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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-02-2018, 09:49 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default How many QBs will be taken in the first 5 Picks?

The more I think about it, the more likely it seems to me that 4 QBs will be taken in the first five picks. I'm interested in everyone else's thinking on this. Here's my rationale:

1. Cleveland - Virtually certain to be a QB. As others have pointed out, it makes no sense to take anything else here, since whatever non-QB they want will likely be available at pick 4 anyway. So might as well get your pick of the QB litter here. Now, I realize it's Cleveland we're talking about, but they have competent management now.

2. New York Giants - I'm finding it hard to believe they'll take a non-QB here. Aside from Eli's age and declining production, as a practical matter I have to think that the Jets tried to trade into this spot at the same time as they spoke with the Colts (wouldn't they have to?). If the Giants weren't willing to drop to #6 in exchange for three 2nds (or maybe even more), then it seems likely that they have zeroed in on a particular player/position and are loathe to drop lower out of fear that he won't be available later. And it's just hard to believe that protecting their right to draft a RB or a DE would justify such a position (particularly since they hadn't yet traded Jason Pierre-Paul at the time).

3. New York Jets - Virtually certain to be QB. The Jets need a QB, and nobody pays that kind of extreme draft price to move up 3 spots for anything but a QB.

4. Cleveland - Obviously won't be a QB if Cleveland keeps this pick. In that case, they could take Barkley (though they already paid good money for Hyde this off season, suggesting to me they aren't targeting a RB high in the draft - it's not like you want a rookie RB to sit and learn) or Chubb (though they've already got two good DEs in Garrett and Nassib). I think a more likely scenario is that with 3 of the top 4 QBs already taken, and with Denver waiting right behind, several teams will approach Cleveland with attractive trade offers to grab the last QB and Cleveland will trade out.

5. Denver - If any of the first four picks is not a QB, this is a likely landing spot for the last of the top 4 QB prospects. Denver could certainly use a top QB prospect to learn under Case Keenum, and none of the other top players really seem to fit Denver's needs (maybe Quenton Nelson? possibly Barkley?) -so if Denver doesn't take a QB, I think its another spot where another team could seek to trade into.

Interested in other's thoughts on this.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-02-2018, 09:56 AM
Dam8610 Dam8610 is offline
Post whore
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 5,995
Thanks: 102
Thanked 1,595 Times in 925 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka View Post
The more I think about it, the more likely it seems to me that 4 QBs will be taken in the first five picks. I'm interested in everyone else's thinking on this. Here's my rationale:

1. Cleveland - Virtually certain to be a QB. As others have pointed out, it makes no sense to take anything else here, since whatever non-QB they want will likely be available at pick 4 anyway. So might as well get your pick of the QB litter here. Now, I realize it's Cleveland we're talking about, but they have competent management now.

2. New York Giants - I'm finding it hard to believe they'll take a non-QB here. Aside from Eli's age and declining production, as a practical matter I have to think that the Jets tried to trade into this spot at the same time as they spoke with the Colts (wouldn't they have to?). If the Giants weren't willing to drop to #6 in exchange for three 2nds (or maybe even more), then it seems likely that they have zeroed in on a particular player/position and are loathe to drop lower out of fear that he won't be available later. And it's just hard to believe that protecting their right to draft a RB or a DE would justify such a position (particularly since they hadn't yet traded Jason Pierre-Paul at the time).

3. New York Jets - Virtually certain to be QB. The Jets need a QB, and nobody pays that kind of extreme draft price to move up 3 spots for anything but a QB.

4. Cleveland - Obviously won't be a QB if Cleveland keeps this pick. In that case, they could take Barkley (though they already paid good money for Hyde this off season, suggesting to me they aren't targeting a RB high in the draft - it's not like you want a rookie RB to sit and learn) or Chubb (though they've already got two good DEs in Garrett and Nassib). I think a more likely scenario is that with 3 of the top 4 QBs already taken, and with Denver waiting right behind, several teams will approach Cleveland with attractive trade offers to grab the last QB and Cleveland will trade out.

5. Denver - If any of the first four picks is not a QB, this is a likely landing spot for the last of the top 4 QB prospects. Denver could certainly use a top QB prospect to learn under Case Keenum, and none of the other top players really seem to fit Denver's needs (maybe Quenton Nelson? possibly Barkley?) -so if Denver doesn't take a QB, I think its another spot where another team could seek to trade into.

Interested in other's thoughts on this.
This is exactly the thought process that led me to believe 4 QBs would go in the Top 5 when the Colts traded down to 6. It'll be 4 QBs and Barkley, and the Colts will send the card for Chubb almost immediately, I doubt Ballard even waits for trade offers with his guy sitting there for the taking.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by omahacolt View Post
i was wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-02-2018, 10:23 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

4. Buffalo will move up to 4th and you’ll see QBs at 1, 3, 4, and 5.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-02-2018, 10:25 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

Regarding the Giants at #2, I heard that Gettleman has never traded down from one of his 1st rounders. While I think it’s foolish to stay put and take a non-QB, that might be what he does.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-02-2018, 11:21 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610 View Post
This is exactly the thought process that led me to believe 4 QBs would go in the Top 5 when the Colts traded down to 6. It'll be 4 QBs and Barkley, and the Colts will send the card for Chubb almost immediately, I doubt Ballard even waits for trade offers with his guy sitting there for the taking.
Certainly possible, but we know Ballard isn't so enthralled with Chubb that he wasn't willing to trade down and reduce the chance that he would get him. This fuels the theory that he might not even take Chubb if he's available. Then again, he was paid a king's ransom to move down a few spots, so maybe it was worth the risk even if he loves the Chubb. Either way, I don't see Ballard as a "turn in the card right away" kind of guy - I think he'll see what's out there trade-wise before selecting his player.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-02-2018, 11:25 AM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Regarding the Giants at #2, I heard that Gettleman has never traded down from one of his 1st rounders. While I think it’s foolish to stay put and take a non-QB, that might be what he does.
Interesting. If I was a Giants fan, this kind of thing wouldn't make me happy. A GM needs to be open minded.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-02-2018, 11:35 AM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,074
Thanks: 287
Thanked 730 Times in 404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dam8610 View Post
This is exactly the thought process that led me to believe 4 QBs would go in the Top 5 when the Colts traded down to 6. It'll be 4 QBs and Barkley, and the Colts will send the card for Chubb almost immediately, I doubt Ballard even waits for trade offers with his guy sitting there for the taking.
I’m not convinced Chubb is “Ballard’s Guy”. If he was I don’t see the trade back. That doesn’t mean he won’t take him if he’s there. It just means I think he’s simply one of 4 non QBs Ballard is comfortable with. And I don’t think we have any idea of the order of those players. I think us fans are more enamored with Chubb than Ballard is.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to rm1369 For This Useful Post:
Chaka (04-02-2018), Oldcolt (04-03-2018), sherck (04-02-2018)
  #8  
Old 04-02-2018, 11:39 AM
Maniac's Avatar
Maniac Maniac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Home
Posts: 1,772
Thanks: 782
Thanked 1,304 Times in 712 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VeveJones007 View Post
Regarding the Giants at #2, I heard that Gettleman has never traded down from one of his 1st rounders. While I think it’s foolish to stay put and take a non-QB, that might be what he does.
They would be fools to not try to get another franchise passer to take over for a 37 year old Eli.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Maniac For This Useful Post:
VeveJones007 (04-02-2018)
  #9  
Old 04-02-2018, 12:38 PM
rcubed's Avatar
rcubed rcubed is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,132
Thanks: 933
Thanked 1,476 Times in 814 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
I’m not convinced Chubb is “Ballard’s Guy”. If he was I don’t see the trade back. That doesn’t mean he won’t take him if he’s there. It just means I think he’s simply one of 4 non QBs Ballard is comfortable with. And I don’t think we have any idea of the order of those players. I think us fans are more enamored with Chubb than Ballard is.
Agree. Ballard is smart enough and disciplined enough to not be in love with any one player, especially to the point of ignoring a great trade opportunity. I think he is comfortable with a couple players at 6 and knows at least one will be there so it was an easy decision for him to trade back to 6.

I think he also knows the importance of getting top level players and will stay at 6 unless some crazy offer comes in last minute.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-02-2018, 12:54 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
I’m not convinced Chubb is “Ballard’s Guy”. If he was I don’t see the trade back. That doesn’t mean he won’t take him if he’s there. It just means I think he’s simply one of 4 non QBs Ballard is comfortable with. And I don’t think we have any idea of the order of those players. I think us fans are more enamored with Chubb than Ballard is.
This is pretty much how I see it as well. I don't pretend to be any sort of talent evaluator and will freely admit that most of my player opinions derive from reading what other (seemingly more technically knowledgeable) people have written about a given player's skill set. What I think is more telling, however, are the GMs' actions, and Ballard's actions in my view are largely consistent with what you've written here.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 03:50 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.