The problem with Norwell is you are assuming it came down just to money. Norwell turned down the Giants and multiple other teams as well. He went to a contender. If we had gotten Norwell, would we still have taken Nelson? From a BPA perspective the answer would be yes. Unless Smith was just as closely rated.

Ok, let's just let Luck get the holy shit beat out of him. Lets not be able to run the fucking ball. Ballard and Reich must be dumb shits to pick Nelson, damn we are in a world of hurt with these two running the Colts. I've mentioned this in other posts, there were only 3 really elite prospects in this draft and Nelson was one of them.

You can't say this but simultaneously saying that spending plentiful cap space in FA on a 27 year old All Pro guard would've been too costly. I think that is his point.

The years when the Colts drafted their starting guards on Day 3, impact defenders with top 15 picks, and the OL had 1 first round pick on the roster. Those years.

Living in Florida? +
No state income tax? +
Playing home games on grass instead of turf? +
Playing for a contender? +

Lot's of things Indy would have to overcome vs Jacksonville.

You're still looking at this too narrowly, doing simple +/- calculations. My point was that this is multidimensional and you can't evaluate it properly at this point in time.

You are right that I don’t know what Norwell’s motivation was (or Pugh’s), but I think it’s become pretty clear what Ballard’s approach to free agency has been. His words and actions have mostly aligned. So I don’t think it’s at all a stretch to believe the Colts weren’t the highest bidder for either of their services. But regardless the question was primarily directed to those who think I’m crazy for, in the current situation, being willing to over pay the position in free agency but not in draft capital.

You aren't wrong. Neither is Ballard's philosophy. Too many of you are arguing absolutes here.

A guard cannot be an elite prospect. Sorry, just can't, the positional value is too low. And as far as "can't miss safe pick" goes, Aaron Curry and A.J. Hawk are the two players I most distinctly remember being given that designation, and neither of them came anywhere close to getting a gold jacket. That said, Nelson could be John Hannah reincarnated and this would still be a bad pick if Roquan Smith becomes the next Derrick Brooks or Tremaine Edmunds becomes the next Brian Urlacher.

What impact defender other than Freeney did Polian draft in the top 15?

Polian's lack of addressing the line as his tenure went on had a negative effect on the offense, especially in the playoffs. Polian should have addressed the line with better quality talent, but failed to do so after some of those guys from his earlier years were gone.

I think it goes without saying that we can’t evaluate Nelson or the situation yet. But doesn’t that also apply to the guys measuring him for his hall of fame jacket already too? But ultimately what’s the fun in that? I’ve given my opinion on the pick and I’ll happily admit I’m wrong if Nelson ends up in Canton and the Colts win some titles behind the strength of their offensive line. Will others admit they were wrong if Nelson is a top guard but the team is bounced earlier than expect in the playoffs every year because they lack defensive difference makers?

1) Yes. See my last post.

2) See my post about what I hope they can get in the draft today.

I have and largely agree. As I’ve said, the one thing I’m happy about is Ballard moved back before taking Nelson. Looking at the total draft haul the Colts should come away with a lot of help from this draft. I’m just praying he doesn’t go WR and RB in the 2nd.

What other Top 15 pick did Polian have? He got a defensive difference maker and drafted well later and didn't have to pick in the Top 15 again. I guess we'll see if s guard can have the same impact.

Agreed. I'm most worried that he'll take Sutton at 36/37, though I wouldn't be as down on it at 49. Ballard's been trying to get a big WR from Day 1 in Indy and we saw what Jeffrey did for Philly last year.

So only one instead of the plural that you used. Polian found just as many impact defenders as that in the fifth round.

I think I made this point clearly earlier, but just so I'm not accused of being a hypocrite later tonight: now, I'm in favor of going OL on Day 2.

The investment in Nelson was already made, so makes sense not to leave the job half-done now. Get a Hernandez or Williams type, or someone who is a great scheme-fit, bring them all up together. The value actually intersects in Rds 2-3, and if you're declaring this to be the draft where you reverse fortunes in the trenches, then you may as well follow through with that.

Yeah, agreed, Philly’s offense was #3 in the NFL in rushing last year.

They need to have the guys to do that. It’ll be interesting to see if they decide we need a 2nd round RB in order to help facilitate such a rushing attack.

I think we can safely assume Ballard will go BPA. It all depends on where he has Williams, Hernandez, Daniels, Landry, Oliver, Jackson, et al, ranked relative to each other.

Personally, I think he wants an infusion of speed on defense, which he will value more highly than one of the remaining OL prospects at this stage of the draft.

Coming into the draft, I thought there might be great value at RB in round 2 (and you could definitely make a case for Guice or Jones), but I didn't expect some of these defenders to fall. They could get 3-4 1st round talents on defense today.

perhaps it's time for another LSU RB

I would like to see them get Guice, Josh Jackson, and Jefferson

I'm thinking more when they Drafted Tarik Glenn in round one, Adam Meadows in round two..
And we had Manning instead of Luck, who is no Manning

Its obvious Ballard has the long term in mind for building the team, so best player available is going to win out right now, with all the holes on the team, over need or the spot in the draft every single time.

Nelson was the best player available and it was a huge need, so screw it if people so its too high for a guard.

You want to know who else everyone thought the Colts drafted too high, for various reasons? Dwight Freeney. Heard the same things. Could have traded down, not a value pick, too high for his talent level, etc. Now he is headed to the HOF in 5 years and he was the cornerstone of the D for almost a decade

Right now, screw it up they are "too high" according to this chart or this opinion. The team needs talent almost everywhere. We aren't fixing this team in one draft or one free agency. Right now you take the best talent that is there

People might hate it because its offense, but if Hernandez for the other OG and Chubb from Georgia are there, I say take them too tonight

Luck is fine. It was a bad scheme and bad line that hurt us. Can't have a long ball scheme with a power run line. You need pass blockers not road graders. Then they telegraphed all their runs. Fuck, why did we not fire grigs and pags years ago? I was ok with the defensive system, but you need good LB's for a 3-4 and we never invested in LB's. Fucking whole thing was stupid.

Freeney was a pass rusher, though. Those are premium. No one is knocking Nelson for his talent. His position is just not high enough value to warrant spending that high of a pick on him. Making that comparison demonstrates a lack of understanding of what the problem with this pick is.

It is a little ridiculous. I expect some Chuck Norris like jokes coming soon. Everyone just expects this to solve all the line problems. I can barely post on stampede blue right now, I think they are in the midst of a parade. What I am afraid is like Kelly, the better player goes later in the draft and we used a high pick yet again on a position you can fill competently with a lower pick.

There is a logical argument for him, and with so much money invested in Luck, keeping him healthy is a priority. I just hate that we have spent so many picks on oline the last couple years. Meanwhile our defense is crap and needs some serious investment.

The OL has been awful for 10 years, so I don't care if people think OG in general is not enough value for most teams.

Your comments demonstrate a general lack of underestimating how bad the Colts have needed better lineman for the past 10 years.

But you comments will be noted and we will be sure to mention them at Nelson's HOF induction in 2035

Yep, I'm sure he'll get inducted right next to Aaron Curry and A.J. Hawk. The "safe pick" hall of fame. :rolleyes:

You are in serious need of a set of balls. whiniest puss I have ever seen ... :rolleyes:

THIS! ALL OF THIS!

We could've been looking at two potential defensive stalwarts not even old enough to drink alcohol legally yet, both physical freaks of nature who could dominate for the next 15+ years, and a serious infusion of talent on defense. Instead we have a guard who doesn't really even solve the problem he was brought in to solve and a hope that maybe we'll see some defenders drafted today. Green dot helmet wearers and pass rushers aren't typically found on Day 3. Starting guards are.

I really would be surprised if we took a RB. this thing with Guice is weird and now all the immaturity comments. ROJO would be a nice pick. But I really think RB takes a backseat this year and maybe a Dion Jones scat back in a later round or a big back like Ballage.

But who knows, Irsay said they would look for a back, I was wrong about Nelson.

Can somebody explain in detail, rather than just stating it as a conclusion, why they think picking an exceptional guard prospect like Nelson at #6 is too high? Virtually every projection had him going in the 5-8 range. This isn't a situation where the Colts picked someone way before they were expected to be picked. Yet it seems to be a working assumption here that taking any guard, even one of Nelson's apparent caliber, at #6 was some sort of reach. I don't get it.

I read GoBigBlue's criticism at the outset of this thread, and Chromeburn's explanation of why an OT is usually considered more valuable than a guard, but neither have really answered my question about why it is impossible for an exceptional guard prospect like Nelson to merit being picked at #6, or why GBB's belief that an opposing team can simply avoid a guard would not also apply to an OT picked at the top of the draft.

Pittsburgh beating the shit out of Manning in 05 comes to mind. Colts had the defense to win it all that year, it was the o-line that let them down.

A LT's value is in being able to neutralize the opposing team's best pass rush threat. They have to have athleticism to be able to force adept pass rushers to run the arc, and the strength to prevent them from bending the edge and creating a direct path to the QB. A guard can't and is not expected to do any of those things. They don't have the value of OTs because the athleticism and footwork requirements are nowhere near as high. Thus, many players who can't play tackle professionally can play guard. The greater supply is what makes it possible to find starters at the position with relative ease on Day 3. Greater supply always means lower value.

Luck is fine... but he will never be Manning. Well he might be ELI Manning
Can't have a long ball scheme with the shit we have now for damn sure. AND we can't run the ball with the shit we had. We could barely keep our QBs off IR. Oh wait...
Oddly enough the 90s Cowboys could do long ball just as easy as they shoved E. Smith up your ass down after down.
One doesn't preclude the other...

If I had to oversimplify your first question? Because you can have an All-Pro guard who busts his ass and does a great job, but is offset by bad OL play around him, and your QB still gets hurt or run game still shut down because the right side of your line is still incompetent.

Whereas you can have an occasional Pro Bowl MLB who is a threat to make a play any down, regardless of the talent around him, because he's off-ball and in a position to affect the play beyond a single matchup.

I wonder who the colts would have chosen if both Nelson and Chubb were available. I am guessing Chubb

I get what you are saying, but it sounds like rooted more in your view that the team would have been better served to take a defensive player instead of an offensive lineman, rather that a criticism of the particular position that Nelson plays. What I was trying to get at was why a guard, in particular, can't ever be worthy of a high first round pick, since that seems to be a working assumption here.

Thank you, I appreciate the effort and I do understand the reason why OTs are generally valued higher that guards, but my question was a little more specific: why was Nelson, in particular, a bad pick given the seeming consensus that he's a uniquely effective guard? And incidentally, what about the emergence of the three tech DTs like Aaron Donald that Chromeburn mentioned in a prior post – wouldn’t that merit reconsidering your lowly view of guards?

Lastly, I’ll add that your conclusions aren’t really borne out in the real world. If guards are merely unathletic, slow-footed OTs, then why does the guard profession exist independently in the first place? Wouldn’t all the bad OTs just move to guard? And why are the top guards now getting $10M+ while there are lots of out-of-work, slow-footed OTs who could be paid a lot less? Why doesn't Zach Banner just move to guard?

I’m really not trying to be overly critical, it’s just that I don’t think it’s as simple or cut-and-dried as you’re saying. The old chestnut that you can't take a guard high in the first round is often stated, but rarely explained other than to say that OTs are generally more important than Guards

We play in a division with DTs named Malik Jackson, J.J. Watt, Dareus Marcell, Casey Jurrell, and Bennie Logan and folks are unhappy we drafted Quinton Nelson?

Really?

Are your heads going to explode when we add 1 or 2 more O-Linemen tonight?

I am hoping for Hernandez and Williams at 36 and 37 tonight....if nothing else to watch the melt down.



Walk Worthy,

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk