State of the Steelers

[warfelg]

2 hours ago, Ward4HOF said:

At the end of the day, will Fields provide more wins than Pickett + an All-Pro-level Free Agent or maybe 2 x Pro-Bowl-level FAs that we can 'invest' that extra $26M we would not be paying Fields in 2025??

Personally, I believe so.  Why's that you ask? Multiple reasons:

~ If you trade for Fields, picking up the 5th year option isn't the only thing you can do.  I look at the Jordan Love extension as the template.  They effectively took the 5th year option, spread the hit over two years while putting in a ton of incentives to hit.

~After this year you have to make a decision on Kenny's 5th year option which looks like it might be in the $28mil range.  And in that year we got starters in DJ, Cam, James Daniels, Elandon Roberts, Pat Freiermuth up.  On top of that you potentially have Najee Harris.  In the contributing and role player category you have Warren, Kazee, Neal up for contract.  Then you got some deeper guys like Nate Harbig, Dan Moore, Isaiahh Loudermilk, Trenton Thompson, Darius Rush, some of which look like guys you might want to keep and some you would let go.

~Given the fact you can backload contracts, bringing in Fields doesn't mean you are giving up the access to those Pro-Bowl level FA's.  In fact, waiting a year and doing nothing likely means you won't get those guys IMO.  Even if Kenny ends up starting after a trade for Fields (unlikely IMO) then at least those FA's know you are serious about finding solutions at the QB position.  IMO bringing in Tannehill and drafting a late round guys would tell FA's we aren't that serious about it, especially on the heels of the owner saying we need better QB play.

2 hours ago, Ward4HOF said:

There's no doubt that Fields would infuse some excitement into our offense, but also, likely more turnovers. I'm personally not convinced that the end result would include that elusive Playoff win, or a trip to the Superbowl...

I would take the more turnovers for the unpredictability it brings the offense.  Kenny is so conservative it's costing us points.

Also - we talk about Kenny being saddled with bad play calling - you realize Justin Fields delt with the same thing.  His OC spammed WR screen calls to Mooney and Moore with deep shots here and there, along with their run game being somehow even more unimaginative than ours.  Fields had a high INT% trying to make something happen while Kenny had a low INT% because he would give up on something happening.  Additionally, I haven't combed the tape do do this but I saw at least 2 instances this year where a Fields INT was off a WR's hands and 1 where the WR ran the wrong route.  Not all INT's are 

2 hours ago, Ward4HOF said:

It's 'Cherry-Picking' for sure, in both instances, but the point is, neither QB shows the propensity to be able to sustain quality QB play for more than a 1/4 of games played, and outside of those, their QB play leaves a lot to be desired. 

Ok, and what's interesting is you can kind of work on this the opposite way.  In there comparative stats of taking the good out, you effectively have 10 games each (Justin had 11 but left the game really early due to injury):

Fields - 184/306 for 1945 yards, 8 TD, 8 INT, 60% passing, 2.6 TD%, 2.6 INT%

Pickett - 170/282 for 1722 yards, 6 TD, 4 INT, 60% passing, 2.1TD%, 1.4 INT%

Now we mix in the running:

Fields - 109 rushes, 575 yards, 4 TD, 6.9 yards per rush, 1 TD every 25 carries

Pickett - 34 rushes, 46 yards, 1 TD, 1.4 yards per rush, 1 TD every 34 carries

So per game:

Fields: 18/31, 194 yards, 0.8 Passing TD, 0.8 INT, 11 rushes, 57 yards, 0.4 TD

Pickett: 17/28, 172 yards, 0.6 passing TD, 0.4 INT, 3 rushes, 5 yards, 0 TD

Roughly, that's 1 more TD per game which takes us from 17.9 PPG to 24.9 PPG.  That alone would have taken us from 24th in PPG for 8th in PPG.  To me, that's why even if you think their 'bad' or 'average' is comparable to each other, Justin could bring just that little bit more.  FWIW Chicago was at 21.2 PPG this past year, and when you add in defense you can see where the issue is because we allowed defensively 19.7 PPG and Chicago allowed 22.3.

[AFF]

28 minutes ago, 43M said:

So, basically, your logic for wanting to trade a 2nd round pick for FIelds is because....he isnt as horrible as Kenny Pickett?

No….im ok with trading for Fields for several reason and ill keep it short.

1)His upside which he’s shown(at times) despite being in an equally bad situation with the Bears.

2)His contract is basically 2 years/$31.5 million due to 5th year option…that’s $25.6 mill option for 2025 would rank currently 14th in the NFL and probably go down with Tuas/Daks/ a few other getting new deals this offseason.

Even factoring in say a 2nd round pick, going after a high upside QB like Fields, that cost isn’t bad at all

3)The team has to make a choice…either go trade the farm with multiple 1sts 2s or 3s and go get their guy and still not be anything special this year….or……go with Pickett/vet like Tannehill and your still punting the season(while still getting OL and other pieces for the team) but then you still have to trade the farm for a guy in 2025 cause the team has too much talent to tank.

By the time, if the new QB is legit a franchise guy, your having to pay Pickens/JPJ and Watt is only under contract for 24-25 and Minkah will be coming up for a new deal.

I think Fields is the best option save for going after Cousins if you want the Steelers to try to win now(Cousins just now) and maybe get their guy for the future.

[warfelg]

2 minutes ago, C$! said:

I don't know that it's that, but while Fields may be a flashier player, I think people who don't want Fields view it as a marginal improvement at best while they will have to commit financially. I think we all agree Fields makes the Steelers more exciting but how much better the team will be is up for debate. Couple that with acquiring Fields will also require a sizable financial commitment can make people very skittish 

I am on the fence on the issue but I get why people are not over the moon about Fields. However, with this specific example, there was that comparison to Lamar Jackson and people are pointing out that those 20-game stats are skewed. 

 

I wouldn’t say I personally am over the moon about Fields, rather I think Fields ceiling is much higher than Picketts, and with limited routes to getting that while building the rest of the team I’m willing to take that shot.

[Ward4HOF]

18 minutes ago, warfelg said:

I’m not calling you out.  More so you are both saying they are inconsistent but your saying take Fields best away to show it and Ward is saying focus on Kenny’s good to show it and finding the humor in that.

I think you misunderstood, but I can understand how I wasn't clear, which is how I tried to clear up in my next post.  What I am saying is that Fields had 2 games, when he exploded, (...and he had a 3rd, actually, that was pretty darn good as well...), but the rest of his season was 'middling', and not really much better than Kenny.  Yet Kenny had a similar percentage of the season, that was quite good, but the remainder, like Fields, is middling. 

My point, was, what's the difference between the two, as far as quality of the QB is concerned, and potential for winning a Playoff game, or even getting to the Super Bowl?? 

Sure, Fields is more exciting, but he suffered quite a few poor games--he was inconsistent, just as Kenny is.  The difference being however, roughly $26M spent over the 2024/2025 seasons...and...that's with us giving up at a minimum, a day 2 pick in 2024 draft.

Essentially, I'm attempting to point out that I do not have confidence that Fields will take us any further than Kenny will, in the postseason (...which is different than me saying I think Kenny is as good as Fields, or that Fields isn't better than Kenny--NOT what I am saying).  So, we pay an extra $26M + a Day 2 Pick, thus hampering our efforts to make our team truly better.  

So, what it boils down to, is that I feel our Day 2 pick, plus up to $26M in free agents we can pay for, have a better chance of making us more competitive, with Kenny, than ditching Kenny, for Fields, alone.

I hope I'm wrong if we do bring in Fields, but simply, again, I'm not confident in the Fields acquisition scenario.

[Ward4HOF]

8 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Also - we talk about Kenny being saddled with bad play calling - you realize Justin Fields delt with the same thing.  His OC spammed WR screen calls to Mooney and Moore with deep shots here and there, along with their run game being somehow even more unimaginative than ours.  Fields had a high INT% trying to make something happen while Kenny had a low INT% because he would give up on something happening.  Additionally, I haven't combed the tape do do this but I saw at least 2 instances this year where a Fields INT was off a WR's hands and 1 where the WR ran the wrong route.  Not all INT's are 

Understood, and agree.  I didn't bring up the Bears' team issues as I did with Kenny, but I am actually taking that into account with my opinion.  I do understand he had as bad, if not worse support structure than Kenny did.

[MOSteelers56]

As someone on the fence in regards to Fields, I'm loving this discussion. You're all bringing up fantastic points! 

[Ward4HOF]

22 minutes ago, warfelg said:

Personally, I believe so.  Why's that you ask? Multiple reasons:

~ If you trade for Fields, picking up the 5th year option isn't the only thing you can do.  I look at the Jordan Love extension as the template.  They effectively took the 5th year option, spread the hit over two years while putting in a ton of incentives to hit.

~After this year you have to make a decision on Kenny's 5th year option which looks like it might be in the $28mil range.  And in that year we got starters in DJ, Cam, James Daniels, Elandon Roberts, Pat Freiermuth up.  On top of that you potentially have Najee Harris.  In the contributing and role player category you have Warren, Kazee, Neal up for contract.  Then you got some deeper guys like Nate Harbig, Dan Moore, Isaiahh Loudermilk, Trenton Thompson, Darius Rush, some of which look like guys you might want to keep and some you would let go.

~Given the fact you can backload contracts, bringing in Fields doesn't mean you are giving up the access to those Pro-Bowl level FA's.  In fact, waiting a year and doing nothing likely means you won't get those guys IMO.  Even if Kenny ends up starting after a trade for Fields (unlikely IMO) then at least those FA's know you are serious about finding solutions at the QB position.  IMO bringing in Tannehill and drafting a late round guys would tell FA's we aren't that serious about it, especially on the heels of the owner saying we need better QB play.

I would take the more turnovers for the unpredictability it brings the offense.  Kenny is so conservative it's costing us points.

Also - we talk about Kenny being saddled with bad play calling - you realize Justin Fields delt with the same thing.  His OC spammed WR screen calls to Mooney and Moore with deep shots here and there, along with their run game being somehow even more unimaginative than ours.  Fields had a high INT% trying to make something happen while Kenny had a low INT% because he would give up on something happening.  Additionally, I haven't combed the tape do do this but I saw at least 2 instances this year where a Fields INT was off a WR's hands and 1 where the WR ran the wrong route.  Not all INT's are 

Ok, and what's interesting is you can kind of work on this the opposite way.  In there comparative stats of taking the good out, you effectively have 10 games each (Justin had 11 but left the game really early due to injury):

Fields - 184/306 for 1945 yards, 8 TD, 8 INT, 60% passing, 2.6 TD%, 2.6 INT%

Pickett - 170/282 for 1722 yards, 6 TD, 4 INT, 60% passing, 2.1TD%, 1.4 INT%

Now we mix in the running:

Fields - 109 rushes, 575 yards, 4 TD, 6.9 yards per rush, 1 TD every 25 carries

Pickett - 34 rushes, 46 yards, 1 TD, 1.4 yards per rush, 1 TD every 34 carries

So per game:

Fields: 18/31, 194 yards, 0.8 Passing TD, 0.8 INT, 11 rushes, 57 yards, 0.4 TD

Pickett: 17/28, 172 yards, 0.6 passing TD, 0.4 INT, 3 rushes, 5 yards, 0 TD

Roughly, that's 1 more TD per game which takes us from 17.9 PPG to 24.9 PPG.  That alone would have taken us from 24th in PPG for 8th in PPG.  To me, that's why even if you think their 'bad' or 'average' is comparable to each other, Justin could bring just that little bit more.  FWIW Chicago was at 21.2 PPG this past year, and when you add in defense you can see where the issue is because we allowed defensively 19.7 PPG and Chicago allowed 22.3.

While this might be true, either would benefit from better OL play, and coaching.  I think Kenny will be able to prosper as well as Fields in this scenario, even without the rushing component.  I just don't think Kenny + Day 2 pick + FA spending (regardless, how you stretch things out, etc, the money is still being spent, and your scenario just kicks the can down the road a bit, limiting us further...) is less effective than bringing in Fields. Plus, I don't envision Kenny as our long-term solution...just one more year, is all, in hopes of having a better option over the next year to improve via FA or draft, at the QB position. 

Anyway, as I also mentioned, I'd be happy to be wrong, if we bring in Fields, and I'll still support him, and won't be massively upset if that's the road we take.  I just don't think it all will matter enough, in the end, and think it will hamper us more than help.  Again...hope I'm wrong!

Edited February 29 by Ward4HOF

[43M]

15 minutes ago, AFF said:

I think Fields is the best option save for going after Cousins if you want the Steelers to try to win now(Cousins just now) and maybe get their guy for the future.

Ahh...there it is.

I (personally) do not think the Steelers should be in win now mode.   At least not in terms of taking unnecessary immediate risks to the detriment of future success.   

No QB we could get this offseason is making us a championship team.

I respect your reasoning, but I just dont see the same upside you and others see.

I see an occasional highlight reel player, but not a long term franchise QB.

[Ward4HOF]

1 minute ago, 43M said:

Ahh...there it is.

I (personally) do not think the Steelers should be in win now mode.   At least not in terms of taking unnecessary immediate risks to the detriment of future success.   

No QB we could get this offseason is making us a championship team.

I respect your reasoning, but I just dont see the same upside you and others see.

I see an occasional highlight reel player, but not a long term franchise QB.

Completely agree...spot on...

Another concern I have, is that the NFL is a business, and yes, bringing in Fields would bump merchandise, advertising, so on and so forth, so I won't be surprised if we don't make a strong effort, which likely will include having to 'outbid' teams like Atlanta, etc., for his services, which will no doubt ensure we spend a 2nd Rd pick, instead of 3rd, plus likely a late-Day-2/early-Day 3 draft pick in 2025.

[warfelg]

5 minutes ago, 43M said:

Ahh...there it is.

I (personally) do not think the Steelers should be in win now mode.   At least not in terms of taking unnecessary immediate risks to the detriment of future success.   

No QB we could get this offseason is making us a championship team.

I respect your reasoning, but I just dont see the same upside you and others see.

I see an occasional highlight reel player, but not a long term franchise QB.

I disagree with his reasoning that it’s to remain in win now, mine is there’s limited avenues to talented upside players like Fields. With FA/Draft being bad next year, and impossible to move up this year, I rather take the risk now on something like this now as opposed to wait for the solution like we did with Kenny.

[warfelg]

3 minutes ago, Ward4HOF said:

Completely agree...spot on...

Another concern I have, is that the NFL is a business, and yes, bringing in Fields would bump merchandise, advertising, so on and so forth, so I won't be surprised if we don't make a strong effort, which likely will include having to 'outbid' teams like Atlanta, etc., for his services, which will no doubt ensure we spend a 2nd Rd pick, instead of 3rd, plus likely a late-Day-2/early-Day 3 draft pick in 2025.

There’s rumor out there that ATL’s interest level is going to depend on talks to move up in the draft and what happens with Ridley.  With Chicago looking to move Fields before FA, ATL won’t know if they have that 2nd from the Ridley trade so it could take them out of it.  Given how high the Raiders 2nd is (the only other team interested) and their own roster construction issue, they might not be willing to invest a high pick in Fields.

That’s why a few pages ago I suggested a trade structured like Ridley’s so both teams feel like they got a win.

[jebrick]

9 minutes ago, 43M said:

Ahh...there it is.

I (personally) do not think the Steelers should be in win now mode.   At least not in terms of taking unnecessary immediate risks to the detriment of future success.   

No QB we could get this offseason is making us a championship team.

I respect your reasoning, but I just dont see the same upside you and others see.

I see an occasional highlight reel player, but not a long term franchise QB.

While I totally agree with you on the Steelers needing to be in build mode vs win now mode, I have had fans from other teams think the Steelers are a QB away from really contending.  Some of that I can see.  The current Steeler playbook would sink Joe Montana.  I really hope that Smith throws everything out.  In that line they should be in rebuilding mode.

[AFF]

I’ve brought this up before but the Steelers won’t be able to just draft a QB in the 5-10 picks in 2025 even if they went with Pickett/vet…too much talent to tank.

Theyre going to have to trade a ton of picks or pay an upper tier vet that somehow makes it to FA….theyre going to have to make a risky move regardless unless Pickett busts out.

[C$!]

4 minutes ago, jebrick said:

While I totally agree with you on the Steelers needing to be in build mode vs win now mode, I have had fans from other teams think the Steelers are a QB away from really contending.  Some of that I can see.  The current Steeler playbook would sink Joe Montana.  I really hope that Smith throws everything out.  In that line they should be in rebuilding mode.

There is some logic to that though... I mean despite their QB issues, the team has not completely bottomed out, and have made or been in playoff contention. Maybe getting even an average QB might make this team a more dangerous and serious contender. 

Just think how fresh the D will be if the Steelers are going 3 and out 12 times a game. 

[jebrick]

Just now, C$! said:

There is some logic to that though... I mean despite their QB issues, the team has not completely bottomed out, and have made or been in playoff contention. Maybe getting even an average QB might make this team a more dangerous and serious contender. 

Just think how fresh the D will be if the Steelers are going 3 and out 12 times a game. 

The key ( to me) is the playbook.  If they throw out the playbook then KP, Fields, Cousins and Joe Montana are in the same situation.  In that case I would bet on Joe and Cousins.  If they keep the playbook then it is a lost cause.