f.... Colts' chances of drafting Bradley Chubb impacted after Giants trade
 

Trading down looking less appealing if this happens

The New York Giants pulled off a trade Thursday morning with the Buccaneers, sending defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul and a fourth-round pick to Tampa Bay for a third- and fourth-round selection in the 2018 NFL Draft.

With the Giants losing one of their starting defensive ends, the chances of the Indianapolis Colts drafting top edge rusher Bradley Chubb might have been impacted in a big way.



Now that the Giants have traded Jason Pierre-Paul to the Buccaneers, maybe they consider Bradley Chubb at No. 2.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) March 22, 2018



The most direct way the trade impacts the Colts is that the Giants can now take Chubb with the No. 2 overall pick if they don’t want to take a quarterback.

New Giants general manager Dave Gettleman has stressed the importance of taking players at valued positions high in the draft and edge rusher might be just below quarterback on that list.

I still don't see how the Giants wouldn't take a QB here.

While conventional wisdom says QB when that high (and your franchise QB is 37 years old), old Bill Polian said that when you draft this high, you pick a QB, a guy to protect your QB (LT) or a guy to sack the other guy's QB (pass rush).

No LT is worthy of a top 5 / 10 pick this year so your choices are QB or pass rush. If they think that Eli has a few years left in him, then you go after the one "complete" pass rusher in the draft at #2.

That really does not hurt us a ton because that assures one of 2 scenarios:

1. Either Barkley or Nelson fall to us at #6 if 3 QBs are taken in the top 5.

-- OR --

2. All three Chubb/Barkley/Nelson are taken and the #3 QB is still undrafted at #6 meaning SOMEONE will pay a king's ransom to trade up into the slot.

Do I want Chubb? I sure do.

However, would I also take Trumaine Edwards / Roquan Smith + a stud drafted at #21 + a kid drafted in the 3rd round by trading with the Bills? Yeah, I would love that too.

We have 4 picks in the top 50 and 5 picks in the top 67.

Would I rather have 5 picks in the top 50 and 7 picks in the top 67? Yes Sir!

1 - 12
1 - 21
2 - 4 (36)
2 - 5 (37)
2 - 17 (49)
3 - 1 (65)
3 - 3 (67)

THAT is how you rebuild a team. Perhaps you are not getting an ELITE player by trading from 3 to 6 to 12. But you are getting a TON of quality guys whom you will hopefully develop into the core of your team for years to come.

Plus add back Luck, Hooker and Anderson with Wilson actually playing the whole year? Lots of positives over last season.

If NYG draft Chubb at #2 then they do. It would be a good move by them; he is arguably the best player in the draft (beside Barkley and Nelson).

That does not doom our draft, however.

Walk Worthy,

I think a lot of misdirection/BS is coming out of the NYG front office with Gettleman in charge. Remember how Norwell was a lock to go to the Giants in FA? I'll believe they take Chubb at #2 when I see it.

If the Colts had re-signed Melvin, none of this would have happened.

Agreed. Colts are in a good spot regardless.

The one thing that’s been bugging me is that Ballard didn’t get the Jets 2019 1st. Maybe the Jets were adamant about not moving it, but I would rather have their 2019 1st than pick 49, for example.

Exactly. I think Gettleman's goal here is to do anything he can to get the Browns to not take a QB at 1 so he can have his choice of QBs.

Schefter is also saying that Giants are in full rebuild mode. Eli is 37, does anyone thin they go from 2 wins to competitive before he retires? You take the QB 10 times out of 10 in that situation. They're in the same situation as we were in 2012.

Be more concerned about Browns and Broncos. Either picking themselves or trading.

For the Browns, I think it depends on what Dorsey thinks of Ogbah. He’s a good player and I would be looking more at Fitzpatrick, Barkley, and Nelson if I were the Browns.

For Denver, Elway needs to get a QB.

If Chubbs is picked then there is one more QB available at six and Buffalo may trade up, so more picks and trade back again.

The Giants taking Chubb at two is most likely the ideal scenario for Ballard. Much better than them trading the pic to Buffalo. Ballard prefers to trade down and wants QBs on the board at 6 to make that enticing. Chubb at two, Barkley at 4, and Nelson at 5 would make Ballard’s day. Considering his approach and the number of holes on the roster, it’s likely the best route available. As much as I want Chubb, a few extra picks in rounds 1-3 is best case for the Colts.

I was thinking about this too, but there's just no way only two QBs going top 5.

1) Buffalo trades up to 2 or 4.
2) Elway doesn't pass on a QB if there are still two to choose from. He probably takes Allen.

I still think the most likely outcome is 4 QBs in the top 5, which makes a trade down a lot less likely. We'd be looking at Chubb, Barkley, or Nelson.

Yeah I don’t think it’s the likely scenario, just the ideal one for Ballard and the Colts. I’m guessing 3 QBs in the top 5 and either Barkley or Nelson being available of the “premier” non QBs. With the premium placed on pass rushers I just don’t see how Chubb makes it to 6.

Seems like every New York franchise is competing as much for headlines and star power as they are for wins and losses. I don't think any of the QB's in the draft move the needle much for buzz and ticket sales, let alone progress toward making the playoffs. They should see more value in taking a name in free agency or via trade at QB to soften the blow of Eli's name no longer having as much value. Someone like Foles or another QB who loses out in a QB battle on another team.

Giants saw the Jests moving up and know they are taking a QB. No way they let the Jests get the better QB this year and they have to watch the team sharing the town have a star QB because they did not get him before they could.

I agree...I'm really sceptical that Chubb will make it to six....all the national guys that I see ranking the non QBs have Chubb ahead of Barkley and Nelson at 3. Just saw 3 scenarios on Total Access tonight.....one scenario was 2 QBs taken in top 5, one was 3 QBs taken in top 5, third was 4 QBs in top 5 and in all 3 scenarios Chubb was taken before 6.

Wouldn't that be something if Darnold and Rosen both went from LA schools to New York professional teams.

Because 1-5 need QBs, 4 of them are good enough to take top 5, and the Browns covet Barkley.

One of the Cleveland pics is a QB. So is the Jets pick at 3. Giants pick is a toss up - should be a QB, but it’s far from a given. They’ve been linked with all three non QBs. I doubt the Broncos go QB after free agency. They are making a last run with their remaining core. So 2 that surely look like QB, one that’s 50/50 and two others I don’t think will be unless their is a trade. Not impossible to see 4 QBs, but I’ll still stick with my guess of 3. And even if there are 4 QBs taken, pass rushers are typically valued much higher than both rbs and guards in the modern NFL. I’d love for Chubb to be available at 6, but it would be pretty surprising to me.

I agree.

As much as it pains me to say it, trading for 3x 2nd round pick to drop 3 spots pretty much doomed us from getting Chubb.

Now, Nelson + 3 2nd round picks is a pretty nice consolidation prize for Chubb if that happens. If not Nelson, then I hope that we can trade down again and target Edmunds or Smith at LB. Both have the athleticism to be our Brian Urlacher for the next decade.

Walk Worthy,

I’d prefer the trade down for Edmunds or Smith. 6 is better than 3, but I still don’t like taking a guard there. That high you want a player that impacts the game more than a guard does. I think Ballard’s preference would be a trade down as well assuming the value is there. I think that may be the case even if Chubb is there. I wouldn’t agree with that, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it happen.

Agreed about Chubb, though I think our chances may be slightly better than many think. The way I look at it, the team with the greatest likelihood of taking Chubb is the Giants, and even without our trade we couldn't have prevented that from happening. The Jets won't take him, and I kinda doubt Cleveland will either since another DE is not really a burning need for them. So I'd expect them to trade out at #4 to a team needing a QB, particularly since Denver is right behind and teams may pay a premium to jump in front of the Broncos, who many believe are also considering a QB.

Denver is a bit of a wild card I suppose, but I'm guessing that a team with that sort of history doesn't view itself as being at the top of the draft very often, and so may feel the need to seize this rare opportunity to grab a top prospect QB too. I'm not convinced the presence of Case Keenum will change this. It's only a 2 year deal after all, and the bulk of the meaningful guarantees are in the first year. And is DE a real need for them anyway?

I guess that makes 4 QBs in the first 5 picks, which I will acknowledge seems unlikely. Still, I think we get at least 3, and with the exception of the Giants, DE doesn't seem like a burning need for the teams who might not take a QB.

Bottom line, I still think there's still a decent chance that Chubb falls to us. All of this is reading tea leaves, of course, and a trade could throw everything into shambles, but it seems likely that any trade in the top 5 would need to be for a QB given the cost that would be demanded.

Agree about Chubb, but I’ll take the over on 3.5 QBs in the top 5.

Trading out of the top ten greatly increases the likelihood that neither Edmunds or Smith are available.

True, no guarantee Chubb will be taken even if available. Would not be a shock. Ballard did make plays for the higher profile RBs (Lewis) and OGs (Norwell and Pugh), so that could mean that he planned at address DE in the draft - or alternatively that he’s focused most intensely on RB and/or OG. Then again, it’s interesting to note that the Colts-Jets trade only went down after all those free agents signed elsewhere, so maybe Ballard figured that he could be sure to fill one of those holes by trading down to 6, and he just plans on taking whoever remains between Chubb/Nelson/Barkley. This would certainly be consistent with Irsay’s comments earlier today.

Mocks are all over on those 2 guys. For every mock that has then going in the top ten, there are 2 that have them going in the middle teens.

I would not want to trade down further than #12 for sure if they are targeting one of the LBs but I think #12 gets one of them.

Walk Worthy,

It's not eye candy impact but that's how you win in this league. Breaking off 7 yard runs instead of 2 yard runs and keeping Luck upright would be eye candy for me.

Keeping Luck from permanent disability checks will take a huge o-line improvement.

We have a DECENT LT and a good C, oft injured but good, the rest would give up sacks to a lingerie league team

What Ive been saying all along

Building a defense and not requiring Luck to throw 40 times a game would go a hell of a ways towards protecting him too.

The #6 pick is the second most valuable commodity the Colts have besides Luck. I don’t see guard or RB being the best use for it. I did see OL being the best use of the Colts vast amounts of cap space, but that opportunity has passed. Find an impact defender at 6 or trade down again. No guard and certainly no RB. Although it sounds increasingly likely it will be one of those two.

I am not opposed to drafting a likely All-Pro Guard at six, the good news/bad news is we will be drafting top ten again next year to take a defensive player.

Troll!

The hardest part about drafting a guard that high is the position is hard to quantify. You draft Barkley and you see all the yards and touchdowns he scores. Draft Chubb and you see the sacks and tackles behind scrimmage. Draft Nelson and what do you see, the non-sacks, the overall line improvement? How to you directly attribute that to him. Maybe the line improves, or just one side improves. He might have a large impact but it’s hard to see and the fanbase will just look at what the other players you did not draft do next season.

A Top 10 pick next year is a lot more likely drafting Nelson than drafting Chubb.

The talk of Nelson at 6 is all in anticipation that Chubb will be gone. I think most of us agree Chubb > Nelson.

The question is do the Colts have anyone besides Chubb in front of Nelson. Like Edmunds, Fitzpatrick, Smith, Vea, or James.

Does Vea fit the D?

Well he has tried to sign Poe two years in a row and most people are saying Vea is comparable to Haloti Naga. Vea is a pretty impressive athlete for his size.

May make the Hankins release make some sense.

The Hail Mary is that Hurst has enough questions in his medicals to push him to 2.04.