Way too early 2022 offseason thoughts

[MOSteelers56]

I feel like I'm a little crazy in this thought, but I'm starting to think that a dominate O-line is built through the interior. I think an elite OG has more of a chance of positively impacting the game for an offense. A horrible OT has a much bigger chance of negatively impacting a game, though.

[August4th]

 

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, MOSteelers56 said:

I feel like I'm a little crazy in this thought, but I'm starting to think that a dominate O-line is built through the interior. I think an elite OG has more of a chance of positively impacting the game for an offense. A horrible OT has a much bigger chance of negatively impacting a game, though.

You can get away with average at LT far easier than you can on IOL. You can also help a OT far easier than the IOL. TE chips, TE in, RB chips, RB in, work away from that side, keeping drops short. 

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, MOSteelers56 said:

This is an interesting discussion about WRs. I hope we bring back JuJu and aren't looking to draft someone. JuJu and Claypool should rotate as the slot and X with Diontae at the Z. I think it would be a pretty big waste of picks to take a WR, unless we can't bring one of JuJu or Washington back. I doubt it'll be Washington, though.  I think it'd be disappointing to not bring back JuJu. I wouldn't break the bank for him, maybe a shorter 2-3 year deal. He's not in the best leverage spot in terms of big money. 

For sure it is. But I do agree with SD and Dave….we need “oh 💩” speed like we had with Bryant, Wallace, and others. Claypool is more “big body” deep threat that doesn’t pull safety help. Jon Metchie, Javan Dotson, Skyy Moore are expected to be that in the draft (Moore reportedly has a 4.22 40 time) if you want a draft pick. Free agents with that speed if you rather sign a guy will be Albert Wilson, DeSean Jackson, DJ Chark. 

[Dcash4]

3 hours ago, warfelg said:

WR2 and WR3 aren’t depth. They’re starters. Cost controlled starters = good. 

You're right, depth has been the wrong word from me. 

3 hours ago, warfelg said:

Personally I have 0 issue If they kept using a 2nd or 3rd rounder on a WR every 3-4 years and we’re able to get the same production for a WR2 rather than pay more on the cap for the same production. That gives them the ability to pull in FAs at a spot they maybe aren’t good at drafting (CB). 

My point being that you should not be going into this process thinking "I am going to use this top 50 pick for 4 years!". Money can be manipulated. You can't recoup draft picks nearly as successfully (going back to my Claypool 48 slot difference between pick and best comp slot).

The draft is where you build franchises, FA is where you fill rosters. Don't waste top 100 picks on people you assume won't stick. 

[warfelg]

1 hour ago, Dcash4 said:

Don't waste top 100 picks on people you assume won't stick. 

No it’s not wasting picks if you set a max price you are willing to pay a guy and his value outpaces that. 
 

I’ll ask you this:

Player X gives you 708 yards, 6 TDs on 44 receptions on a 4 year $5.6mil deal. 
 

Player Y Gives you 700 yards, 5 TDs on 47 receptions on a 3 year $15mil deal. 
 

Both are WR2’s. One was drafted in the 50’s. The other was signed as a free agent.

Which one is better for you for building a team?

[VigilantZombie]

The first thing that caught my eye is that Sam Highsmith, the father of Alex Highsmith, does not play for this team @warfelg lol

[Dcash4]

1 hour ago, warfelg said:

No it’s not wasting picks if you set a max price you are willing to pay a guy and his value outpaces that. 
 

I’ll ask you this:

Player X gives you 708 yards, 6 TDs on 44 receptions on a 4 year $5.6mil deal. 
 

Player Y Gives you 700 yards, 5 TDs on 47 receptions on a 3 year $15mil deal. 
 

Both are WR2’s. One was drafted in the 50’s. The other was signed as a free agent.

Which one is better for you for building a team?

I mean this in the nicest way possible…that’s a snake oil salesmen question. Yes, I would like to make $1M per year sitting on my couch…no I will not invest $300k to JimBob to hope for solid returns. 

There’s too many variables. Do we have a perfect team? Then cool. Let’s do it. What’s our OL contract situation look like? How’s our DL? What about our DB top level talent? 

I’ll return your question with one: would you rather draft someone at pick 50 and only use them for 4 years at replaceable production or draft a quality starter you don’t need to replace for 8-10 years? 

Because I think of TJ Watt holding down his spot for 10 years…not focusing on talent alone but longevity. And now, we don’t have to redraft his position and can concentrate our best assets on other position to fill a roster. You have 22 positions to fill. 

My problem isn’t that it happens, my problem would be that you plan for it to happen. There will always be the Wallace, and the Bell, and the Sanders who you offer deals too that don’t sign. You will always get that Nate Washington that balls out and allows you to let someone else walk. There’s gonna be the players who don’t fit long term. But I would never PLAN for it. 

I know you guys think we have 10% of the talent other NFL teams have….we got here because there’s 3 dudes drafted in rounds 2 and 3 outside of JuJu’s 1 year hit that made a second contract In the last 12 years. And one of them retired immediately.  

Wanna know how you fall down in total team talent? You miss - long term - on your best shots. And if your PLANNING to do that…well, you deserve everything you get. 

[VigilantZombie]

Overall I like the roster and I'd absolutely love to see us add Carlton Davis at CB

[43M]

1 hour ago, warfelg said:

No it’s not wasting picks if you set a max price you are willing to pay a guy and his value outpaces that. 
 

I’ll ask you this:

Player X gives you 708 yards, 6 TDs on 44 receptions on a 4 year $5.6mil deal. 
 

Player Y Gives you 700 yards, 5 TDs on 47 receptions on a 3 year $15mil deal. 
 

Both are WR2’s. One was drafted in the 50’s. The other was signed as a free agent.

Which one is better for you for building a team?

I may be misunderstanding your argument, but player X is on their rookie deal and you dont actually know if thats the type of output youre going to get from them in the NFL, whereas player Y costs more because he has proven he can produce those numbers in the NFL.

You cant just assume production.   You COULD get Golden Tate....you could also get Devin Smith.

[warfelg]

6 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

I’ll return your question with one: would you rather draft someone at pick 50 and only use them for 4 years at replaceable production or draft a quality starter you don’t need to replace for 8-10 years? 

Just as you said, this is a little snake oil salesman.  Is the guy I'm replacing that pick 50 with going to give the same production?  Is the long term quality starter going to make more than a replaceable production while making more?  

Those two players I pointed out are Van Jefferson and Kendrick Bourne FWIW.  

6 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

There’s too many variables. Do we have a perfect team? Then cool. Let’s do it. What’s our OL contract situation look like? How’s our DL? What about our DB top level talent? 

Wow I disagree with what you are playing here.

Let me give you something to mull on:

We suck at drafting CB's.  Now I know you think the cap basically doesn't exist, but you have to operate within the confines and guaranteed money has to be accounted for at some point.  But if you know you can draft a WR2 or WR3 who will produce what you need from the spot, and it allows $4mil savings under the cap that you could put towards signing a top level CB, which do you do?  Draft the WR and sign the CB or sign a WR for more and the same production and be unable to bring in the better corner?

[warfelg]

3 minutes ago, 43M said:

I may be misunderstanding your argument, but player X is on their rookie deal and you dont actually know if thats the type of output youre going to get from them in the NFL, whereas player Y costs more because he has proven he can produce those numbers in the NFL.

You cant just assume production.   You COULD get Golden Tate....you could also get Devin Smith.

You are misunderstanding my argument.  No you can't assume production, even from a FA (we know that well too lately).  

My argument is would you rather draft WR you know you are better at scouting to have the space to sign CB which you are worse at drafting OR have to split you money for a WR and a lesser CB.

Thinking in terms of players:

If you could draft a WR to sign a CB like Carlton Davis or you could draft a NT while signing Cedrick Wilson and Mackensie Alexander?

[Dcash4]

4 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Just as you said, this is a little snake oil salesman

I was just returning the favor 😉

6 minutes ago, warfelg said:

We suck at drafting CB's

So pay for a CB? There’s still 19-20 more positions in your squad you need to add talent too. And if your so good at finding okay receivers…find those qualities further down the draft board and develop one. We actually have been pretty good at identifying talent at the top end of DL and OL too but the fact we have just ignored it with guys who never made a second contract have lead us to here.

10 out of 10 times I would pay that $5m in your first example for the same mediocre production and hope I’m landing my next pro-bowl/all pro talent with my top 50 pick. 

Second round picks are still where you can find super valuable players. I’m not wasting that on okay. 

[warfelg]

33 minutes ago, Dcash4 said:

I was just returning the favor 😉

So pay for a CB? There’s still 19-20 more positions in your squad you need to add talent too. And if your so good at finding okay receivers…find those qualities further down the draft board and develop one. We actually have been pretty good at identifying talent at the top end of DL and OL too but the fact we have just ignored it with guys who never made a second contract have lead us to here.

10 out of 10 times I would pay that $5m in your first example for the same mediocre production and hope I’m landing my next pro-bowl/all pro talent with my top 50 pick. 

Second round picks are still where you can find super valuable players. I’m not wasting that on okay. 

FWIW I'm not saying you continually ditch guys no matter what.  But let's say next year the FO sees DJ as a WR2, and they want to pay him at max $8mil per year AAV.  Then the Texans come along and offer him $13mil per year AAV to be their WR1.  Do you honestly think you are better off paying him than turning to the draft to replace him and signing someone else, somewhere else?

If you can retain the guy you do it.  But my point being is if we need to use the draft and a top 100 pick 1 time every 3 years to replace a guy, that's about the right cycle and it's not a problem at all.

[Cbrunn]

Wan'dale Robinson is impressive in this game against Iowa 

I'd be ok with him as a mid round WR