ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum - Post-Combine, Pre-Pro Day QB Preference

ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/index.php)

- Indianapolis Colts Discussion (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)

- - Post-Combine, Pre-Pro Day QB Preference (http://www.coltfreaks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159061)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory (Post 260840)

Interesting so far. For being the consensus #1 in the mainstream, this board has been consistently cautious about Young.

Lov2fish has been on the Levis train, but it looks like everyone else has bailed. A month or two ago, he seemed about as popular as Richardson currently is.

I can't decide where the leverage is with this whole situation. There are so many variables it'll make you dizzy. The market is the market, so it's going to be expensive.

The question I have is how by the balls does CHI still have IND if, hypothetically, HOU wins the bidding war for #1? Colts still need a QB and SEA is right behind them. Is SEA willing to start a separate bidding war for #2? They do have multiple 1st's and 2nd's this year if they wanted to.

Couldn't CHI realistically trade #1 to HOU for a big haul and then trade #2 to either IND or SEA for another lesser, but still big, haul and STILL end up with one of the two best players in the draft (Carter/Anderson)?

IMO the answer is the leverage is about even. I think this Carter thing blows over and he will still be a top 4 pick. That means 4 is way more valuable than 5. Like I said, if it must be done, a Manning/Rivers type trade is acceptable, but not much, if any, more than that. Obviously, though, I'd prefer players be used in lieu of draft capital, especially because Chicago is the most ideally set up team to take players from the Colts given their HC's familiarity with Colts players and their GM's familiarity with the Colts front office.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 260861)

IMO the answer is the leverage is about even. I think this Carter thing blows over and he will still be a top 4 pick. That means 4 is way more valuable than 5. Like I said, if it must be done, a Manning/Rivers type trade is acceptable, but not much, if any, more than that. Obviously, though, I'd prefer players be used in lieu of draft capital, especially because Chicago is the most ideally set up team to take players from the Colts given their HC's familiarity with Colts players and their GM's familiarity with the Colts front office.

I agree about Carter. But IND is still taking a QB at #4 even if they don't work out a trade, don't you think? Which opens up SEA as another possibility for CHI to trade with and still get Carter/Anderson.

And ultimately all I'm saying with all of that is... An expensive trade up looks like it could get even more expensive when you consider those downstream factors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory (Post 260867)

If Will Levis and/or Anthony Richardson is all that's left, I'd take Jalen Carter and wait for next year. But in all seriousness I think Ballard trades up to 1 and ends all this speculation.

I have no idea why anyone wants us to trade. We are going to struggle with a new QB next year and have a very very high draft pick once again. Possibly a number 1 or 2 pick bad.

That is not worth giving away for any of these guys

So stay at 4 take Richardson or wait till 35 and take Hooker. Still on the Hooker bandwagon. Start Sam until Hooker is completely ready then throw him in there

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puck (Post 260908)

Fuck you, we’re winning the south next year!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puck (Post 260908)

Stop making sense.

I'm still with Puck and I still say hold tight and if the guy isn't there, pick one of these defensive guys and just dig in.

I get the sense of urgency to get it right is pretty high this year, and that perspective might not work for Ballard & Irsay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Puck (Post 260908)

I've never been big on trading up, and that would include this year. Just talking about what the situation may dictate. It's not Ballard's style, but just like free agency, you have to deal with other teams' disagreeable moves if you want a guy.

If the Colts and/or other teams see a significant drop off in quality or too big a risk after their first choice (or even second choice), then they're forced into the bidding game. CHI is definitely in the enviable position for this year's draft.

I like Stroud out of this group enough that I don't consider it a toss-up and we should just take whoever is left. That said... I don't have the conviction Dam has. I hope he's right and we land him, but I've never been real big on this class. Just seems like we'll have to pay to get him.

Imagine needing a QB in 2005 when you could've had Aaron Rodgers and instead saying, "Wait for Matt Leinart to come out next year."

I'd really rather the Colts not make a similar mistake.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dam8610 (Post 260941)

Imagine needing a QB in 2005 when you could've had Aaron Rodgers and instead saying, "Wait for Matt Leinart to come out next year."

I'd really rather the Colts not make a similar mistake.

Imagine needing a QB in the 2017 draft and trading up for Mitch Trubisky

Ah this is fun. Keep them coming