Those pundits releasing draft grades before a single member of the draft class has taken a professional snap are a bit ridiculous. Still the allure of their pontifications is too much to pass up and so I've wasted hours on this nonsense.
While attempting to reconcile my own misspent time it occurred to me that there must be a reason we all love draft grades so much. After all, they insist on issuing their grades each year and as each draft class passes the number of pundits doing so multiplies. At some point there were more draft grades than picks, each opinion more pointed and perhaps less informed. Imagine being one of these young men reading about their perceived value as imagined by Mel Kiper or Todd McShay.
Why must we pass judgment immediately following a draft? Why are we so enamored by the potential without much fact to base our judgments upon? Who would win a draft pundit beat down?
No matter the reason let's breakdown the breakdowns and pass our own judgment on the pundits.
USA Today gave Ryan Grigson a C and openly questions everyone drafted except Bjoern Werner.
Verdict: Yep. That's a fair assessment given the role players drafted, the lack of a cornerback and the apparent confusion in the Colts war room.
CNNSI's Chris Burke agrees with that assessment and goes one further saying that it's "hard to see it all falling into place for this group."
Verdict: Once again it's hard to argue with Burke's opinion. Grigson may prove to be a genius but on paper this one seems fair.
Dan Kadar of SBNation found an A for each team, loved the Bjoern Werner pick and thinks the gamble on Montori Hughes may spell bad news for Josh Chapman.
Verdict: Kadar is absolutely right about Werner--he's got a motor and may prove to be an incredible pick. I don't agree on Hughes. He's a character issue and he'll be stacked behind Aubrayo Franklin and Josh Chapman unless he shows a remarkable ability to dominate at the point of attack.
Evan Silva, writing for Rotoworld, gave the Colts a C- but concedes that Grigson may know what he's doing. He too disliked the Khaled Holmes pick.
Verdict: Grigson may surprise us but I think Silva is right to question this draft. The Holmes pick could prove to be fantastic but Grigson gave up quite a bit for a guy whose character may become an issue.
Rob Rang of CBS Sports was considerably higher on the Colts' draft haul giving them a B.
Verdict: I'm not sure I buy this one-off review given the fact he likes the selection of John Boyett. Boyett is recovering from surgery on not one but both knees. I'm sure the Colts reviewed Boyett's medical history but I'm not sold that the only solid pick in a weak secondary should have been on a guy who played one game in 2012. Boyett may turn into a ball hawking, tackling machine but that's a huge bet to make. Boyett was perhaps worth the late round flyer but that's no reason to say it was a good draft.
The greatly coifed Mel Kiper proclaimed the Colts draft a C- but liked the addition of Kerwynn Williams at wideout.
Verdict: Mel is a personality. He makes his living giving poorly formed opinions. He's a step above Skip Bayless. That's the best I can say without getting violently ill.
Last but not least Philip B. Wilson gives us some rational reasons to like every pick. Maybe Phil is right.
Verdict: Wilson's more in-depth look at each player is worth a read and perhaps may be the best way to view this draft class. I'd give Phil the only passing grade of this bunch.
Overall the pundits have once again offered little of value and I have wasted a morning reading the mindless tripe. Yes, for the record, it was fun.
"Overall the pundits have once again offered little of value and I have wasted a morning reading the mindless tripe. Yes, for the record, it was fun."
That was an awesome summation. Why on earth did I click on this article? (looks at calendar) Oh yeah, four months till the season starts. Gotta do something at work...!
Grigson wants bodies. He wants bodies and bodies for every position where he was dissatisfied the previous season.
The point isn't to find "the guy" for every hole, but to make sure that every hole has three guys who want to be "the guy". If you don't know who your NT or interior guys are, you can't have too many options. He's playing the law of averages where he sees weakness.
I loved our draft with that in mind. "Sexy" is stupid. We can trade-up to grab the WR or RB we want for the future next year. It won't matter if Luck gets hurt or doesn't have time to throw the ball this year.
I think too many people see last years draft, and all the top skill position help we added, and wonder why this year appears to be a let down. Well, we have Luck, and do not need another QB. Have Wayne, Hilton, and DHB at WR, so another would have been fine, but not a need. We have 3 solid RB's under contract and Ballard showed he can run even behind a less than stellar O-Line. So this year we go after more of the 'trenches' type players. Besides QB, they say to build a team from the lines out. And we did a good job of that in FA and in this draft.
I personally think Boyett is a beast. Love this kid. He's had surgery, but way earlier than what we saw with Chapman. Ran a 4.57 at his pro day and was 2nd among safeties with 27 reps @ 225lb @ combine. Plus is known as a team leader in college. With a 6th rounder? Nothing but upside.
There is no reason to believe that Holmes Character will become an issue as you say. Absolutely none.
It appears the general consensus of expert opinions is simply: Colts' offseason and draft were not so flashy, and have raised eyebrows, but Grigson proved himself last year, and can be trusted again this year. I felt the same way, so how can I monetize that?
@Travis_Tango There is no reason to pay much attention to this analysis when the author is clearly confusing Holmes and Hughes. He obviously doesn't care fore Hughes, and he lets that spill over into his analysis of Holmes and in fact writes about Hughes when he was in fact talking about Holmes.
@jelewin Excellent question. If you figure it out let me know.
@Travis_Tango Yes, what an egregious error! He should be tarred and feathered! How dare you mix up the names of Hughes and Holmes! Don't listen to this guy!