If you boil this down to courtroom style and berate me as a witness, I will give you a simple “Yes, we made the right decision” answer. If you have the opportunity to bring in this sort of difference maker,
during a season where the conference seems more up for grabs than any year in recent memory, it would be a dereliction of duties not to do so. I understand the argument against, I just do not agree with it. I know it will take some fans favorite time of the year away (draft time). I mean how much fun is it to run simulators, when the first 50 or 60 guys are off the board? If I can ease your mind a bit, our roster should be stout enough that BPA should be just fine.
My Monday morning poll ahead of the draft this week asked what we would add at the deadline and I gave you the choice of CB, LB, and Edge. I also asked if that player would be a starter or a depth piece. Lastly, you had the option to predict that Ballard would stand pat. It actually surprised me that this was the leading vote getter, with 34% saying that the Colts would do nothing at the deadline.
I think this shows that there is still an anti-Ballard contingent that is hoping for that final straw to break the camel’s back, or in this case, Carlie’s back. I know I heard him say in a presser a good while ago that “If we think we are a player away, I will get him” (paraphrased). I think it is admirable that with the entire media contingent trying to break the trade news ahead of their contemporaries, absolutely no one leaked a thing. He’s got his building in order. I predicted on a post somewhere that if we made a deal, it would be for a name that no one would have associated with us, based on this nearly always being the case when it comes to Colt acquisitions.
Adding a starting edge rusher was the 2nd highest vote getter at 20%. Maybe the constant reporting of how much sense Hendrickson made, finally made many believe that we could make it happen. Finally, in 3rd place, we found the group that predicted that we would add a starter at CB. This is a departure from the October 2nd poll in which just over 50% indicated that a #2 corner was the best use of our limited cap space. To be fair, Howard had just been torched and we were weeks away from J. Jones’s return.
Gardner’s arrival inspires a few questions. Was he worth the price? Will his addition make the Colts a Super Bowl contender? (Currently the 7th lowest odds overall and 3rd lowest in the AFC to KC and Buffalo) Will the addition save or cost Ballard his job? All are good questions that may eventually be asked, but the title of the article is “Did the Colts make the right decision to trade for Sauce? Since Ballard will ultimately get credit or blame, how it affects him will be part of the process.
Your choices:
It was the right choice, even if we don’t make the playoffs, or we lose in the first round. It has set us up for success over the next three years and Gardner’s addition allows us to have one of, if not the strongest defensive backfields in the league. This move shows proof that Ballard is now taking a more urgent approach to team building.
It was the right choice, only when we win the AFC. An investment this big can only be justified with big results. If Ballard got this right and it sees us on the biggest stage, lets just say that “Winning fixes everything”.
It was the right choice, when we win the South and a home playoff game. We would still be trending in the right direction and have something to build on. If this is what you thought Ballard had to do to keep his job, mission accomplished.
It was the wrong choice, because it was the wrong position. We should have addressed the pass rush in some capacity. Ballard should have paid the smaller price for Phillips.
It was the wrong choice, because Sauce is not worth two #1s and a talented player. Ballard should have received “something” back. Sauce’s production does not warrant the price and this move could set us back for years.
It was the wrong choice, because Ballard made it.
