| rm1369 |
09-08-2018 12:24 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Racehorse
(Post 78068)
He was the best option left, not the only one. Sorry you are too slow to understand my point and have to resort to this BS to make your point. Ballard said that he should have addressed it in the previous draft, and would fix it this year. He went after Norwood, and got outbid. I don't remember if he went after Solder, but I was not convinced that he was worth what he got. Patriots fans have not been kind to him regarding his play. Now, some could argue that he could have taken Chubb and then taken Smith in round 2, but every expert agreed that the drop-off between the two was huge, so if Ballard had done that, the ones clamoring for protection for the QB would be back at it. Like I said, they can't have it both ways.
As to my other point, one could argue that the best way to protect Luck is to get a defense that keeps the opponents from scoring, making it easier for the QB to manage a game instead of playing hero, which Luck does so well. I could agree with this, but I feel that the easiest way to protect him is to add a piece or two on that side of the ball, because the other side would have needed five or six pieces to accomplish the goal of constructing a dominant defense.
Just to be fair, I was one of those who wanted us to draft Chubb in the first round and get a free agent answer to the OLine. Once we struck out there, I was fine with the Nelson pick, especially when moving down gave us an additional pick in the draft.
|
Correct me if I’m wrong but aren’t you the one who felt the need to talk
S
L
O
W
to me to say Norwell wasn’t an option? Quoting a post I specifically said I wasn’t knocking Ballard for not getting him? So don’t talk to me about having to resort to BS to get my point across. I’ll stoop to whatever level you do when addressing me. You want to be an ass, I’ll be an ass. Simple as that.
My point has simply been that Nelson was not the only option available to Ballard. Possibly not even the best. Even when taking into account his failure to address it previously. I’d say a good argument could be made that trading back and walking away with McGlinchey or Miller and then adding Smith would have improved the line tremendously as well. Many said predraft that tackle was the biggest issue for the line, so that’s not hindsight. And I could argue the long term outlook of the line would be brighter with a solid tackle in place to slide to the left side in a year or two. Or whenever Castonzo is hurt.
Regardless, sitting at 6 Ballard had options. Especially considering that the way the QBs fell made the spot extra valuable. The #6 pick was the 2nd most valuable commodity the team had behind only Luck. The trade down from 3 to 6 was brilliant, but from there Ballard failed to maximize the value of his commodity IMO.
As a side note, I chuckle watching people say the money Norwell got was way to much but having no problem with using the #6 pick on Nelson. If Nelson isn’t worthy of being the highest paid guard in the league after his rookie contract then the pick was a failure. You either believe in the value of the position or you don’t. I don’t rank it as high as other positions, hence why I don’t blame Ballard for Norwell. But if I had to choose, considering the current state of the roster, I’d rather overpay with cap space than draft position. Top 10 picks are scarce commodities - usually. Admittedly the Colts may very well be in position for another next year though. |
