Pre Combine Hitman Mock 2.0

[Dcash4]

1 hour ago, Chieferific said:

If you think Barron is bad at it,  wait until VW is charged with running down the Seam on a regular basis.  Ideally, neither play much. 

There is far less of an emphasis on our ILB playing against seems with Minkah here. We dont play near the amount of C2 from down to down that had Williams and Bostic idiotically in trail. Putting guys in positions to fail is far more coaching than player oriented. 

Vince Williams is not nearly as bad at coverage as your are portraying. Can he match more athletic guys step for step? No....but he is where he needs to be and seems to have a far better grasp at understanding his role in coverage than Barron did. I mean, this isnt projecting who Williams will be. We have years of seeing it done. While I am not going to ask him to man up Travis Kelce for an entire game or put him over the slot -- I'm not doing that with Barron either. With Mikah playing deep allowing Edmunds to move more into the box that allows us a bigger bodied safety and Bush to defend the majority of the match ups we want Williams to ignore. 

Man is the real issue with Williams, but Barron cant play man either. He can not do it.  He isnt able to despite the physical traits that Williams may lack. Coverage is the reason he couldnt stick at safety. Williams isnt built to cover, but I will take his understanding and effort over Barron every time. With sub-packages and the increased usage of guys like Bush, Edmunds, and even Hilton in that middle of the field coverage role, it puts less stress on Williams need to be a top line pass defender. 

28 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

Again, he had 700+ snaps last year.  That has to be replaced it he leaves.

I agree that we need a replacement for what he offered as an athlete on the field, that 700 number is deceiving if we are arguing Barron vs Williams. Barron played around 50 Snaps per game with Williams at 28. Barron was also our defacto ILB1 as he wasnt a rookie, plays across 3 downs, and wore the green dot at times. Those three factors will, in all likelihood, go away with Bush in his second year. Barron was not an option to be removed for Williams most of the time and Williams wasnt taking over for Bush, therefore he played the odd man out. But with Barron losing out on the top spot to Bush, losing the sticker, and ultimately losing work as the lone LB in single sets -- there will be far more a chance that he loses out on snapsto Williams if we ran back those three again. 

By my math, Bush will probably pick up 12 snaps a game from Barron's role in 2019 (he only played 2 games 100% of snaps, I am filling that gap). That would put the final game average tally at Bush 67, Barron 38, and Williams 28 -- far more realistic for the number from Williams to Barron to be much less significant, especially when considering them both being replaceable on field with Bush taking full time duty. Also far more of a reaslitic number to understand that someone like Gilbert filling 20-30 snaps a game is more palatable. 

1 hour ago, MOSteelers56 said:

Barron is a better coverage guy than Vince. Nobody is debating that.

I will. Barron was god awful at coverage. Being more athletic doesnt make someone superior. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by Dcash4

[Chieferific]

Just now, Steeler Hitman said:

1. His snaps in 2020 would be reduced either way. Bush is going to take more snaps. As he should! (There's a big part of the replacement). Bush's snaps will go up and Baron or whoever's will go down. 

2. His snaps can/would be replaced by multiple remaining  people: As stated, Bush with more snaps, VW in base and short yardage, Gilbert and maybe even Edmonds moving down to take some snaps. 

 

So 3 guys (VW/Barron's replacement/3rd Safety replacing 1 player.  I understand the trend towards specialization but that's going a little overboard imo.  Another ILB to play both coverage and Run seems like the "easiest" solution. Granted, one has to be found.  I do think you're on to something with Edmunds taking on more of a Dimebacker role.

[Chieferific]

10 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

There is far less of an emphasis on our ILB playing against seems with Minkah here. We dont play near the amount of C2 from down to down that had Williams and Bostic idiotically in trail. Putting guys in positions to fail is far more coaching than player oriented. 

Vince Williams is not nearly as bad at coverage as your are portraying. Can he match more athletic guys step for step? No....but he is where he needs to be and seems to have a far better grasp at understanding his role in coverage than Barron did. I mean, this isnt projecting who Williams will be. We have years of seeing it done. While I am not going to ask him to man up Travis Kelce for an entire game or put him over the slot -- I'm not doing that with Barron either. With Mikah playing deep allowing Edmunds to move more into the box that allows us a bigger bodied safety and Bush to defend the majority of the match ups we want Williams to ignore. 

Man is the real issue with Williams, but Barron cant play man either. He can not do it.  He isnt able to despite the physical traits that Williams may lack. Coverage is the reason he couldnt stick at safety. Williams isnt built to cover, but I will take his understanding and effort over Barron every time. With sub-packages and the increased usage of guys like Bush, Edmunds, and even Hilton in that middle of the field coverage role, it puts less stress on Williams need to be a top line pass defender. 

I agree that we need a replacement for what he offered as an athlete on the field, that 700 number is deceiving if we are arguing Barron vs Williams. Barron played around 50 Snaps per game with Williams at 28. Barron was also our defacto ILB1 as he wasnt a rookie, plays across 3 downs, and wore the green dot at times. Those three factors will, in all likelihood, go away with Bush in his second year. Barron was not an option to be removed for Williams most of the time and Williams wasnt taking over for Bush, therefore he played the odd man out. But with Barron losing out on the top spot to Bush, losing the sticker, and ultimately losing work as the lone LB in single sets -- there will be far more a chance that he loses out on snapsto Williams if we ran back those three again. 

By my math, Bush will probably pick up 12 snaps a game from Barron's role in 2019 (he only played 2 games 100% of snaps, I am filling that gap). That would put the final game average tally at Bush 67, Barron 38, and Williams 28 -- far more realistic for the number from Williams to Barron to be much less significant, especially when considering them both being replaceable on field with Bush taking full time duty. Also far more of a reaslitic number to understand that someone like Gilbert filling 20-30 snaps a game is more palatable. 

I will. Barron was god awful at coverage. Being more athletic doesnt make someone superior. 

Bush (889) played almost 150 more snaps then Barron (750) so how much more are you expecting?  Barron covered Seam routes and carried receivers down the field even with Minkah on the team.  VW can't do that anywhere near Barron's ability (which is agreeably bad). VW cannot be on the field and his snap count proves the Steelers agree.  So, even if Barron's snaps go down that's still a large chunk being left up to Gilbert and/or a Rookie 3rd Safety.  

[jebrick]

41 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

Vince Williams is not nearly as bad at coverage as your are portraying. Can he match more athletic guys step for step? No....but he is where he needs to be and seems to have a far better grasp at understanding his role in coverage than Barron did.

I can still see Williams getting schemed to line up against A.J. Green in man coverage.  Happened less this season but Williams had to cover WR several times.  If he is in there then teams will scheme him into coverage

[Dcash4]

Just now, jebrick said:

I can still see Barron getting schemed to line up against A.J. Green in man coverage.  Happened less this season but Barron had to cover WR several times.  If he is in there then teams will scheme him into coverage

Same. 

[Chieferific]

5 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

Same. 

Agreed but Barron is the better of the 2 terribles.  The best solution is to have an adaptive scheme which puts neither there.      

[jebrick]

1 minute ago, Chieferific said:

Agreed but Barron is the better of the 2 terribles.  The best solution is to have an adaptive scheme which puts neither there.      

Or someone who can run like Gilbert or Edmunds.

[Chieferific]

Just now, jebrick said:

Or someone who can run like Gilbert or Edmunds.

Not "or". A different scheme would put them there.  

[Steeler Hitman]

12 minutes ago, jebrick said:

I can still see Williams getting schemed to line up against A.J. Green in man coverage.  Happened less this season but Williams had to cover WR several times.  If he is in there then teams will scheme him into coverage

Teams are going to try to attack your weakness. At least f they are intelligent. I remember Coach Belichick saying some years ago how stupid it was to try to run against the steelers in the days of the 3-4 with Hampton, Big Snack, Keisel and our LB'ers. What did he have Tom do? Throw quick passes. It took us forever to adjust and change from our base scheme and getting killed by teams nickel and diming us with short quick passes. To the point when VW wasn't there they still completed passes against Baron. If you put Edmunds in there too much, they will simply run. Pick your poison and try to out scheme and think your opponent. That's called coaching.

46 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

So 3 guys (VW/Barron's replacement/3rd Safety replacing 1 player.  I understand the trend towards specialization but that's going a little overboard imo. 

Why? because everyone says that you should play one guy there! Use only a bellcow RB because that is how it used to be done!  You can only play this position because you fit the chart for it, I have never believed in that stuff. I am a bit of a radical in my thinking. I love tradition, but I like change too, especially when your tradition just isn't working. Bell is the ILB1 or MLB1. He will get the majority of snaps. Gilbert and VW will get some based on their roles and what they are good at VW short yardage, run downs and blitzing, Gilbert (hopefully) in coverage as he showed last pre season and training camp.  Yes Edmunds would be a great wildcard, especially with a third good safety. That is why I hope they can keep Davis to a cap friendly deal or draft someone who can play fairly early and well. 

Another ILB to play both coverage and Run seems like the "easiest" solution.

It would be but, we have six picks and very little cap money. In a perfect world I would try to sign Daron Lee or Joe Schobert to play next to Bush, keep Davis, draft or sign another safety, sign Billings and a lower tier DT, add a veteran RB and explore veteran QB options. Not realistic and just can't do it with the hand the team is dealt. I have to play this pair like I have a full house or better.

Granted, one has to be found.  I do think you're on to something with Edmunds taking on more of a Dimebacker role.

They need another safety to make that happen. In my mock scenario this is possible if Brooks would be ready. 

Big thanks to everyone for helping to ease my Steelers football jonesing!

[Chieferific]

8 minutes ago, Steeler Hitman said:

Teams are going to try to attack your weakness. At least f they are intelligent. I remember Coach Belichick saying some years ago how stupid it was to try to run against the steelers in the days of the 3-4 with Hampton, Big Snack, Keisel and our LB'ers. What did he have Tom do? Throw quick passes. It took us forever to adjust and change from our base scheme and getting killed by teams nickel and diming us with short quick passes. To the point when VW wasn't there they still completed passes against Baron. If you put Edmunds in there too much, they will simply run. Pick your poison and try to out scheme and think your opponent. That's called coaching.

Big thanks to everyone for helping to ease my Steelers football jonesing!

Yeah 6 later picks certainly hurts the process.  But you have to have a guy that isn't one dimensional.  Meaning, 1 for Run. 1 for pass and 1 for 3rd and long.  Offenses will exploit those guys.  Maybe Gilbert and a 3rd Safety is the answer.  Maybe another ILB in the style of Barron is the answer.  Maybe both could be.  Who knows?  And yes,  It's nice to have a good debate that's logical and respectful.   

Edited February 7, 2020 by Chieferific

[MOSteelers56]

I was not overly impressed with Barron last year. I know he started coming around by the end of the year, but I really think Gilbert can replace at least some of what he brought. He looked good in camp and in the preseason and showed impressive coverage skills in college. I think we got a good one in UG3. Also, I think Spillane might be able to fill in for Dirty Red, I'm not as confident about that one, though. 

::EDIT:: Also, I really don't think the position of coverage ILB is that difficult to master. Remember Terrance Garven looked passable in our defense and I believe he was a rookie. Basically just cover that dude that's running wide open down the middle of the field. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by MOSteelers56

[Dcash4]

On 2/7/2020 at 1:10 PM, Chieferific said:

Bush (889) played almost 150 more snaps then Barron (750) so how much more are you expecting?  Barron covered Seam routes and carried receivers down the field even with Minkah on the team.  VW can't do that anywhere near Barron's ability (which is agreeably bad). VW cannot be on the field and his snap count proves the Steelers agree.  So, even if Barron's snaps go down that's still a large chunk being left up to Gilbert and/or a Rookie 3rd Safety.  

As I mentioned...about 12 more snaps a game. The point I am making regarding the snaps is that Barron held onto a role as the lead guy that wont be his anymore moving forward. He was the vet, the three down guy, and the communicator at most points during the season. They couldn't take him off in 2019. With Bush assuming those roles in 2020 and beyond, they CAN take him off more. Both games Williams missed were the only games Bush played 100% of the snaps. Moving forward, Bush will always play 100% of the snaps and that second backer can be in-and-out more since it wont be a traded up for top 10 draft pick. So what I am saying is that 750 snaps vs 400 snaps is a bit erroneous when you talk Williams vs Barron because they will be on more even footing in 2020. Theres more to the snaps than just "see, the Steelers knew they couldnt play him". 

I just have a hard time with this because Williams is not BAD at coverage, but he is limited physically. Barron sucks at coverage despite his better physical traits. You can be athletic and suck at coverage. The arument against Williams seems to assume that QB will call out 98 and we will be put into a 4x1 set with Williams Man'd up solo against Tyreek Hill all the time, and that's just simply not how this works.

If we are talking moving on from one of Williams or Barron, give me the better football player and lets fill the athletic void with someone else athletic -- because, Barrons athleticism ended up meaning nothing. 

[Chieferific]

35 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

As I mentioned...about 12 more snaps a game. The point I am making regarding the snaps is that Barron held onto a role as the lead guy that wont be his anymore moving forward. He was the vet, the three down guy, and the communicator at most points during the season. They couldn't take him off in 2019. With Bush assuming those roles in 2020 and beyond, they CAN take him off more. Both games Williams missed were the only games Bush played 100% of the snaps. Moving forward, Bush will always play 100% of the snaps and that second backer can be in-and-out more since it wont be a traded up for top 10 draft pick. So what I am saying is that 750 snaps vs 400 snaps is a bit erroneous when you talk Williams vs Barron because they will be on more even footing in 2020. Theres more to the snaps than just "see, the Steelers knew they couldnt play him". 

I just have a hard time with this because Williams is not BAD at coverage, but he is limited physically. Barron sucks at coverage despite his better physical traits. You can be athletic and suck at coverage. The arument against Williams seems to assume that QB will call out 98 and we will be put into a 4x1 set with Williams Man'd up solo against Tyreek Hill all the time, and that's just simply not how this works.

If we are talking moving on from one of Williams or Barron, give me the better football player and lets fill the athletic void with someone else athletic -- because, Barrons athleticism ended up meaning nothing. 

VW is bad at coverage.  I don't understand the praise here.  Also, Bush played 89% of the snaps.  You wanna add snaps to Bush (which I agree) but there aren't enough left to make the significant difference you're proposing.  VW was not out there because he isn't trusted in coverage.  That seems pretty clear to me.  What other reason is there?  Furthermore, even if you feel he isn't bad in coverage and Barron is bad (which he is) VW cannot carry a receiver down the field.  He simply can't.  So the better of the 2 bads is a QB trying to hit a WR that is 5 yards open opposed to 20.  In that scenario, Barron's athleticism does matter.  And to be clear, I'm not backing Barron.  I'm suggesting the need to draft/acquire a better ILB in that style which is what you stated at the end.  I feel that would help more then a 3rd Safety.  

*If anyone has the PFF coverage grades I'd be interested to hear them.  I'm not opposed the the idea that I have no idea what I'm talking about. 

Edited February 8, 2020 by Chieferific

[Dcash4]

4 hours ago, Chieferific said:

VW is bad at coverage.  I don't understand the praise here.

There is more to this than just black and white - good vs bad. So I am not sure what I am praising here? Williams isnt good at coverage. He does not and will not excel there. But Williams also isnt fall on my face bad at coverage like it feels you want him to be. Those two things can be true at the same time. 

4 hours ago, Chieferific said:

Also, Bush played 89% of the snaps.  You wanna add snaps to Bush (which I agree) but there aren't enough left to make the significant difference you're proposing.

Im not sure you understand what I am proposing after reading this. I am not saying VW will be a 90% snap guy, but it seemed that your argument of Barren vs Williams was based on snap count and I have made my case for how with Bush taking over the main role of LB1, Barrons grip on demanded PT evaporates. If all three came back, I think you would see a far clearer shared snap count than the 750 to 400 we saw this year between those two. And in the instances of their being a true rotation between Vince and Barron, 98 > 26 from down to down. 

4 hours ago, Chieferific said:

VW cannot carry a receiver down the field.  He simply can't.

 I think you are overvaluing what one circumstance means in the scheme of a game. How often will we ask any of our LBers to win a 40? I understand the thought process to the issue, but Williams was on the field for 400 snaps last year and was targeted 4 times, giving up 3 catches for 13 yards. 1) He wasnt a walking audible for a TD and 2) small sample size but he averaged 4.3 yards per catch allowed. This isnt screaming a guy who cant do his job - a job that wont have him matched against great pass catchers. 

Also, please.....please, please, please throw more seams at Minkah. That's not even just about this Vince Williams thing. That's a request in general. 

4 hours ago, Chieferific said:

*If anyone has the PFF coverage grades I'd be interested to hear them.  I'm not opposed the the idea that I have no idea what I'm talking about. 

So, I have no clue on full context here, but from my half-a$$ed internet research I found PFF grades from when the week we played the Bengals the second time -- so going into week 11. Barron was an overall 49.4 with a coverage grade of 43.7. Vince was a 76.2 with coverage at 57.1. 

Honestly, that doesnt mean much to me, because I hate PFF, but I was interested.

I watch and see Vince as a far better football player than Mark Barron. I am not overall worried about the issues you seem to think are glaring because I just dont fear masking our 6 or 7th coverage guy against their weakest link. I do fully believe we need a new LBer to play the pass in situations, but I can live with Vince as a 50%er who you take off the field if someone throws him off of it. 

 

[Chieferific]

2 hours ago, Dcash4 said:

There is more to this than just black and white - good vs bad. So I am not sure what I am praising here? (I equated the insistence that he wasn't bad as praise) Williams isnt good at coverage. He does not and will not excel there. But Williams also isnt fall on my face bad at coverage like it feels you want him to be. Those two things can be true at the same time. 

Im not sure you understand what I am proposing after reading this. I am not saying VW will be a 90% snap guy, but it seemed that your argument of Barren vs Williams was based on snap count and I have made my case for how with Bush taking over the main role of LB1, Barrons grip on demanded PT evaporates. If all three came back, I think you would see a far clearer shared snap count than the 750 to 400 we saw this year between those two. And in the instances of their being a true rotation between Vince and Barron, 98 > 26 from down to down. My argument based on snap count is simply Barron was out there more because VW cannot cover nor does he have the ability to reach the corner in time.   

 I think you are overvaluing what one circumstance means in the scheme of a game. How often will we ask any of our LBers to win a 40? (Barron was asked to carry receivers down the field regularly) I understand the thought process to the issue, but Williams was on the field for 400 snaps last year and was targeted 4 times, giving up 3 catches for 13 yards. 1) He wasnt a walking audible for a TD and 2) small sample size but he averaged 4.3 yards per catch allowed. This isnt screaming a guy who cant do his job - a job that wont have him matched against great pass catchers. Those snaps I will bet were on "Run Downs". If the argument is to keep him solely for that role, I'm Ok with it but ideally you'd have a guy that can do both which is what I'm suggesting. 

Also, please.....please, please, please throw more seams at Minkah. That's not even just about this Vince Williams thing. That's a request in general. 

So, I have no clue on full context here, but from my half-a$$ed internet research I found PFF grades from when the week we played the Bengals the second time -- so going into week 11. Barron was an overall 49.4 with a coverage grade of 43.7. Vince was a 76.2 with coverage at 57.1. 

Honestly, that doesnt mean much to me, because I hate PFF, but I was interested.

I watch and see Vince as a far better football player than Mark Barron. I am not overall worried about the issues you seem to think are glaring because I just dont fear masking our 6 or 7th coverage guy against their weakest link. (It's a pretty big deficiency when Teams know they can exploit him. 3rd and 7? I'm going after VW)  I do fully believe we need a new LBer to play the pass in situations, but I can live with Vince as a 50%er who you take off the field if someone throws him off of it. 

And to clarify, The whole debate wasn't VW or Barron (neither are high snap guys).  It was about which would be more helpful...a new ILB that can cover and play the Run or a 3rd Safety to come down and help on Passing downs.