Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Potential Draft Picks for the Indianapolis Colts in the 2018 NFL Draft

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

    They didn't draft anyone like Nelson. He might be the best guard prospect ever. He will fix lots of problems. Kelly can play if healthy now we have to get him that way. I do not think Chubb is a guaranteed 10 sack pass rusher in the NFL at all. I like him but there other who could be just as good. That isn't the case with Nelson, he is alone at that position.
    Funny, from what I've read Chubb is the undisputed best pass rusher in this draft. Nelson being the best guard prospect ever...not sure where you're getting that from. I assume your tireless study of the tape.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by cdash View Post

      Funny, from what I've read Chubb is the undisputed best pass rusher in this draft. Nelson being the best guard prospect ever...not sure where you're getting that from. I assume your tireless study of the tape.
      My tireless study of what the experts say about him. SI rates Barkley as number one on their board and Nelson is number two. Chubb is listed as number four. Now this is just raw talent regardless of position. They won't get drafted that way because the craziness with QBs. I would eliminate Barkley because I just devalue his position and I would not draft any RB in the first round. The difference between Barkley and any of the other running backs is minimal and he won't do anything if he doesn't have an offensive line blocking well for him. Here is what was said about Nelson and Chubb:

      2. Quenton Nelson, G, Notre Dame
      The complete package at guard—one evaluator told our Albert Breer that
      Nelson is a better prospect than Zack Martin was coming out of Notre Dame
      . Nelson is a violent mauler with brute strength and a nasty disposition, but blends it with nimble athleticism that allows him to thrive in space and as a pass protector.

      4. Bradley Chubb, EDGE, N.C. State
      He can’t match Myles Garrett from an athleticism standpoint, but Chubb combines impressive get-off, an advanced approach to the pass rush and a relentless motor. A strip-sack savant, he’s also athletic enough to make the move to outside linebacker in a 3-4 defense and hold up in space.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

        My tireless study of what the experts say about him. SI rates Barkley as number one on their board and Nelson is number two. Chubb is listed as number four. Now this is just raw talent regardless of position. They won't get drafted that way because the craziness with QBs. I would eliminate Barkley because I just devalue his position and I would not draft any RB in the first round. The difference between Barkley and any of the other running backs is minimal and he won't do anything if he doesn't have an offensive line blocking well for him. Here is what was said about Nelson and Chubb:

        2. Quenton Nelson, G, Notre Dame
        The complete package at guard—one evaluator told our Albert Breer that
        Nelson is a better prospect than Zack Martin was coming out of Notre Dame
        . Nelson is a violent mauler with brute strength and a nasty disposition, but blends it with nimble athleticism that allows him to thrive in space and as a pass protector.

        4. Bradley Chubb, EDGE, N.C. State
        He can’t match Myles Garrett from an athleticism standpoint, but Chubb combines impressive get-off, an advanced approach to the pass rush and a relentless motor. A strip-sack savant, he’s also athletic enough to make the move to outside linebacker in a 3-4 defense and hold up in space.
        Cool, okay. Mel Kiper has Chubb at #3 and Nelson at #4. Todd McShay has Chubb at #4 and Nelson at #9. Perhaps you shouldn't wear out so easily when engaging in your tireless studies.

        I'm still not seeing anything that is anything close to as lofty as calling Nelson the "best guard prospect ever". Can't these guys just be great prospects without the needless exaggeration?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by cdash View Post

          Cool, okay. Mel Kiper has Chubb at #3 and Nelson at #4. Todd McShay has Chubb at #4 and Nelson at #9. Perhaps you shouldn't wear out so easily when engaging in your tireless studies.

          I'm still not seeing anything that is anything close to as lofty as calling Nelson the "best guard prospect ever". Can't these guys just be great prospects without the needless exaggeration?
          It says he is a better prospect than Zack Marin was coming out. I have seen nothing said about Nelson that say he is anything less than great. You will not that Chubb is not in the same league as Myles Garrett. You can get picks lower than him that have a chance to be every bit as good. I have read most of the boards. I happen to think that Peter King and his staff are very knowledgeable. But I don't think the other two are bad. I think Nelson goes at closer to five or six than nine. But it is obvious that Nelson is by far the best Olineman available. Chubb is the best pass rusher available but not by as large of a margin IMO. Take Nelson and fix that damn line. I don't care about pass rush or running backs until that is done but that is just me.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bluboy View Post

            It says he is a better prospect than Zack Marin was coming out. I have seen nothing said about Nelson that say he is anything less than great. You will not that Chubb is not in the same league as Myles Garrett. You can get picks lower than him that have a chance to be every bit as good. I have read most of the boards. I happen to think that Peter King and his staff are very knowledgeable. But I don't think the other two are bad. I think Nelson goes at closer to five or six than nine. But it is obvious that Nelson is by far the best Olineman available. Chubb is the best pass rusher available but not by as large of a margin IMO. Take Nelson and fix that damn line. I don't care about pass rush or running backs until that is done but that is just me.
            Comparing him favorably to Zack Martin is nice, to be sure. Martin was a mid-first round pick. But equating him being a better prospect than Zack Martin (not to mention only one dude is saying such a thing, but I digress) to being the "best guard prospect ever" is a huge leap.

            Holding it against Chubb isn't as gifted as Myles Garrett--not sure I see the logic in that. Myles Garrett was a physical freak and the undisputed best prospect in his draft.

            Again, you can make your point (and lord knows you have re: the offensive line) without needless inflation of Nelson as a prospect.

            Comment


            • I am a Notre Dame fan who played offensive line in high school so I look at the line more often than not. I don’t just follow the ball. Notre Dame’s blocking schemes are pro ready. I really wanted Martin for the Colts but we didn’t even have our 21st pick thanks to Grigson and the running back not to be named. Even then Martin was drafted before we could have gotten him.

              Nelson is great. I like him a lot. Kizer was picked too high primarily because Will Fuller was great and Nelson. Nelson was next to a very good LT and is a better run blocker now than a healthy Mewhort. Nelson could very well be the best Guard in the NFL in a couple of years. With that said I think Isaiah Wyn could be as good as any blocker in this draft. I think people are sleeping heavily on him and if he is there in the second I would take him even if we draft Nelson in the first.

              Bradley Chubb is good. The distance from Bradley Chubb and the second best pass rusher Davenport is roughly the same as Nelson and the second best blocker. It really comes down to who will be a better personality fit for the team.

              I wanted Reuben Foster last year. I was wrong. The guy has been arrested twice and he might be cut by Gruden. Busy factor boils down to meshing and motor. And we will hear more about that in the coming g two months.

              Comment


              • I really like Minkah Fitzpatrick too. I think he's going to be a stud.

                Comment


                • How about Chubb in the first round...and then Chubb (Nick) in the second round? Chubb and Chubb
                  Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                    How about Chubb in the first round...and then Chubb (Nick) in the second round? Chubb and Chubb
                    Already discussed, lol: https://www.pacersdigest.com/forum/t...98#post3329398
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment


                    • Doub Chubb...
                      Edit Signature

                      Comment


                      • Double Chubble

                        Comment


                        • My Saquon Barkley dreams are slowly slipping away, as the league opinion catches on. I still see things working out for us, however... maybe.

                          This will be an interesting draft for sure. The top 5 could go so many different ways, and it all hinges on Cleveland.

                          First, there's a lot of QBs being thrown around at the top of this draft... none of them are home runs. But it's safe to assume that at least some of them will hit and some of them will bust. You really can't just "wing it"; you gotta do your home work and figure out which one of these guys is going to hit. You can't afford to get a pick this high and blow it on the wrong guy. Speaking of which...

                          - Cleveland: Barkley or a QB

                          I can't see them trading the top pick, they need too much, especially QB. Everything depends on their mindset for a QB. If they really like a certain guy, which for a team that doesn't have a QB in place, and a #1 pick at their disposal... they better have a guy in mind --- they almost *have* to take him #1. If they are fairly indifferent to the top 3-4 QBs and can move forward with any of them, which I feel is a pretty cavalier way to approach such a big decision, then they could go Barkley #1, and take "whatever is left" at #4. If they happen to like a certain QB, but gamble and take Barkley #1, I could see a flurry of teams throwing packages at the Giants and Colts for #2 and #3 to move up and nab a QB. Because of this possibility, if Cleveland really has their sights on a particular QB, they *might* not be able to get their QB guy at #4... so they *might* have to pass on Barkley at #1 and get their guy.

                          Personally, and I *love* Barkley... but the top priority for any team should be the quarterback, and if you don't have that lined up, you almost have to go that route first. Any franchise worth their salt would be stupid to so blithely throw their fortunes to the wind in such a manner as to "settle" on the #4 pick with so many QBs bunched together at the top. For this reason, I almost have to believe that despite the rumors of them taking Barkley... I think Cleveland goes QB at #1. Think from a Cleveland fan's perspective; they have nothing in place at QB, but take a running back? And doing so just a few years after this same team gambled and lost on TRich with a high pick? That said... this is Cleveland --- logic doesn't always prevail. But let's assume it does.

                          I'd say 75% QB, 25% Barkley.

                          - Giants: Barkley or a QB, or trade-down
                          Giants don't pick again until round 2, so they really have to take advantage of this opportunity. They have a starting caliber QB in Eli, but he's 37 and showing signs of decline/inconsistency. But they also love Barkley. If they stick with Eli and go with Barkley, that's a vote for them thinking they have a team close to competing for a long time and don't want to think QB. Another wrinkle is with Barkley and other moves, they could be a better team next year, so this #2 pick might be their best chance at landing an Eli-successor for some years to come. I personally think that would not be a wise choice for them to skip on a QB. What could likely happen in that case is Eli is gone in a year or two, and they have a great RB with no QB. I can't imagine that's ideal for them. But again, things happen, and they could certainly go Barkley at #2. I think their chances of trade-down increase if Barkley goes to Cleveland, and if that happens, then a QB is going #2 to whoever, which impacts Cleveland's decision at #4. honestly, if the Giants do what I think they should and go QB, that also affects the Browns decision at #4, which further solidifies my take that Cleveland goes QB at #1.

                          I'd say the Giants' chances of going either Barkley, QB, or trade-down is pretty even at 33% each.

                          - Colts: Barkley, Chubb
                          That last win of the season is really biting us in the butt, since we moved down a spot to the Giants. Lost a lot of leverage. On the other hand, Indy is an enviable position, however, in that they really don't need to consider QB. If Luck is healthy, great; if not, Brissett is serviceable. We can literally go best available here, and should.

                          I think Indy needs to come out of this first round with at least one of Barkley, Chubb, or Nelson. Barkley/Chubb are worthy of #3, but I can't imagine taking Nelson at #3, which means trade-down. However, I also don't see Nelson slipping past 5-7.

                          The bad thing is, while we are in a great position to trade down, I don't really see many great trade-down options in the 4-7 range that give us more picks while not slipping us too far down into the 1st round where we can't nab someone like Nelson. The trade would have to include other stuff, like future 1sts, etc... The other bad part of this is, there's really only 2 teams behind Indy in the top 7 that want a QB... NY Jets and Denver. So our options are limited, and do they want to move up? Or just sit back and wait for whatever QB lands in their lap?

                          I think normally Indy would be open to trading down in their situation... as long as they stop in the top 7-10, but the lack of options has me not seeing that happening with the teams currently in those spots, and I think we keep the pick.

                          If we don't trade down, then it's safe to say we're getting either Barkley or Chubb. If Barkley is there, I think you have to go with him, he's just such a talent. But if he's not, Chubb is still an awesome talent to bring in. I see the Colts options as being 25% Barkley 75% Chubb, only because I think that chances of either Cleveland or NY biting on Barkley is pretty high, even though I think both teams should go QB if they were using their heads.

                          ---
                          I think if heads prevail, #1 and #2 should go to QB.. but Barkley is so damn good I think he could possibly shake things up and make one of them take that gamble. Cleveland and Barkley are driving everything at the top of this draft and they can take things in any number of directions.

                          If I had more confirmation that Luck was going to come back 100% immediately for the season, I'd be shopping Brissett forthright to try to land another pick back in the 1st or more likely 2nd round. Brissett is a huge trade asset for us right now. But it's hard to pull any trigger on something until Luck's status becomes more solidified, so unfortunately I think we sit on it for the meanwhile. Who knows though... we have almost 2 months until then, anything can happen.
                          In all seriousness, I want Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson. Make it happen, Ballard.
                          Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-05-2018, 02:49 PM.
                          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                            My Saquon Barkley dreams are slowly slipping away, as the league opinion catches on.

                            This will be an interesting draft for sure. The top 5 could go so many different ways, and it all hinges on Cleveland.

                            First, there's a lot of QBs being thrown around at the top of this draft... none of them are home runs. But it's safe to assume that at least some of them will hit and some of them will bust. You really can't just "wing it"; you gotta do your home work and figure out which one of these guys is going to hit. You can't afford to get a pick this high and blow it on the wrong guy.

                            - Cleveland: Barkley or a QB

                            I can't see them trading the top pick, they need too much, including QB. Everything depends on their mindset for a QB. If they really like a certain guy, which for a team that doesn't have a QB in place, and a #1 pick at their disposal... they better have a guy in mind... they almost *have* to take him #1. If they are fairly indifferent to the top 3-4 QBs and can move forward with any of them, then they could go Barkley #1, and taking whatever is left at #4. If they happen to like a certain QB, but gamble and take Barkley #1, I could see a flurry of teams throwing packages at the Giants and Colts for #2 and #3 to move up and nab a QB. Because of this possibility, if Cleveland really has their sights on a particular QB, they *might* not be able to get their QB guy at #4... so they *might* have to pass on Barkley at #1 and get their guy.

                            Personally, and I *love* Barkley... but the top priority for any team should be the quarterback, and if you don't have that lined up, you almost have to go that route first. Any franchise worth their salt would be stupid to so blithely throw their fortunes to the wind in such a manner as to "settle" on the #4 pick with so many QBs bunched together at the top. For this reason, I almost have to believe that despite the rumors of them taking Barkley... I think Cleveland goes QB at #1. Think from a Cleveland fan's perspective; they have nothing in place at QB, but take a running back? That said... this is Cleveland --- logic doesn't always prevail. But let's assume it does.

                            I'd say 75% QB, 25% Barkley.

                            - Giants: Barkley or a QB, or trade-down
                            Giants don't pick again until round 2, so they really have to take advantage of this opportunity. They have a starting caliber QB in Eli, but he's 37 and showing signs of decline/inconsistency. But they also love Barkley. If they stick with Eli and go with Barkley, that's a vote for them thinking they have a team close to competing for a long time and don't want to think QB. Another wrinkle is with Barkley and other moves, they could be a better team next year, so this #2 pick might be their best chance at landing an Eli-successor for some years to come. I personally think that would not be a wise choice for them to skip on a QB. What could likely happen in that case is Eli is gone in a year or two, and they have a great RB with no QB. I can't imagine that's ideal for them. But again, things happen, and they could certainly go Barkley at #2. I think their chances of trade-down increase if Barkley goes to Cleveland, and if that happens, then a QB is going #2 to whoever, which impacts Cleveland's decision at #4. honestly, if the Giants do what I think they should and go QB, that also affects the Browns decision at #4, which further solidifies my take that Cleveland goes QB at #1.

                            I'd say the Giants' chances of going either Barkley, QB, or trade-down is pretty even at 33% each.

                            - Colts: Barkley, Chubb
                            That last win of the season is really biting us in the butt, since we moved down a spot to the Giants. Lost a lot of leverage. On the other hand, Indy is an enviable position, however, in that they really don't need to consider QB. If Luck is healthy, great; if not, Brissett is serviceable. We can literally go best available here, and should.

                            I think Indy needs to come out of this first round with at least one of Barkley, Chubb, or Nelson. Barkley/Chubb are worthy of #3, but I can't imagine taking Nelson at #3, which means trade-down. However, I also don't see Nelson slipping past 5-7.

                            The bad thing is, while we are in a great position to trade down, I don't really see many great trade-down options in the 4-7 range that give us more picks while not slipping us too far down into the 1st round where we can't nab someone like Nelson. The trade would have to include other stuff, like future 1sts, etc... The other bad part of this is, there's really only 2 teams behind Indy in the top 7 that want a QB... NY Jets and Denver. So our options are limited, and do they want to move up? Or just sit back and wait for whatever QB lands in their lap?

                            I think normally Indy would be open to trading down in their situation... as long as they stop in the top 7-10, but the lack of options has me not seeing that happening with the teams currently in those spots, and I think we keep the pick.

                            If we don't trade down, then it's safe to say we're getting either Barkley or Chubb. If Barkley is there, I think you have to go with him, he's just such a talent. But if he's not, Chubb is still an awesome talent to bring in. I see the Colts options as being 25% Barkley 75% Chubb, only because I think that chances of either Cleveland or NY biting on Barkley is pretty high, even though I think both teams should go QB if they were using their heads.

                            ---
                            I think if heads prevail, #1 and #2 should go to QB.. but Barkley is so damn good I think he could possibly shake things up and make one of them take that gamble. Cleveland and Barkley are driving everything at the top of this draft and they can take things in any number of directions. If I had more confirmation that Luck was going to come back 100% immediately for the season, I'd be shopping Brissett forthright to try to land another pick back in the 1st or more likely 2nd round. Brissett is a huge trade asset for us right now. But it's hard to pull any trigger on something until Luck's status becomes more solidified, so unfortunately I think we sit on it for the meanwhile. Who knows though... we have almost 2 months until then, anything can happen.
                            In all seriousness, I want Barkley, Chubb, and Nelson. Make it happen, Ballard.
                            I think what makes this a great draft for the Colts is that Bradley Chubb should be there at #3 and we'd have a chance to get a defensive game-changer. And after that, there's really solid depth at RB and OLine. I like Nick Chubb and Derrius Guice. Also think we may end up with a shot at EQ St. Brown from Notre Dame, and I'd love to get him. Going to be an exciting draft!
                            It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                            Comment


                            • Yep, if Barkley is gone, Chubb is an excellent pick-up, and like you said, we have a lot of options at RB and O-line. That said... even though it's a deep RB draft, there is a pretty huge drop-off from Barkley to the 2nd tiers. I like Guice and Chubb, but both have injury concerns. Chubb especially, was pretty special before his knee blow-out, and now looks like an Alfred Morris-type guy, which isn't bad... but... ya, Chubb and Co. wouldn't be bad at all if this is our route.
                              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-05-2018, 02:27 PM.
                              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                              Comment


                              • I've got a prediction I feel pretty safe making: At #3, the Colts will have the option to pick Barkley if they want to.
                                Further prediction: They won't.
                                One step further: They trade down to a team that falls in love with Darnold/Allen/Rosen.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X