|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 17, 2018 23:15:35 GMT -6
Colts fans think they might still find one of the two they really want at 6, that somehow 4 QB picks in top 5.
If not, Nelson and the good CB from Bama other good players will be there. Then a couple more extra picks in top 50. Those sometimes very good, probably get 4 or 5 starters in this draft. As bad as the Colts are, maybe more.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 18, 2018 7:49:27 GMT -6
Using a first round pick for an interior offensive lineman (for the second time in three years) because "you need to keep Luck from getting killed" is extremely stupid, knee-jerk, ignorant, wasteful, defeatist thinking. The interior of the line is an inherently clogged up place, and preventing sacks from there is only a matter of basic competence. If you are using a top 6 pick for that, you are completely failing as a GM. You should be able to find acceptable interior offensive lineman from mid to low round picks, reasonably priced free agents, or electrical supply stores in North Carolina.
The invaluable resource of a top 6 pick needs to be used on something you won't get anywhere else - rare play-making ability at a key position. It's much much harder to prevent sacks from the wide open spaces and athletic freaks a tackle has to deal with. You need a very rare combination of physical qualities. THAT'S a position often worthy of a top 6 pick.
Again I ask - why isn't Nelson a tackle? |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 18, 2018 9:04:59 GMT -6
Assuming the two guys they really want are there, I am sure they agree. If they are gone, then it might even make sense to trade down again, but Nelson then makes some sense if you are looking at DB or less good play makers.
Hard to value what keeping Luck upright means in terms of play making.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 18, 2018 9:50:10 GMT -6
Once again - it is not necessary to use a top 6 pick to prevent sacks from the interior of the line. The supposed choice at the 6 spot between "keeping Luck upright", and a playmaker at a premium position is a false choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 18, 2018 11:02:47 GMT -6
Once Who do you have in mind?again - it is not necessary to use a top 6 pick to prevent sacks from the interior of the line. The supposed choice at the 6 spot between "keeping Luck upright", and a playmaker at a premium position is a false choice. Nelson is generally regarded as the first offensive lineman to go in the draft. Normally everyone would take the best Tackle, he may be exceptionally good. My assumption is basically that Barkley and Chubb are gone, then it might be hard to fine that premium play maker. That assumption means the best players may be a QB that the colts don't seem to desire, maybe a DB or LB who are not sure fire stars either. They could probably trade down and come up with very nearly equivalent value. I wonder how far down the frenzy over QB choices will go. Could be true about Nelson too, I suppose, but it's a closer case then where the Colts have such a weak line. I am not the expert on it but reading about the big trade that seemed to be a pretty common opinion, and I didn't see quite the certainty you have about it to skip over Nelson. Who do you have in mind as the alternative? |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 18, 2018 12:56:14 GMT -6
A rare, play-making athlete at a key position. I don't watch nearly enough tape to know which. Ballard and his staff should though.
The herd mentality is very strong in the world of mock drafts and draft "experts". For example, I don't necessarily believe that Chubb is the best edge defender available. Maybe, but maybe not. In the echo chamber world of internet mock drafts, players' reputations can become progressively detached from reality. I don't have the hours or access necessary to watch the tape, conduct the interviews etc. that would be necessary to sort through all that.
BUT - if you are going to make a case for Nelson at #6, it has to go way beyond "keeping Luck upright." And if he is, in fact, special enough to warrant a #6 pick, it should be explained why he isn't a tackle. Because if he is that much of an offensive line super stud, then, in my mind, he should be able to play the more demanding and important tackle position. So there is a logical contradiction in picking Nelson at #6 that can be grasped without looking at hours of tape. |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 18, 2018 19:30:30 GMT -6
Nelson's combine media interview
Certainly seems like a sensible, no-nonsense, no-drama kid. Don't picture him embarrassing his future team by beating the shit out of his baby mama, or repeatedly driving drunk or any such idiocy. (Colts have enough embarrassing idiocy with their owner...don't need any more) Makes a not-unreasonable case for himself as a high pick. Paraphrasing: there are interior D-linemen dominating games these days and a player like him can control them, and he can also open lanes for a good running game which opens up the passing game.
Still not sure that I buy that completely enough to spend the 6 pick, but that's a lot better case than " we need to keep Luck alive".
Also says he could possibly play tackle and has played tackle in high school and early (non-starting) days at ND. Google finds several NFL scout types conjecturing that he could be a tackle in the league. And for all I know he can, but is that the sort of possibility you use a top 6 pick on? Expecting a guy to play a position he didn't play in college? Maybe with...I don't know...the 14th pick or the 24th pick. But the 6th? |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Mar 18, 2018 21:22:20 GMT -6
He's higher on everyone's board than 14.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 19, 2018 7:14:30 GMT -6
I'm talking about if you plan to switch his position because you need a tackle, then that additional risk makes a higher pick unwise. Bill Polian always said you HAVE to hit on your first round pick - risks and projects are for later rounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by gocardsgo on Mar 19, 2018 15:09:22 GMT -6
I say we trade down again w/ Buffalo, get both their first round picks and another second round pick next year
|
|
|
|
Post by TakeMeBackto2008 on Mar 20, 2018 21:45:15 GMT -6
I'm getting really tired of hearing people say "the Colts need o-linemen cuz Luck gets hit a lot" which leads into other fantasies about building these unstoppable teams that just flat out own the trenches and how we "don't want to repeat the Manning era" (which was incredible, by the way).
Mostly I'm just sick and tired of this fanbase. We have a lot of dumb fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 28, 2018 13:19:04 GMT -6
Wonder what the odds are that Luck will ever come back as the 2016 Luck. What precedents are there for a QB missing well over a year with throwing arm/shoulder issues and returning to play as well as before? What about baseball pitchers? An NFL QB arm is an instrument that needs not only strength, but also precision, timing, touch, etc.
If you were dumb enough to take the Colts public statements at face value last year, I hope you've learned better by now. They're not going to ever admit to ANYTHING that would depress ticket sales until they absolutely have to. They are a for-profit business after all. Apparently he is STILL not throwing a real football.
With no expertise and only the limited publically available information, I think the odds are a good bit less than 50/50 that he will play at an above-average-NFL-QB level this coming season. I think the odds are no better than even money that he will ever have a season like 2014 or 2016 again.
If some one knows of comparable cases with happy endings, I would love to hear about them.
|
|
|
|
Post by proctorp on Mar 31, 2018 9:53:00 GMT -6
Drew Brees had a very similar injury. Had a successful surgery and is still performing well. I don't know how long his rehab was. The problem I had with Luck is why didn't he use the same surgeon as Brees?
|
|
|
|
Post by TakeMeBackto2008 on Mar 31, 2018 12:00:25 GMT -6
I heard Luck was having to completely re-learn a proper throwing motion because his delivery changed to accommodate the injured shoulder.
He should have had the surgery after the 2015 season, when it was initially injured. That not only would have prevented more damage, but might have also influenced Irsay not to give contract extensions to Dumb and Dumber.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Mar 31, 2018 12:51:42 GMT -6
I looked up that Brees hurt his shoulder the last game of the 2005 season, had surgery in Jan 2006 and came back and was 2nd in MVP voting for the 2006 season. Since Luck has already departed so far from that pattern, I'm not feeling confident we can use that as a reassuring comparison.
|
|
