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
Register FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 03-30-2018, 11:02 AM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZiaColt View Post
if Buffalo's GM is desperate enough for #6 to give up #12 and #22 (which combined have about 130-150% of the draft value of #6, depending on which evaluator you use) by all means Ballard should do it.

more likely Buffalo would want Ballard to sweeten the package to make that deal, and it might end up looking like Buffalo sends Indy #12 and #22 in exchange for the Colts' #6 and #49. If I were Ballard, I don't think I'd be willing to give up #36, and I'd have to think long and hard before I'd part with #37 either, but I'd likely be happy to throw #49 into the deal. IIRC Buffalo already has two 2nd rounders, and both are after the 49th pick, so the Bills would still be moving up in Round 2.

IMO that would still be a worthwhile deal for the Colts: you drop from #6 to #12, where a day-one starter will still be available at several positions (even if he's BPA too) and you give up 1 of your 2nd rounders but gain another 1st rounder. Still have 4 picks in the top 37, 5 in the top 67--in a draft most NFL scouts feel has about 70 day-one, or future, starting players in it.
Absolutely not to giving additional value to Buffalo. You throw the value chart out the window when a team is moving up for a QB.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to VeveJones007 For This Useful Post:
Dewey 5 (03-30-2018), Racehorse (03-30-2018), smitty46953 (03-30-2018), Spike (03-30-2018), YDFL Commish (03-30-2018)
  #42  
Old 03-30-2018, 11:33 AM
YDFL Commish YDFL Commish is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Mt. Pleasant Wisconsin
Posts: 3,430
Thanks: 2,039
Thanked 2,258 Times in 1,217 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Absolutely not to giving additional value to Buffalo. You throw the value chart out the window when a team is moving up for a QB.
Totally agree. Also there is no way in a trade down scenario that I am willing to come out of the 1st rd. without 1 of the 2 top LB's, in Smith and Edmunds.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to YDFL Commish For This Useful Post:
Racehorse (03-30-2018), VeveJones007 (03-30-2018)
  #43  
Old 03-30-2018, 11:41 AM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by YDFL Commish View Post
Totally agree. Also there is no way in a trade down scenario that I am willing to come out of the 1st rd. without 1 of the 2 top LB's, in Smith and Edmunds.
Aside from missing on Chubb, my biggest fear is staying at 6, taking Barkley, and missing on one of those LBs and the potential to add another quality pick.

Let's just say Barkley and Nelson are still there at 6 and the Bears will give you 8 and 40 to move up for Nelsen. You probably get Smith and Michel with those two picks and I think those two will provide more value than either Barkley or Nelson on their own.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to VeveJones007 For This Useful Post:
ChileColts (04-02-2018), Racehorse (03-30-2018)
  #44  
Old 03-30-2018, 01:56 PM
Racehorse's Avatar
Racehorse Racehorse is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: God's green Earth
Posts: 12,930
Thanks: 17,133
Thanked 4,404 Times in 2,531 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Aside from missing on Chubb, my biggest fear is staying at 6, taking Barkley, and missing on one of those LBs and the potential to add another quality pick.

Let's just say Barkley and Nelson are still there at 6 and the Bears will give you 8 and 40 to move up for Nelsen. You probably get Smith and Michel with those two picks and I think those two will provide more value than either Barkley or Nelson on their own.
Yeah, Chubb or additional 1st or 2nd round picks.
__________________
Keep your political crap out of a football forum! Nobody here gives a rat's a**
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-30-2018, 04:22 PM
ZiaColt ZiaColt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 89
Thanks: 0
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Absolutely not to giving additional value to Buffalo. You throw the value chart out the window when a team is moving up for a QB.
GM's never truly "throw the value chart out the window," and I think in this case it also depends on WHICH of the QB's might be available at #6. For Darnold or Rosen, maybe the Bills would be willing to give more than they would for bigger gambles like Allen or Mayfield.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-30-2018, 07:16 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZiaColt View Post
GM's never truly "throw the value chart out the window," and I think in this case it also depends on WHICH of the QB's might be available at #6. For Darnold or Rosen, maybe the Bills would be willing to give more than they would for bigger gambles like Allen or Mayfield.
I think you underestimate Buffalo’s desire to get one of the 4 QBs. The moves they’ve made this offseason tell me that they are desperate to get one of them. If three are already off the board, lack of supply drives up the price.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-30-2018, 07:45 PM
ZiaColt ZiaColt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 89
Thanks: 0
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
I think you underestimate Buffalo’s desire to get one of the 4 QBs. The moves they’ve made this offseason tell me that they are desperate to get one of them. If three are already off the board, lack of supply drives up the price.
I can sort of understand if a sloppy Darnold or a brittle Rosen somehow falls to #6, but if I'm Buffalo's GM I want more than just #6 for a project like Allen or a gamble like Mayfield.

I've even read anonymous quotes from some NFL scouts suggesting that they don't feel there's that much of a drop-off from Allen and Mayfield to guys like Jackson and maybe even Rudolph. (But I've also seen where some scouts said they wouldn't draft Rudolph until the 3rd round.)

If Ballard can persuade Buffalo to do a straight-up deal of #6 for #12 and #22, more power to him. But IMO Buffalo would be giving up too much for (at least) 2 of the 4 QB's being mentioned.

Then again, if Chubb or Nelson is still around at #6, all trade discussions may become moot.

Last edited by ZiaColt; 03-30-2018 at 07:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-30-2018, 09:05 PM
nate505 nate505 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,726
Thanks: 2,143
Thanked 2,538 Times in 1,489 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromeburn View Post
Barkley will have an instant impact. I just don’t like drafting a RB this high, especially with a team not ready to contend. I like taking one as the last step to put your team over the jump. I do think Barkley will be good, epitome of the modern three down back. Great character, work ethic, he should have a LT type impact on a team. If you want one more shot at a title he might be the guy to get. Giants like their guys clean cut. But if the Giants take Barkley, I think the Browns take Chubb.
I'm all for Barkley if both Cubb and Nelson are off the board and there isn't a line of team to offer a good package for the pick. At the very least he's about a sure fire talent as this draft has.

Then again I could just be getting nostalgic for the Edge days.
__________________
Free of Frank!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-30-2018, 09:11 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZiaColt View Post
I can sort of understand if a sloppy Darnold or a brittle Rosen somehow falls to #6, but if I'm Buffalo's GM I want more than just #6 for a project like Allen or a gamble like Mayfield.

I've even read anonymous quotes from some NFL scouts suggesting that they don't feel there's that much of a drop-off from Allen and Mayfield to guys like Jackson and maybe even Rudolph. (But I've also seen where some scouts said they wouldn't draft Rudolph until the 3rd round.)

If Ballard can persuade Buffalo to do a straight-up deal of #6 for #12 and #22, more power to him. But IMO Buffalo would be giving up too much for (at least) 2 of the 4 QB's being mentioned.

Then again, if Chubb or Nelson is still around at #6, all trade discussions may become moot.
We already know they were offering 12 and 22 to get to three with a chance at either the 2nd or 3rd QB. Either way, I think it’s moot because Dorsey will get them to pay an arm and a leg to get to #4.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-30-2018, 09:54 PM
1965southpaw's Avatar
1965southpaw 1965southpaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 997
Thanks: 548
Thanked 818 Times in 391 Posts
Default

You guys are forgetting that there is a "mystery 6th" candidate that Ballard is said to think is a game changer in addition to the top 3 QB and top 3 non-QBs (Chubb, Barkley, Nelson) that he is presumed to not want to miss out on by trading out of if he's still on the board at pick 6. I don't see him trading down to 12 if one of these 4 guys is on the board at 6 unless it is a truly exceptional haul if the word about the "mystery 6th" man is accurate (reported by Kevin Bowen and others),
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 08:36 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.