ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 01-13-2020, 09:14 PM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Default

Nice thing about QB's, they retain their value better than other positions. I bet if the Dolphins wanted to trade Rosen they would still get a decent pick for him and the Cardinals got a 2nd for him from the Dolphins.

College NC on tonight. The next two number one picks playing each other. Doesn't happen often. Tigers are going to kill them.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 01-13-2020, 10:40 PM
apballin apballin is offline
Doom -N- Gloom
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,852
Thanks: 1,805
Thanked 1,124 Times in 638 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
Nice thing about QB's, they retain their value better than other positions. I bet if the Dolphins wanted to trade Rosen they would still get a decent pick for him and the Cardinals got a 2nd for him from the Dolphins.

College NC on tonight. The next two number one picks playing each other. Doesn't happen often. Tigers are going to kill them.
Which tigers lol
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 01-13-2020, 10:56 PM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,074
Thanks: 287
Thanked 730 Times in 404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Despite what you say, there’s nothing wrong with drafting a QB and evaluating them for a year and, if necessary, getting rid of them if they aren’t going to pan out. Among the higher round draftees, Josh Rosen and Deshone Kizer are a couple of recent examples that come to mind.
The teams that moved on from Rosen and Kizer coincidentally had the number one pick in the following draft. I’m not sure how the situations are comparable when you keep saying the Colts are likely to be better next year. The issue with your suggestion isn’t taking a project QB (although it’s not my preference) it’s in the idea they could / should just move on after a year. Are there circumstances that could lead to that (like getting the number one pick)? Sure. But if they are making the pick with the idea of doing anything less than putting their full support behind the guy and giving him a few years to develop then it’s a wasted pick. If the guy is so damn bad that without really seeing the field the team decides to move on after one year, what more can you say except it’s a bad pick? You want to waste a 5th - 7th? Fine. But wtf is the point if you are going to ditch the guy after a year? It just makes no sense. It’s a move to simply say you did something.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 01-13-2020, 11:33 PM
Spike's Avatar
Spike Spike is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 7,710
Thanks: 8,123
Thanked 4,793 Times in 2,672 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
Nice thing about QB's, they retain their value better than other positions. I bet if the Dolphins wanted to trade Rosen they would still get a decent pick for him and the Cardinals got a 2nd for him from the Dolphins.

College NC on tonight. The next two number one picks playing each other. Doesn't happen often. Tigers are going to kill them.
Burrow looking damn good again tonight. Too bad we won't be able to draft him.
__________________
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 01-13-2020, 11:39 PM
Chromeburn's Avatar
Chromeburn Chromeburn is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,253
Thanks: 1,407
Thanked 3,582 Times in 2,004 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apballin View Post
Which tigers lol


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike View Post
Burrow looking damn good again tonight. Too bad we won't be able to draft him.
Everything I hear about him is good personality wise. Seems to study QB's too. I like him a lot. Bengals are idiots if they don't draft him.

I like the RB's in this game. Etienne is a mismatch nitemare and has really good hands. Edwards-Helaire is really under used. Did you see that sliding jumpcut, it was so fast and smooth, just amazing. Hope we draft one of them.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Chromeburn For This Useful Post:
smitty46953 (01-14-2020)
  #156  
Old 01-14-2020, 03:27 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
The teams that moved on from Rosen and Kizer coincidentally had the number one pick in the following draft. I’m not sure how the situations are comparable when you keep saying the Colts are likely to be better next year. The issue with your suggestion isn’t taking a project QB (although it’s not my preference) it’s in the idea they could / should just move on after a year. Are there circumstances that could lead to that (like getting the number one pick)? Sure. But if they are making the pick with the idea of doing anything less than putting their full support behind the guy and giving him a few years to develop then it’s a wasted pick. If the guy is so damn bad that without really seeing the field the team decides to move on after one year, what more can you say except it’s a bad pick? You want to waste a 5th - 7th? Fine. But wtf is the point if you are going to ditch the guy after a year? It just makes no sense. It’s a move to simply say you did something.
Well, then I'll ask you a practical question to put your statements to the test. What franchise QBs have take more than a year to show promise after being picked high in the draft? Kurt Warner doesn't count, he was undrafted and cut in training camp. Brett Favre? Not really true, he was a 2nd rounder that was able to be traded for a 1st rounder the next year.

I haven't done a comprehensive survey, and maybe you can think of a few, but I think its fair to say that the franchise QBs usually flash early. I can think of several - Rodgers, Mahomes, Jackson for instance. Even Tom Brady, a 6th round afterthought, was installed as the starting QB two games into his second season.

In short, I think we'd know in a year if we have something special. And, by the way, I never said one year was all we'd give a developmental QB, just that I think in a year we'd have a much better idea of what we have. And if it looks like it's going nowhere, then by all means cut bait.
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 01-14-2020, 10:59 AM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,074
Thanks: 287
Thanked 730 Times in 404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
Well, then I'll ask you a practical question to put your statements to the test. What franchise QBs have take more than a year to show promise after being picked high in the draft? Kurt Warner doesn't count, he was undrafted and cut in training camp. Brett Favre? Not really true, he was a 2nd rounder that was able to be traded for a 1st rounder the next year.

I haven't done a comprehensive survey, and maybe you can think of a few, but I think its fair to say that the franchise QBs usually flash early. I can think of several - Rodgers, Mahomes, Jackson for instance. Even Tom Brady, a 6th round afterthought, was installed as the starting QB two games into his second season.

In short, I think we'd know in a year if we have something special. And, by the way, I never said one year was all we'd give a developmental QB, just that I think in a year we'd have a much better idea of what we have. And if it looks like it's going nowhere, then by all means cut bait.
Chaka I’ll admit it would be pretty damn hard to answer your question, but that’s fine because it isn’t testing my statements anyway. My issue isn’t that you can’t give up on a guy after a year because he may blow up elsewhere, it’s that teams rarely give up on a QB (other than very late picks) after one year. If you want me to compile a list of guys that showed enough that teams kept them around a few years, but that never developed into franchise guys, I can. Going to be awhile though because it will be a long ass list. And that’s my point.

It’s very often not obvious what you have until they see the field for real games and you see if they progress. That’s why Brady didn’t see the field until Bledsoe was hurt. The greatest coach in history didn’t recognize Brady as a HOFer at practice. Jackson didn’t start until Flaco was hurt. Warner didn’t become the starter until Green was hurt. Yes it’s possible he’s so bad you move on after a year (bad pick) and it’s possible he’s so good you bench JB this year for him. But BY FAR the most realistic scenario is that you still see promise in the guy and he becomes your starter next year. Unless he is absolutely awful you don’t draft another high QB next year, you use the picks to shore up the rest of the team to try to lessen the load on a young QB. So that makes it at least a 2 year investment. And if the guy shows flashes of good play mixed with some bad play (like many do) then it’s possible he gets another year to see if he improves.

I don’t want the team drafting a guy because the timing is right. I want them drafting a guy because they absolutely believe in him. If they decide to move on from him after a year then they spectacularly fucked up their evaluation of him. I don’t see how that is in anyway arguable. And I certainly don’t see that as a plan. I’d much rather they target and go get a guy they believe in than giving up 2-3 years on their 4th or 5th choice because he happened to be available.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 01-14-2020, 12:23 PM
Racehorse's Avatar
Racehorse Racehorse is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: God's green Earth
Posts: 12,880
Thanks: 16,945
Thanked 4,362 Times in 2,509 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
Chaka I’ll admit it would be pretty damn hard to answer your question, but that’s fine because it isn’t testing my statements anyway. My issue isn’t that you can’t give up on a guy after a year because he may blow up elsewhere, it’s that teams rarely give up on a QB (other than very late picks) after one year. If you want me to compile a list of guys that showed enough that teams kept them around a few years, but that never developed into franchise guys, I can. Going to be awhile though because it will be a long ass list. And that’s my point.

It’s very often not obvious what you have until they see the field for real games and you see if they progress. That’s why Brady didn’t see the field until Bledsoe was hurt. The greatest coach in history didn’t recognize Brady as a HOFer at practice. Jackson didn’t start until Flaco was hurt. Warner didn’t become the starter until Green was hurt. Yes it’s possible he’s so bad you move on after a year (bad pick) and it’s possible he’s so good you bench JB this year for him. But BY FAR the most realistic scenario is that you still see promise in the guy and he becomes your starter next year. Unless he is absolutely awful you don’t draft another high QB next year, you use the picks to shore up the rest of the team to try to lessen the load on a young QB. So that makes it at least a 2 year investment. And if the guy shows flashes of good play mixed with some bad play (like many do) then it’s possible he gets another year to see if he improves.

I don’t want the team drafting a guy because the timing is right. I want them drafting a guy because they absolutely believe in him. If they decide to move on from him after a year then they spectacularly fucked up their evaluation of him. I don’t see how that is in anyway arguable. And I certainly don’t see that as a plan. I’d much rather they target and go get a guy they believe in than giving up 2-3 years on their 4th or 5th choice because he happened to be available.
That all makes sense. However, how much capital do you think is too much? That seems to be the sticking point.
__________________
Keep your political crap out of a football forum! Nobody here gives a rat's a**
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 01-14-2020, 01:58 PM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,074
Thanks: 287
Thanked 730 Times in 404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehorse View Post
That all makes sense. However, how much capital do you think is too much? That seems to be the sticking point.
Damn good question that’s hard to answer. It depends how much you believe in a certain guy and what your scouts think of the potential for next years group. I’d certainly be willing to do a trade similar to the Colts / Jets trade to move to #4 and get a guy I believe is a franchise QB. If I have to swap next years #2 with next years #1 to get my guy, then yeah I still do it. I’d probably still be willing to add some lower pics of swaps if I had to to get it done. So two #1s and two #2s, plus some mid to lower round pics or position swaps to go from 13 to 4 - if I believe the guy is a franchise QB.

If that’s not enough or I don’t see a guy after Burrow that I believe in enough then I’d turn my sights to next years draft. I’d look to move two of this years top 3 pics to next years draft to build up the ammo I need to get my guy. It wouldn’t be unrealistic to end up with 3 #1s next year as early to mid 2nds are fairly commonly traded for future #1s. So next year three #1s and a #2 should move you up pretty damn high. Sprinkle in some swaps or lower pics if absolutely necessary.

And what if you don’t see a guy next year? Well being the GM of a QBless team is a shitty deal. I don’t have much else to say. At some point you have to identify a guy and be willing to pull the trigger.

The real cost to me is time, not picks. I don’t see the need to waste time (and draft pics) on someone the team doesn’t completely believe in. That’s why I don’t agree with the idea that they draft someone just to have them in the pipeline. It not only wastes a valuable pick, but you can only really develop one QB at a time, it’s not like other positions. The team would only do what Chaka is suggesting and move on after a year if they completely, completely fucked up the pick. So while my scenario looks scary because there is a chance that in two years time you still haven’t been able to acquire that guy, I believe that chance is much smaller than the likelihood that if you draft a guy you aren’t sold on (because this is the year it makes sense), you will still be evaluating him 2 years or 3 years down the road. Then when he doesn’t pan out you start the process again without the drafts pics having been pushed into the future to go get your guy. You are in the typical QB purgatory - too good to draft high, but not good enough to get a Super Bowl.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rm1369 For This Useful Post:
Pez (01-14-2020)
  #160  
Old 01-14-2020, 03:21 PM
Pez Pez is offline
Accidental Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 684 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Some really good posts in this thread from rm, chaka, race etc.

I think the Constanzo situation plays big into this. If he retires it hoses us pretty seriously. Even if he doesnt retire, we have to get an FA OT, and we have to draft an OT. We really want Braden Smith to be playing guard opposite Q.

The only first rounder that makes sense to me is OT Andrew Thomas. (He may be gone by 13) This allows us to keep investing in the OL, and provided we got a free agent tackle, we can move Smith to guard. If we still have Costanzo, it's an embarrassment of riches and perhaps trade capital.

I think we get a QB in the second, If QB Eason is still available at #34 we go for it. If not, we get CB or DT or WR.

We can get Fromm with #44.
__________________
** 2017 Premier league champion **

"I want to dominate all my opponents, and take their will away to play the game, by each play, and finishing them past the whistle."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.