Jump to content
Magnus-Viktor

I wish they would've done this last year instead

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, 3rivers said:

Troy also had velcro hands and took good angles, you really can't compare to  Troy 1st ballot HOF ,  be more realistic.  Agree that they would be better with Baron and Bush but that won't happen until injuries force the issue.  I don't mind the Bush pick, but I thought Evans last year and CB this year would help more.  Could have traded down this year, got Murphy and then move up in RD2 and get WR.  It's all good - if the secondary STILL is a major weakness, Stephen A willed tomlin know about itxD

I was only comparing the height in regards to covering TEs. Troy didn't play a lot of man coverage on big athletic TEs and neither will Bush. Also, there's no point in talking about taking Evans last year, we didn't. We can only go forward. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MOSteelers56 said:

He didn't really. He didn't have very many FF but his statlines are almost exactly the same as Shazier's coming out. Tons of tackles, TFL, and sacks. I think he'll be pretty good. We needed a guy that could fly around the field and stop big plays. That is exactly what Bush can do. He just needs to start taking the ball away.

60 tackles is not much.  Shazier was a lot faster and more explosive too IMO.  Like I said, he has range and will improve coverage, so it was a good pick.  It would've been better if they'd realized the dire need and done this a year sooner so last season wasn't a wasted one as soon as they wasted the 1 on Edmunds.  I'm hoping he turns into a Shazier-type player though.  We need it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I was only comparing the height in regards to covering TEs. Troy didn't play a lot of man coverage on big athletic TEs and neither will Bush. Also, there's no point in talking about taking Evans last year, we didn't. We can only go forward. 

For the record, that's a large part of why I mentioned the size of Vander Esch vs him.  6'4 1/4" matches up with a 6'5" TE a lot better than 5'11" does.  That 4.65 speed should be able to hang with the vast majority of the TEs as well.  The ones that are too fast for a LB should have a S on them anyway.  

I don't hate the pick, and I'm cautiously optimistic about having 2 fast ILBs in there now, I just think they should've done it last year.  Better player and wouldn't have wasted last season that way.  I'd be lying if I said that even though I'm not a Bush fan, that I am not a little excited about having a 4.44 LB back there.  My friend that is a huge Michigan fan, I mean he lives and breathes this stuff, texted me when they traded up asking me if we were going to take Bush.  I told him I hoped not, but I figured they would.  He said he really like Bush and thinks he'll be a stud.  He played some hybrid position so perhaps that's why his stats aren't there.  The stats after he was drafted said he pressured the QB something like 29% when he was blitzing.  So he's doing something right.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, I loved LVE too. I wish we could have gotten him, but I'm happy with Bush. I think he'll be really good in our defense. His leadership and tenacity has been something we've been missing. I love Vince's demeanor and passion, but adding Bush will help with bringing some intensity back. I think Vince and Bush are going to be really good together. I think Heinz is going to be rocking this year. A lot of fire from this defense now. Plus, I can't imagine giving up as many big plays with an ILB that closes as fast as Bush does.

I'd try to get a 6th or 7th for Bostic tomorrow too. He's not going to play any I'd imagine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I mean, I loved LVE too. I wish we could have gotten him, but I'm happy with Bush. I think he'll be really good in our defense. His leadership and tenacity has been something we've been missing. I love Vince's demeanor and passion, but adding Bush will help with bringing some intensity back. I think Vince and Bush are going to be really good together. I think Heinz is going to be rocking this year. A lot of fire from this defense now. Plus, I can't imagine giving up as many big plays with an ILB that closes as fast as Bush does.

I'd try to get a 6th or 7th for Bostic tomorrow too. He's not going to play any I'd imagine. 

I agree about trading Bostic.  Never been a big fan there.  CB may be a big need yet, but maybe we're over stating the need after signing Nelson.  If they stay healthy, Haden, Nelson and Hilton are a good top 3 in the nickel.  The depth is sorely lacking though unless someone unexpected steps up.  I was hoping for Greedy Williams or someone in 2, even if it took a trade up, but that's not happening now unless they package pick 66 with another one to move up into late 2.  Then that means you aren't taking a WR.  Maybe they think Moncrief and Washington will step up and fill the void, along with the great Eli Rogers.  I'm not a fan of any of those guys though.  They're just mediocre players from what I've ever seen.  JuJu is iffy as a #1 too in my opinion.  If those guys don't step up, and Vance McDonald gets hurt, that O is dead in the water.  But you're very right, the D should be much improved now.  Just that ONE guy, having range and being able to cover in the middle, should make a HUGE difference.  Shazier sure masked a lot of holes and made the D look better than it was, just as Troy did before him.  So IF Bush is any good, hopefully he'll have that type of an impact as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how you say we should of just moved up to 18 to take him before the Cowboys last year you do realize it takes two parties to make a trade right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said:

Shazier sure masked a lot of holes and made the D look better than it was, just as Troy did before him.  So IF Bush is any good, hopefully he'll have that type of an impact as well.  

I also think that the defense around the playmaker is better now too. Shazier HAD to mask a lot of problems. Those problems have gotten a little less problematic. When Shazier was our dude we couldn't rush the passer and our corners were junk. Now we can rush the passer a little and our corners are shinier junk. I expect big things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, 95lloyd said:

I love how you say we should of just moved up to 18 to take him before the Cowboys last year you do realize it takes two parties to make a trade right?

Yeah, and if you're going to give up a 2 plus a future 3, I'm positive you could've done it last year too.  Cheaper actually, since you only would have been forced to trade to 18 instead of 10.  Those higher picks are always more valuable and more expensive to get.  If they wanted to, they could've done it.  They were just too damn stupid.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I also think that the defense around the playmaker is better now too. Shazier HAD to mask a lot of problems. Those problems have gotten a little less problematic. When Shazier was our dude we couldn't rush the passer and our corners were junk. Now we can rush the passer a little and our corners are shinier junk. I expect big things.

Haha that's true too.  I love our defensive line when they're healthy.  I love Watt.  I love Haden when he's on.  I love Hilton as a blitzer.  The rest have shown flashes.  We just lacked speed at ILB so the entire middle of the field was wide open.  Hopefully Edmunds makes a jump instead of having a sophomore slump, Smith is better after having settled in to the position and hopefully they quit moving him around, and the rest falls into place.  Staying healthy is the key though, because the depth is sorely lacking across the board in my book.  Fort is now gone.  I liked him.  Burnett is gone.  The DL doesn't have a lot of depth either.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Magnus-Viktor said:

Yeah, and if you're going to give up a 2 plus a future 3, I'm positive you could've done it last year too.  Cheaper actually, since you only would have been forced to trade to 18 instead of 10.  Those higher picks are always more valuable and more expensive to get.  If they wanted to, they could've done it.  They were just too damn stupid.  

 

3 hours ago, skywlker32 said:

Maybe they didn't do this last year because the teams that they were contacting either weren't looking to trade or were asking for too much. Just saying it's always a two way street. The closest similar trade to what they would have needed for Vander Esch I could find that DID happen was:

Quote

Green Bay traded a first-round selection (14th) to New Orleans in exchange for New Orleans's first- and fifth-round selections (27th and 147th) and a first-round selection in 2019

So the Saints gave up 2 1sts (1 future, but the value of the first would only likely get better than there other first) and a 5th for the move versus a 1st, a 2nd and future 3rd.

As I said on the last page. It took the Saints 2 firsts and a fifth to trade up to about where the Steelers would have needed to go. What makes you think that a 2 and a 3 would be a given to get it done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, skywlker32 said:

 

As I said on the last page. It took the Saints 2 firsts and a fifth to trade up to about where the Steelers would have needed to go. What makes you think that a 2 and a 3 would be a given to get it done?

Because trading from 18 to 14 would cost a lot too.  You're talking about moving up 13 spots instead of 10 basically.  Different trading partners then too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Packers traded a first, a third and some change for the trade from 27 to 18. We would have had to BEAT that offer and would have likely been in a bidding war (for all we know we offered the same or similar anyways and the packers just had higher picks). The value to get Vander Esch would have been somewhere between the two offers, which is quite the wide range I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×