.   And he did.   Ballard thought Dayo would fall to pick 54, and he said he likely would’ve taken Dayo at 21 if Paye had been taken.  Ballard was right again.   And again, not possible if everyone sees things the same. 
 

Historically speaking…. In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked THIRD on their board.  But they waited to draft him at pick 75 because they thought at 5’10” and 5/8ths,  RW would still be there.  And he was.   That wouldn’t be possible if everyone had mostly similar rankings as you believe. 

As for Reimann:  picked 77.  You talk about his value as a left tackle.  Yet he lasted to pick 77.   Any other team could’ve taken him before the Colts did.   They didn’t.  Yet you think it has nothing to do with his age.  I don’t understand the logic you use to reject the age argument.   I don’t see an alternative view that makes sense. 
 

All of these are examples of teams seeing the same thing differently.  They value things differently.  When asked recently, Steichen said he valued quickness in a wide receiver.  For other teams they might value speed, or precision route running.   Every team has its own identity based on what they value. 
 

GMs are different.  Head coaches are different.  Scouts are different.   They are NOT working with the same information.  Every team has their own Big Board and the differences are big, not small.  32 teams, 32 very very different looking boards.  
 

I’m 67.  I have literally studied the draft for more than 50 years.   The draft has always been a passion of mine, even before I became a TV sports producer at age 23.   I’m not making this up.  

 

This post could be longer, but I think it’s gone long enough.  There was much to talk about.   Thanks for reading.   
 

 

 

 

 

 

[DougDew]

8 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I actually heard that Falcons tried to trade back into top 10 to get Latua. That's coming from Lombardi

Exactly.  I read that from a different source (but all reports may have originated from one source). 

 

If the trade was made, that would again reshuffle the deck of players Ballard had to choose from, impacting on the quality of the draft to some player probably less than Latu.  I bet Ballard had no clue that ATL would try to trade up but be rejected by another, like he had it all figured out.  Has a guess, but no real working knowledge about what teams ahead of him will do.   

 

Only Polian used to tell us he knew what other teams in front of him would do, an in every round.  LOL.

[VikingsFanInChennai]

15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Exactly.  I read that from a different source (but all reports may have originated from one source). 

 

If the trade was made, that would again reshuffle the deck of players Ballard had to choose from, impacting on the quality of the draft to some player probably less than Latu.  I bet Ballard had no clue that ATL would try to trade up but be rejected by another, like he had it all figured out.  Has a guess, but no real working knowledge about what teams ahead of him will do.   

 

Only Polian used to tell us he knew what other teams in front of him would do, an in every round.  LOL.

There's a video of Jets GM himself talking in surprise to people around him in the draft room on draft day that Falcons tried to trade up to 10 again for Latu after picking Penix at 8. They didn't accept the offer. They accepted offer from Vikings to move down only one spot to let them take a QB. 

 

So, yes, that information is as true as it could get. 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

16 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Where they were drafted would seem to support your view on the corner room. The teams seems high on them but if this failed, there needs to be accountability at the end of the season. I have seen this movie before and it didn't end well lol

Stop watching Tragedy movies 

[VikingsFanInChennai]

14 hours ago, DougDew said:

When you write...Only you have these views...that is singling out me from some group you have in mind.  The word Only does that.  Including the word VIEWS, it suggests that you are singling out my views from a group.  That would be the consensus.  It appears that you don't remember what you wrote.

 

I said that teams have their TOP 250 ranked Prospects pretty much the same, because the evaluation process uses the same inputs and metrics, give or take some weighting, and based upon if its the top 30 prospects or the last 220 to 250 prospects.  I said their draft boards could be different, and gave an example of having their #12 ranked prospect, JJ McCarthy, ahead of their #3 ranked prospect MHJ on their draft boards.  So what you said about draft boards...like anybody pays attention to you over 13 years...probably doesn't disagree with what I said either...so relax.

 

This comment seems full of itself.  It doesn't read like a 50/50 disagreement of opinions.  Approaching someone who has a different opinion by TELLING them its has gobs of flaws looks more like an 85/15.  Sorry, but neither I nor many on this board are going to treat you like the 85/15 knowledgeable guy you want to be treated like (and some others here).  You just haven't earned the chops.

 

Hmm.  You "explained to me"...and so did others?  There goes that 85/15 relationship you...and others...sort of demand.  And you...and others...haven't earned.  And BTW, you didn't even get my opinion right.

 

This thread should not be talking about opinions you think I've had the past two years...not sure why they are relevant.  But you are not representing them correctly so they need to be corrected (I'm sure everybody cares to read it. LOL)

 

As far as Woods:  I never said Ballard got lucky with Woods at 73.  I said Ballard overvalued Woods relative to other teams at 53.  Ballard's own words in his own draft day video showed him debating who to take at 53...AP or JW...and he finally says "lets go with the wide-out".  And then Woods fell to 73, where Ballard stopped him from falling who knows how far by picking him.  So him debating closely to take JW at 53 shows he strongly considered taking him at 53 when he did not have to strongly consider it.

 

As far as Raimann.  I did not ignore the age thing that you..(and others?)...explained to me.  I discarded it for being bad.  Every GM E.V.E.R.Y one of them would have been glad to spend a first round pick on a 25 year old LT who is playing like a top 10 LT and have that player under a rookie contract for 5 years (except the GMs who already had an All-Pro at LT).  EVERY GM who's team needed an LT as badly as the Colts needed an LT probably would have traded up from 53 to get him...if they knew what he would be this early.  Being 25 is completely irrelevant.  LTs have longevity, and teams still have to deal with a second contract if he was 22.  They'll gladly take the top 10 play for the next 5 years (lets see) over the risk of what the situation will be 5 years from now.  The same player evaluation process that prevails throughout the NFL failed Raimann, not an age bias.  And Ballard got lucky that such a good player was able to be picked with his third pick of the draft.

 

 

Hmmm, as if NO ONE explained to me?  Who would that be?  Just another guy on the forum?   Or the ones with 5 figure post counts and a decade of history that feel that their role is to explain stuff to others?  

 

Saying Ballard got lucky is not negative nor is it belittling.  Especially when I also say that ALL GMs get lucky, which I exampled by mentioning Polian/Mathis, Polian/Saturday, NE/Brady, and Lynch/Purdy...etc.   They all get lucky.  I'm sorry that you feel putting Ballard in the same Commoner bucket as all other GMs belittles his Majesty.

 

Which is what Ballard tended to support by his own words that said "nobody knows how this stuff (the draft day activities...rankings, draft board, and draft pick trades) will play out".  

 

Sorry, but for what...7 years...you have been trying to sell this notion of Ballard being Smart and right...like there is a bright line separation between those GMs who are, what, dumb and wrong?  Ballard has sort of deflated the idea that there is a bright line between GMs.  BTW, the great John Lynch sure did mess up that Trey Lance trade up didn't he? Good thing he got lucky with Purdy pick to sort of bail him out of the important QB position issue. 

I think you've some bad angle of understanding in some matter, as in saying every team has same top 250 players or top 100 prospects... How will be that possible? 

 

You also have some really good perspective, but that comes across as bad or negative, as in saying Ballard got lucky with BR or the examples of other GMs you pointed out...

 

Overall, you've an eccentric way of looking at things that make the discussion interesting.

 

It's nothing different than some saying Raimann fell to third round of the draft ONLY because of his age. Like how do they know that for sure? He could've have fallen just because some teams could've thought his development wouldn't amount him to be a starter one day.

 

Just like that, we all have our bad and good opinions. Or opinions that's not agreed by others. Or opinions that would be proven right or wrong later when we all would've have forgot to get back to this.. anyway, the difference in opinion is what makes the forum engaging. 

[#12.]

17 hours ago, wig said:

 

Him saying 'he's just too talented to pass up' on With The Next Pick just screams that there was hesitation but he was too talented to pass on

 

That's exactly how I read it.  You could definitely sense the hesitation.  

[#12.]

The secondary could use some help, but I don't think it will make or break the season.

 

Two things will make or break the season:

One, can Richardson improve his accuracy and thread the needle on clutch 3rd and longs, and two, can he stay healthy?

[DougDew]

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Have you noticed in the last month or so that I am responding to your posts very slowly?

No, why would I notice something like that?  

 

2 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

As to your two posts….   I think your memory is playing tricks with you.  Ballard said “let’s take the wide receiver” this draft for Mitchell.  His quote in 2022 after the Colts had no pick in the first round was this…. “Tomorrow,  wide receiver, tight end, tackle, and safety or corner.”   What did Ballard do?   He took those 4 positions in that order.  But not until he had traded DOWN from 35 to 53 for Pierce.   That was Reich’s personal pick.  Ballard was confident the players would be there and they were.   Not possible if everyone has same info as you assert. 

No.  He may have said that, but that isn't the video I'm talking about.  There is a video of him in the draft room exactly at pick 53, looking at his draft board (we see his face so the board is unseen behind the camera)  looks around the room talking to the staff, and finally says, "lets go with the wide out".  Nothing about that suggests that he had that specific debate between those two players AP and JW, ahead of time to where it was a clear decision to take AP over JW the day before the draft.  Maybe you never saw that video.

 

Yes, everybody has the same info on the players.  All players are ranked as the top 250 prospects on all 32 teams' prospect board within a variance of about 5% throughout the ranking.  The difference is in how teams use the info that forms their actual draft boards.  So when Ballard says...and he just did in this presser...".Nobody has any idea how this stuff will play out"....he's talking about how no one GM (meaning himself) knows how all 31 GM are going to use the information.  He has absolutely no working knowledge that tells him a player isn't going to be sniped ahead of him, (See ATL trying to trade up for Latu) That's why he. and other GMs, have a GROUP of players they are comfortable taking at a certain slot.  It may work out to  where the highest ranked player within that group is still available, but that's not the same thing as "targeting that player" 

 

Trading UP is the proof that a GMs targets a specific player, like CAR just did with Brooks at 46, Ballard previously did with JT at 41, and Grigsy did with TY at the end of round 2, etc.  There are examples all over the NFL where teams trade up to get players they targeted, but standing pat or trading down is not how they "target" a specific player.  That's where they settle for one of a group of players that they think will be there when they pick.  In round 1, they can better predict if a player will come to them, but not so much in round 2, 3, 4, etc.  The margin of error in their assessment of what other teams with do is just too big.  No, there is no proof that Ballard targets a mid round player by waiting for him...or trading down for him.  Its more likely that he picks the best player out of the group of players he will settle for.  

 

You probably should adjust your understanding of the concept of GMs "targeting players" to what it actually is.  Its not easy, because their are a lot of paid talking heads in the media using the term wrongly, IMO.

 

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

As for Reimann:  picked 77.  You talk about his value as a left tackle.  Yet he lasted to pick 77.   Any other team could’ve taken him before the Colts did.   They didn’t.  Yet you think it has nothing to do with his age.  I don’t understand the logic you use to reject the age argument.   I don’t see an alternative view that makes sense. 

Do you think teams wanting a top 10 LT (and which team would not even shuffle their oline or cap to accommodate) would pass on him through pick 77 because he was 3 years older than the typical college graduate, when LTs have careers that typically span 10 years or more?  It makes no sense that they would be hung up on that three years.

 

Before your time, a truly great GM, Bill Polian, took LB Rob Morris at pick 26 because he was a player who was thought to be able to start immediately and because it was a position of need.  At the first round presser, BP call RM, "overaged", because he was 24 or 5 coming off his mission from BYU.  Overaged by three years, and still took him in the first round because he "strongly thought" he was a player who could step in and fill a position of need right away.  He didn't wait until the third round because of concern about how old he would be years down the road when he had to think about a second contract.  So, yes, when teams think a player won't be able to step in and play well right away, they slide to the mid rounds.  Those are called "developmental players".

 

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Historically speaking…. In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked THIRD on their board.  But they waited to draft him at pick 75 because they thought at 5’10” and 5/8ths,  RW would still be there.  And he was.   That wouldn’t be possible if everyone had mostly similar rankings as you believe. 

That was the Luck/Griffin year...and yes, pundits all over the place had him ranked as a third rounder.  Seems SEA had him ranked no differently than others on their draft board. 

 

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Do you remember the 2019 draft when Ballard took Rock, Benagu, Campbell, and Okereke on Day 2,  that was the first year of the popular video series and the most memorable sound was Frank going around the war room high fiving everyone yelling “Four for Four!  Four for Four!”   Those were the guys Frank wanted, those were the guys Ballard got him.   Not possible if every team sees things the same. 

Again, the prospects are ranked similarly.  Who teams want to draft out of a grouping is obviously different. 

 

The point being made by me...and Ballard...is that no GM knows what the other 31 GMs will do at any given moment....they don't know the other teams' draft boards.

 

But they all know the traits of the players and have similar ideas about what kind of prospect they will be, and whether or not they can play right away or take a season or two to earn a starting job.  That part of the evaluation is all the same amongst 32 teams, IMO.

 

Because they don't know what other teams will do, and don't know other teams draft boards is why why Frank was high fiving.  There was excitement  in getting the players they wanted, in that no other team took them or sniped them.  If they knew what other GMs were going to do, they would have known they would have gotten those players and it would be non suspenseful. 

 

But. its possible that Ballard was way off in how he ranked his prospects compared to other teams back then, and everybody was excited when they didn't have to be.  

 

And I'm not going to believe for a moment, that Ballard lets himself be some dullard blank canvas between the ears that won't make a pick until his HC draws him a picture of who to pick.  Especially on the defense and in every round.  Especially when he deliberates with only himself and then he's the one telling the others in the room "lets go with the wide out".  Sorry, not buying it.

 

3 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

All of these are examples of teams seeing the same thing differently.  They value things differently.  When asked recently, Steichen said he valued quickness in a wide receiver.  For other teams they might value speed, or precision route running.   Every team has its own identity based on what they value. 
 

GMs are different.  Head coaches are different.  Scouts are different.   They are NOT working with the same information.  Every team has their own Big Board and the differences are big, not small.  32 teams, 32 very very different looking boards.

Yes, that difference is what dictates their draft boards.  But, they all have the same knowledge of what the different player traits are.  They know which ones are fast, slow, twitchy, good balance, arm length, etc.  As the Raimann example, they all evaluate him as being a successful NFL LT.  His experience at a small school, weight (like Freeland), years as an olineman when he was a former TE, all weigh into their conclusion about how long they think it would take him to be a starter.  They all saw his traits and experience as not being worthy of a pick higher than 77, and they misjudged how quickly he learned the NFL game. 

 

Same with Mathis, Saturday, Brady, Purdy, etc... all the teams know what these players traits are, and they all feed them through the same evaluation process, and that process misses players from time to time.  Contrast that thought with what I've been reading, that Ballard knew Raimann was good and dropped him only because of age, which means that better GMs like Polian, NE, and Lynch must have known those players would be what they would be....and knew that no other team figured it out so they waited.  To me, that makes no sense.  IMO, they all got lucky relative to how well they thought each player would play when they drafted them.

 

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’m 67.  I have literally studied the draft for more than 50 years.   The draft has always been a passion of mine, even before I became a TV sports producer at age 23.   I’m not making this up.

That's great.  And I sincerely hope that you've enjoyed your career.  

 

But, I'm the kind of person that doesn't care about credentials.  I judge the content for what it says.

 

Thanks for staying calm.

 

[DougDew]

37 minutes ago, VikingsFanInChennai said:

You also have some really good perspective, but that comes across as bad or negative, as in saying Ballard got lucky with BR or the examples of other GMs you pointed out...

 

Overall, you've an eccentric way of looking at things that make the discussion interesting.

I don't understand this, so please explain.  

 

This is how I see it based upon what we know.

 

By accounts, Purdy has played better than Jimmy G.  If you believe the training camp stories where the players were telling media and the coaches that Purdy was the real deal when he got a chance to play in TC, Purdy was good right away and need little actual development by NFL coaches.   If Lynch knew this would happen, why did he wait until the very last pick of the drat to select Purdy?  To say it wasn't luck, but rather skill and knowledge, you'd have to believe that...going into the draft... Lynch knew Purdy would be good (or else why pick him), and also knew that not one other team thought he would be good, so he knew he could just wait until pick 250.. 

 

He knew the other GMs thought Purdy would not even be even good right away, but not even a good enough prospect to take a flyer on him and snipe him at pick 249?  Sure, he benefits from Shanahan's system, but my goodness, his success is not THAT system dependent that some team would not have selected him in round 4, 5, 6, 7. with all of the comp picks added on as merely a prospect.  They all ignored Purdy.   

 

How do folks hold the GM player evaluation process in such high regard when we all know that GMs miss.  Both with picking busts and missing good players.  Why is pointing that out a negative?  We all know it.  And why does Ballard deserve to be shielded from it?

[dw49]

53 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't understand this, so please explain.  

 

This is how I see it based upon what we know.

 

By accounts, Purdy has played better than Jimmy G.  If you believe the training camp stories where the players were telling media and the coaches that Purdy was the real deal when he got a chance to play in TC, Purdy was good right away and need little actual development by NFL coaches.   If Lynch knew this would happen, why did he wait until the very last pick of the drat to select Purdy?  To say it wasn't luck, but rather skill and knowledge, you'd have to believe that...going into the draft... Lynch knew Purdy would be good (or else why pick him), and also knew that not one other team thought he would be good, so he knew he could just wait until pick 250.. 

 

He knew the other GMs thought Purdy would not even be even good right away, but not even a good enough prospect to take a flyer on him and snipe him at pick 249?  Sure, he benefits from Shanahan's system, but my goodness, his success is not THAT system dependent that some team would not have selected him in round 4, 5, 6, 7. with all of the comp picks added on as merely a prospect.  They all ignored Purdy.   

 

How do folks hold the GM player evaluation process in such high regard when we all know that GMs miss.  Both with picking busts and missing good players.  Why is pointing that out a negative?  We all know it.  And why does Ballard deserve to be shielded from it?

 

I see your point , but the point can be made that Lynch , while not a "genius " for waiting as long as he did , was at the least  , smarter than the other 31 GMs. 

[shasta519]

On 5/1/2024 at 5:33 PM, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

Player pressers today. How in the world is speed almost 29 already? LB could become a real need soon with both speed and Franklin approaching 30.

 

Speed was 24 when he was drafted and it took him a few years to develop.

 

Flowers is going to be 27 and is only in his 3rd season.

 

COVID played a role because of the extra year, but Ballard seems to gravitate toward older prospects. I would be interested to see how he compares to other GMs. I bet he way's up there. His 2022

 

Not meant to be a Ballard grievance, just an observation. 

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

I see your point , but the point can be made that Lynch , while not a "genius " for waiting as long as he did , was at the least  , smarter than the other 31 GMs. 

What would drive me to say that is the need to try to draw a bright line between GMs, which I don't really have.  In this case, I think its safer to simply put them all in the same "didn't know" bucket. 

 

And I assume team need played a part.  Jimmy G was  kind of on thin ice and Trey Lance had some questions by that time, privately I think, motivating SF to take Purdy at all.

[RollerColt]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

I don't understand this, so please explain.  

 

This is how I see it based upon what we know.

 

By accounts, Purdy has played better than Jimmy G.  If you believe the training camp stories where the players were telling media and the coaches that Purdy was the real deal when he got a chance to play in TC, Purdy was good right away and need little actual development by NFL coaches.   If Lynch knew this would happen, why did he wait until the very last pick of the drat to select Purdy?  To say it wasn't luck, but rather skill and knowledge, you'd have to believe that...going into the draft... Lynch knew Purdy would be good (or else why pick him), and also knew that not one other team thought he would be good, so he knew he could just wait until pick 250.. 

 

He knew the other GMs thought Purdy would not even be even good right away, but not even a good enough prospect to take a flyer on him and snipe him at pick 249?  Sure, he benefits from Shanahan's system, but my goodness, his success is not THAT system dependent that some team would not have selected him in round 4, 5, 6, 7. with all of the comp picks added on as merely a prospect.  They all ignored Purdy.   

 

How do folks hold the GM player evaluation process in such high regard when we all know that GMs miss.  Both with picking busts and missing good players.  Why is pointing that out a negative?  We all know it.  And why does Ballard deserve to be shielded from it?

Am I understanding you correctly that you feel all GMs are not really that valuable? 

 

That essentially anyone can do the job? 

[Moosejawcolt]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

Exactly.  I read that from a different source (but all reports may have originated from one source). 

 

If the trade was made, that would again reshuffle the deck of players Ballard had to choose from, impacting on the quality of the draft to some player probably less than Latu.  I bet Ballard had no clue that ATL would try to trade up but be rejected by another, like he had it all figured out.  Has a guess, but no real working knowledge about what teams ahead of him will do.   

 

Only Polian used to tell us he knew what other teams in front of him would do, an in every round.  LOL.

Actually Lombardi had said that if Murphy was on the board, the Colts may have picked him. I threw that out weeks ago as Buckner is getting older the   3tech is the most important position on this defense. 

[shasta519]

Just now, RollerColt said:

Am I understanding you correctly that you feel all GMs are not really that valuable? 

 

That essentially anyone can do the job? 

 

Sorry to jump in, but I find this a very interesting topic. I don't think that anyone can do the job, but I do believe there are far more than 32 who can. Several FOs are full of bright men/women with extensive knowledge of football and a strong grasp of the fundamentals of roster building/scouting/analytics. With a good support structure is put in place, I think many could make the jump. 

 

Look at KC for example...Dorsey's FO alone makes up 3 of those 32 jobs. While I am not Ballard's biggest fan, he is clearly capable of the doing the job. As is Veach...and even Poles. Another, Brandt Tillis, is the second-in-command in CAR I believe. That's just one FO. 

 

So that's partly why I disagree with the idea that there would be a huge downside to losing Ballard. Not to say there aren't bad GMs, but the odds of finding a good one aren't that low because the pool is so large.

 

Contrast that to coaching, where I don't believe there are even close to 32 good HCs at a given time.   

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Am I understanding you correctly that you feel all GMs are not really that valuable? 

 

That essentially anyone can do the job? 

No.  But once they have the years of experience and system training to reach that level, I think they are more interchangeable with each other than what most folks think.  Certainly their success or failure is based more on random things out of their control than what they get praised or blamed for.  JMO.

[richard pallo]

32 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

 

Speed was 24 when he was drafted and it took him a few years to develop.

 

Flowers is going to be 27 and is only in his 3rd season.

 

COVID played a role because of the extra year, but Ballard seems to gravitate toward older prospects. I would be interested to see how he compares to other GMs. I bet he way's up there. His 2022

 

Not meant to be a Ballard grievance, just an observation. 

I like the idea of drafting older players.  I think we have a better chance of getting a more mature player.  They seems to develop faster imo.  The real young ones seem to take longer.