Colts attempted to trade up to 6

[Stephen]

55 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

I don't think 6 would be high enough to get MHJ which was Ballards first choice I believe.  I think Irsay asked for him as well.

 

So most likely for Bowers who was projected to go as high as 5.

They were after nabors

[AKB]

21 minutes ago, Stephen said:

They were after nabors

they were after neighbors. 

[stitches]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, I would have loved having Nabers, but I'm very happy with how the first two days of the draft went for the Colts. I felt like AD Mitchell was the 5th best WR in the class, and we got him in the 50s. Not a bad consolation prize at all.

Yeah, this is probably not the right way to evaluate the decision but I cannot deny that I like us not making that trade more after I knew the results of the draft than before the draft. I was one of the people advocating for trading up for MHJ or Nabers... or Odunze.. but we ended up with my best defensive prospect in the draft and my 4th best WR prospect in the draft with those picks... plus we still have the future pick to add. 

[Superman]

8 minutes ago, stitches said:

Yeah, this is probably not the right way to evaluate the decision but I cannot deny that I like us not making that trade more after I knew the results of the draft than before the draft. I was one of the people advocating for trading up for MHJ or Nabers... or Odunze.. but we ended up with my best defensive prospect in the draft and my 4th best WR prospect in the draft with those picks... plus we still have the future pick to add. 

 

Agreed. I didn't expect AD Mitchell to be available at #52. I was on the fence with Latu before the draft, felt like medical would drop him and that was my biggest concern with him. Then after the draft, the info we've heard indicates that the medical concerns were overblown to begin with. If that earlier tweet about the Giants color coding was right, then they didn't even have Latu as a medical red flag... I think the draft broke really well for the Colts, and I think most of the people who wanted them to trade up for a WR should be pretty satisfied with getting AD in the 2nd.

 

But yeah, seeing how it went in hindsight makes it easier to say 'I'm glad we didn't trade up.' At the time, a lot of people were hand-wringing about WR. Even I got nervous after the run late in the first round, and I figured we'd missed the boat. The run on DBs kind of saved us.

[John Hammonds]

5 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Me too, so far it looks like staying put, may work out better. Latu falling to 15 was huge and Mitchell is a beast. I am puzzled to why he fell so far. I thought Mitchell would go in round 1.

Looking back on it, it's and interesting choice:

 

Would you rather trade up and get Nabers at #6 (or Odunze) and nothing else?

 

Or would you rather have Laiatu Latu (#15), Adonai Mitchell (#52), Anthony Gould (#142), Jaylin Simpson (#164), Micah Abraham (#201), and whoever we take with next year's 2nd?

 

That's the choice.  One uber-WR.  or 6 players, including the best pure pass rusher in the draft, the steal of the draft, and other guys that may wind up being good contributors?

 

In hindsight, I'm glad we did what we did.

[MikeCurtis]

I am personally glad that this deal did not happen

 

 

[ProblChld32]

6 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I am aware. If it didn’t warrant anything more then why wasn’t it accepted? It was a serious offer… and wasn’t good enough. Based on Ballard’s comments on it, which reflects your “takes two to tango,” he knew it was a long shot… and he drew the line at what they offered. The fact they didn’t counter or anything of the like speaks on either a) their understanding of the offer being the best the Colts were going to give or b) their total unwillingness to move back to 15, which it seems like off the video that was the case… which is my entire point. An unwarranted offer of next years 1st probably still doesn’t get the deal done. 

Here’s the thing, you miss every shot you don’t take. You still have to try, the giants GM literally said “I’m not moving back that far”. The jets who had the 10th overall pick also had their offer declined as well, Giants would have only had to move back 4 spots in that potential trade. So you saying it would have been unwarranted in a hypothetical scenario really doesn’t tell us if that would have gotten the deal done or not. Also I was speaking more so to your opinion that Ballard doesn’t try or isn’t aggressive. I think the offer proves he is. 

[ColtStrong2013]

31 minutes ago, ProblChld32 said:

Here’s the thing, you miss every shot you don’t take. You still have to try, the giants GM literally said “I’m not moving back that far”. The jets who had the 10th overall pick also had their offer declined as well, Giants would have only had to move back 4 spots in that potential trade. So you saying it would have been unwarranted in a hypothetical scenario really doesn’t tell us if that would have gotten the deal done or not. Also I was speaking more so to your opinion that Ballard doesn’t try or isn’t aggressive. I think the offer proves he is. 

You’ve lost me bud. You are just recycling what I said. 
 

you speaking to my opinion of Ballard not being aggressive or doesn’t try? Please point to where I made that opinion? Quite the contrary on this forum, my friend. He’s been aggressive in many ways. He was aggressive to get Hunter and actually bid more than the Texans did this offseason. That’s just a recent example. I know how Ballard works. I believe he works as hard as anyone in the league when it comes to searching for talent and deals. And because of that, he’s willing to walk away from a lot.  

[GoColts8818]

Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don’t make.  I’d rather have Latu, Mitchell, and next years second rather than just Nabers.

[ProblChld32]

4 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

You’ve lost me bud. You are just recycling what I said. 
 

you speaking to my opinion of Ballard not being aggressive or doesn’t try? Please point to where I made that opinion? Quite the contrary on this forum, my friend. He’s been aggressive in many ways. He was aggressive to get Hunter and actually bid more than the Texans did this offseason. That’s just a recent example. I know how Ballard works. I believe he works as hard as anyone in the league when it comes to searching for talent and deals. And because of that, he’s willing to walk away from a lot.  

Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say I saw “I think it’s possible Ballard put a decent offer on the table knowing it was going to be documented on hard knocks and would get those saying he doesn’t try to make moves off his back a little.” So I assumed you were apart of that minority, My apologies.

[ColtStrong2013]

1 minute ago, ProblChld32 said:

Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say I saw “I think it’s possible Ballard put a decent offer on the table knowing it was going to be documented on hard knocks and would get those saying he doesn’t try to make moves off his back a little.” So I assumed you were apart of that minority, My apologies.

That was what I said and think is possible. I think he thought getting the giants to move was a long shot compared to others down the line. The bears snagged Odunze at what 9? We were reportedly callling all the way to when Bowers was picked. 
 

I think it’s highly likely they were targeting pass catcher and in order of how it fell. MJH, Nabors, Odunze, Bowers. The odds of selecting first defensive player at 15 is next to nothing. If Latu performs big, it will likely never happen again. We were very lucky in that regard. Ballard made attempts to go up and get a weapon, just didn’t work out. Perhaps it was destiny we landed Latu- time will tell. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

That would of been silly 

 

 

 

[ADnum1]

I told you all it was Bowers.

 

TE is probably a bigger need than WR with Pitt, Pierce and Downs.

 

But don't get me wrong, I'm happy with AD and Latu

[smittywerb]

10 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

I told you all it was Bowers.

 

TE is probably a bigger need than WR with Pitt, Pierce and Downs.

 

But don't get me wrong, I'm happy with AD and Latu

I gotta disagree.  Adam says he believes it was for Brock, not that’s who it was.  Still doesn’t make sense to trade up THAT far for him.  
 

And then on the jets side, THEY COULD’VE DRAFTED HIM lol.  Multiple mocks had Brock being available for the jets to draft and a lot of them had him going to the jets.  If the jets were that willing to go up and get him, then they wouldn’t have traded with the Vikings and drafted bowers instead.

 

nope, not buying what Adam is selling.  This is something he believes.  Usually, if he’s told something he says a “source”.  

[ColtStrong2013]

32 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

I told you all it was Bowers.

 

TE is probably a bigger need than WR with Pitt, Pierce and Downs.

 

But don't get me wrong, I'm happy with AD and Latu

I don’t buy it. You are telling me we were offering 15, 46 and next years 2nd for Brock bowers at 6, and couldn’t get the deal done all the way up til he was drafted 2 picks before us? I don’t buy it one bit. I think they tried to get him, but I don’t think there is any chance they were trying to trade up to 6 for him and couldn’t pull a trade at some point. No way. 

[NewColtsFan]

1 hour ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I don’t buy it. You are telling me we were offering 15, 46 and next years 2nd for Brock bowers at 6, and couldn’t get the deal done all the way up til he was drafted 2 picks before us? I don’t buy it one bit. I think they tried to get him, but I don’t think there is any chance they were trying to trade up to 6 for him and couldn’t pull a trade at some point. No way. 

 

Well, odds are high the offer the Colts made to move up to 6 may not have been the offer to move up to 10 or any other pick.   We might’ve decreased our offer as Bowers fell further down the board.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment.  

[tweezy32]

I don't know, but I personally believe there was a zero % chance the Colts were trying to go up to 6 and get Bowers. He went right before us anyway, and the Colts still could have tried every single team before he was taken and given up a big package for him, but they didn't. I think once Nabers and or Rome was finally gone then they started to hit teams up about bowers, but no way they were trying to get up to 6 for him when they could still have tried super hard and sent a massive trade to the other teams after pick 10.

[ADnum1]

I'm not sure I understand the resistance to Bowers from this board.

Bowers was a monster in college.  He was the UGA offense.  A hybrid TE/WR who is 6'5 240 and runs a 4.4.  He's a freak of nature.  He catches everything in his zip code with incredible hands and understands how to get open.

 

Its clear to me Ballard wanted Bowers.  He needed a TE desperately to help out his young QB coming off an injury and we know Ballard drafts based off need.

 

Ballard getting Bowers at 6 would have been the right decision and I would have supported it.

 

If Bowers became the next Travis Kelsey would he be worth it ?  Of course he would.

 

And keep in mind Nabors had Brian Thomas on the other side as well so it will be interesting to see how Nabors fares being the guy. 

 

Bowers was the whole Georgia offense and the Number 1 option there.

[Solid84]

2 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I don’t buy it. You are telling me we were offering 15, 46 and next years 2nd for Brock bowers at 6, and couldn’t get the deal done all the way up til he was drafted 2 picks before us? I don’t buy it one bit. I think they tried to get him, but I don’t think there is any chance they were trying to trade up to 6 for him and couldn’t pull a trade at some point. No way. 

Personally I think the Colts wanted any of Nabers, Odunze and Bowers. Maybe they wanted one of the WRs at 6 and Bowers when they tried later (11?), nobody but the Colts really know.

 

I do think Ballard offering a "fair" trade to move from 15 to 6 was a bit naive if he REALLY wanted one of those 3 guys. Fair trades don't really happen when you trying to get into that range 1-8 range in my opinion - there's always a premium.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, ADnum1 said:

I'm not sure I understand the resistance to Bowers from this board.

Bowers was a monster in college.  He was the UGA offense.  A hybrid TE/WR who is 6'5 240 and runs a 4.4.  He's a freak of nature.  He catches everything in his zip code with incredible hands and understands how to get open.

 

Its clear to me Ballard wanted Bowers.  He needed a TE desperately to help out his young QB coming off an injury and we know Ballard drafts based off need.

 

Ballard getting Bowers at 6 would have been the right decision and I would have supported it.

 

If Bowers became the next Travis Kelsey would he be worth it ?  Of course he would.

 

And keep in mind Nabors had Brian Thomas on the other side as well so it will be interesting to see how Nabors fares being the guy. 

 

Bowers was the whole Georgia offense and the Number 1 option there.

 

The bolded is what people say about any prospect they've allowed themselves to fall in love with. It's not good strategy.

 

My resistance is not to Bowers directly. It's to the idea that the Colts would have seen Bowers as the best option available if they had the #6 pick in the draft. With Nabors and Odunze still on the board. 

 

I think we already knew that the Colts were trying to trade up for Bowers. Someone reported right after the draft that the Colts were calling everybody trying to move up, and the calls stopped when the Raiders took Bowers. So 1+1=2, the Colts wanted Bowers. Not hard to accept. And now we're seeing that the Colts were trying to get up as high as #6, so it's easy to assume that Bowers was the target. 

 

But would the Colts have moved up to #6 -- giving up #15, #46, and a future 2nd -- for Bowers? With Nabers and Odunze still on the board? I don't think they would have. I don't think it would have been the right decision. I would have been disappointed with the overall strategy, while still thinking Bowers would be a good offensive weapon for the team. 

[Nate!]

3 hours ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I don’t buy it. You are telling me we were offering 15, 46 and next years 2nd for Brock bowers at 6, and couldn’t get the deal done all the way up til he was drafted 2 picks before us? I don’t buy it one bit. I think they tried to get him, but I don’t think there is any chance they were trying to trade up to 6 for him and couldn’t pull a trade at some point. No way. 

 

Seems clearly obvious Bowers wasn’t the pick at 6 if they traded up.  As you noted, that would’ve been a massive haul/overpay for where Bowers ultimately got taken.  Would’ve been a WR at 6.  
 

Yeah, maybe they tried to move up for Bowers too, but would’ve been a lesser package than what they offered to try to get to 6

[ColtStrong2013]

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Well, odds are high the offer the Colts made to move up to 6 may not have been the offer to move up to 10 or any other pick.   We might’ve decreased our offer as Bowers fell further down the board.

 

Sorry if I misunderstood your comment.  

of course they would be, if that were the case… but why? If you valued giving 15, 46 and next years 2nd for a player at 6, why would it be significantly reduced if that player fell? Wouldn’t you just do what it took to get that player? that’s my argument here. If we were targeting Bowers at 6 (I don’t think we were), and we were offering a solid trade package, how did he fall all the way to two picks before us without us trading for him? It doesn’t add up for me. 

[smittywerb]

I think people are missing the point that bowers was available when the jets traded their pick away.  
 

rumors that the jets were trying to move up and he fell right in their laps, and they traded out.

 

i believe indeed we wanted bowers, but not at that cost.  

[Superman]

1 hour ago, smittywerb said:

I think people are missing the point that bowers was available when the jets traded their pick away.  
 

rumors that the jets were trying to move up and he fell right in their laps, and they traded out.

 

i believe indeed we wanted bowers, but not at that cost.  

 

That's a good point. If the Colts were trying to move up for Bowers, I feel like they could have competed with the Vikings offer of a 4th and a 5th. Of course, it was four more spots back, but if we were giving up a 2nd and a future 2nd to get to #6, I think getting to #10 would have been in play. And Bowers was still on the board, but Nabers and Odunze were not... 

 

https://www.newyorkjets.com/news/jets-trade-no-10-overall-pick-to-vikings-2024-nfl-draft

[smittywerb]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

That's a good point. If the Colts were trying to move up for Bowers, I feel like they could have competed with the Vikings offer of a 4th and a 5th. Of course, it was four more spots back, but if we were giving up a 2nd and a future 2nd to get to #6, I think getting to #10 would have been in play. And Bowers was still on the board, but Nabers and Odunze were not... 

 

https://www.newyorkjets.com/news/jets-trade-no-10-overall-pick-to-vikings-2024-nfl-draft

 

I honestly believed things changed once bowers was gone.  I do think he was a target of ours.  But with what we know now, with the way Ballard was elated to get Latu, I think him and bowers were their picks (who were left) and we were fine with seeing which one would be left.