2017 Draft Thread

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

His listing as a guard makes me doubt his athleticism to hold up at LT in the NFL, though admittedly I've watched no film of him. That said, LT is the only OL position worth a Top 15 pick.

We need a guard more than a tackle and I couldn't care less about what a pick is worth on paper.... I care about the biggest need on the team and that is Andrew Luck. Without him you can have all the pass rush and Dline and CB's in the world and this team is going no where behind that oline.

This team is not going to built around defense as long as Luck is the QB. It will be built around him and rightfully so.

Look what an improvement the oline made with adding the best OC in the draft last yr. Look at what Dallas did!

Again there are plenty of defense available in rounds 2-4.

We dont need the 86 Bears D to win. They need to be top 15 to win the SB if Luck is healthy. We need a healthy Andrew Luck, who isnt getting killed every play.

[Coltsalr]

We're much closer to an OL that Luck would be capable of winning a Super Bowl behind than we are to having a top 15 defense, that's for damn sure.

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Coltsalr

We're much closer to an OL that Luck would be capable of winning a Super Bowl behind than we are to having a top 15 defense, that's for damn sure.

I think you are underestimating what Ballard has already done. Simon is going to be a stud and I think Sheard will be a huge improvement.. There are plenty of pieces in rounds 2-4 to get this D to where it needs to be.

TBO they probably only need to be top 20 to beat even the Pats, if Luck has time to throw and the Oline can run block.

[Coltsalr]

Originally Posted by Puck

I think you are underestimating what Ballard has already done. Simon is going to be a stud and I think Sheard will be a huge improvement.. There are plenty of pieces in rounds 2-4 to get this D to where it needs to be.

TBO they probably only need to be top 20 to beat even the Pats, if Luck has time to throw and the Oline can run block.

I'm actually pretty high on Sheard/Simon too. I think Simon will be an improvement over Walden and I think Sheard alone will be a fairly massive improvement over Cole/Mathis, who were both completely tapped out last year.

I do however worry that since neither has proven they can handle full slate of starters reps that we'll need plenty of depth at the position. Depth that we certainly don't already have.

And I'm also very concerned about the ILB corps. Sean Spence might be a nice piece, but that's actually one of the moves that Ballard has made that I'm most down on. Morrison/Jackson showed me nothing last year that would indicate that they're capable of being good NFL starters. God help us if we start the season with them.

That said, I say all of that to say that, again, I will never bitch if they go full-on with the OL. I agree, if we suddenly have Dallas' OL, then sure, that could really do some interesting things for us. It's not the path that I would take, but if they did do so, I wouldn't be stark raving mad over it.

TE and WR are the only positions that if we draft in the 1st round that I'll literally lose my mind. I'd prefer not to draft RB/CB/S/OL, but I could at least see why they would do so (Yes, I believe that Cook is THAT good that if we drafted him in the 1st that with time it would be justifiable, but no, it's NOT what I would do).

That was some Pete fence-sitting right there, wasn't it?

[Puck]

Originally Posted by Coltsalr

I'm actually pretty high on Sheard/Simon too. I think Simon will be an improvement over Walden and I think Sheard alone will be a fairly massive improvement over Cole/Mathis, who were both completely tapped out last year.

I do however worry that since neither has proven they can handle full slate of starters reps that we'll need plenty of depth at the position. Depth that we certainly don't already have.

And I'm also very concerned about the ILB corps. Sean Spence might be a nice piece, but that's actually one of the moves that Ballard has made that I'm most down on. Morrison/Jackson showed me nothing last year that would indicate that they're capable of being good NFL starters. God help us if we start the season with them.

That said, I say all of that to say that, again, I will never bitch if they go full-on with the OL. I agree, if we suddenly have Dallas' OL, then sure, that could really do some interesting things for us. It's not the path that I would take, but if they did do so, I wouldn't be stark raving mad over it.

TE and WR are the only positions that if we draft in the 1st round that I'll literally lose my mind. I'd prefer not to draft RB/CB/S/OL, but I could at least see why they would do so (Yes, I believe that Cook is THAT good that if we drafted him in the 1st that with time it would be justifiable, but no, it's NOT what I would do).

That was some Pete fence-sitting right there, wasn't it?

I will disagree on CB in round one, I would love if they took one of the top CB's if they were there. I am not that high on Cook as others are. I think there are plenty out there that could be great at a later pick. I havent given up on Ferguson yet either. I may after game on though.

I don't think Foster will be there at 15. I wont be pissed if he is and they take him, and I wouldnt be pissed if they traded back up to get Lamp with our second pick. Picks on rounds 4-6 usually dont generate starters...usually... so if one was traded to get us to be able to pick a sure fire starter, I would be very happy. I know Ballard wants quantity, I want quality with the 1st 3 picks, after that draft away

"OH and we are drafting TE somewhere.... Signed Chris Ballard"

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Puck

We need a guard more than a tackle and I couldn't care less about what a pick is worth on paper.... I care about the biggest need on the team and that is Andrew Luck. Without him you can have all the pass rush and Dline and CB's in the world and this team is going no where behind that oline.

This team is not going to built around defense as long as Luck is the QB. It will be built around him and rightfully so.

Look what an improvement the oline made with adding the best OC in the draft last yr. Look at what Dallas did!

Again there are plenty of defense available in rounds 2-4.

We dont need the 86 Bears D to win. They need to be top 15 to win the SB if Luck is healthy. We need a healthy Andrew Luck, who isnt getting killed every play.

Well I hope Ballard disagrees with you.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by njcoltfan

You know that Barnett had more career sacks at Tennessee than Reggie White? I really don't care that he is a "one trick pony", because that "one trick" is getting to the QB, exactly what the defense is lacking. If he is there at 15 ( and he probably won't be) I'd have the card up to the podium while Goodell was still hugging the Eagles pick !!

QBs will just step up in the pocket every play if Barnett doesn't get an inside move. He doesn't have it right now. He racked up those sacks by beating guys around the edge and using his strength against weak opponents.

I'm not saying that he won't be a good pro. I just see the limitations in his current game. He could get some good coaching and overcome it, but right now he's a slightly better Erik Walden.

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

QBs will just step up in the pocket every play if Barnett doesn't get an inside move. He doesn't have it right now. He racked up those sacks by beating guys around the edge and using his strength against weak opponents.

I'm not saying that he won't be a good pro. I just see the limitations in his current game. He could get some good coaching and overcome it, but right now he's a slightly better Erik Walden.

I think it's out of line to look at 3 years of consistent SEC production and say he racked up empty sacks against weak competition. You can say that for one year, sure. Two is pushing it. Three, no. He is a playmaker. He may have some developing to do, what rookie doesn't? But his game translates to the NFL a lot better than an undersized track athlete just running around his blocker every play. I'll be happy if we get him in the 1st.

[VeveJones007]

Originally Posted by FatDT

I think it's out of line to look at 3 years of consistent SEC production and say he racked up empty sacks against weak competition. You can say that for one year, sure. Two is pushing it. Three, no. He is a playmaker. He may have some developing to do, what rookie doesn't? But his game translates to the NFL a lot better than an undersized track athlete just running around his blocker every play. I'll be happy if we get him in the 1st.

You're misunderstanding what I meant by "weak." I meant weaker than the tackles he'll match up against in the NFL. We'll see if his strength translates.

Still, I trust Harris's current skill set to translate better than Barnett's. Harris has the inside moves and awareness that Barnett doesn't quite have at this moment. To say it another way, I think Harris has a higher floor.

[natagu23]

Originally Posted by VeveJones007

You're misunderstanding what I meant by "weak." I meant weaker than the tackles he'll match up against in the NFL. We'll see if his strength translates.

Still, I trust Harris's current skill set to translate better than Barnett's. Harris has the inside moves and awareness that Barnett doesn't quite have at this moment. To say it another way, I think Harris has a higher floor.

You cant go wrong with a guy that has a decent floor when you have Pags as a coach.

We cant mess around with projects or players with a lot of potential with questionable floor.