MOSteelers56 Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 45 minutes ago, bigben07MVP said: https://x.com/steelersdepot/status/1778429319741857957?s=46&t=qcRuXjH2St1oLeP8Aph7Og Matt Miller basically guarantees Steelers go OL in round 1. I agree. I think we're all pretty much in agreement. I'd rather not reach for a guy like Guyton at 20, though. I'm hopeful for Mims, Latham, or maybe Barton. If we miss out on the "premium" OT prospects(my opinion at least), I hope we trade back and get someone like Frazier in the late 1st. 26 minutes ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/Alex_Kozora/status/1778427451451847002 That's pretty wild Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 11 Author Share Posted April 11 6 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said: I think we're all pretty much in agreement. I'd rather not reach for a guy like Guyton at 20, though. I'm hopeful for Mims, Latham, or maybe Barton. If we miss out on the "premium" OT prospects(my opinion at least), I hope we trade back and get someone like Frazier in the late 1st. That's pretty wild Frazier will be there in the second. In fact ESPN just dropped their sim and it’s really cool. Tells you the chances they will be there and chances they last to the next pick. I was able to take Frazier at 60 and he has a 60% change of being there. 20 Troy Fautnau OT 45% chance 60 Zach Frazier C 59% chance 84 Mike Sainristil CB 35% chance 98 Brenden Rice WR 65% chance 119 Spencer Rattler QB 52% chance 133 MJ Devonshire CB 89% chance 178 Curtis Jacobs LB 37% chance 195 Jalen Coker WR 84% chance https://espnanalytics.com/draft-sim/ Trades aren’t offered but you can make them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armsteeld Posted April 11 Share Posted April 11 Denzel Mims interview.... https://t.co/p21agPISST First off, what made you decide to sign with the Steelers this offseason? Well, I just felt like it was a good fit. A new beginning. Coach T. – everyone told me he was a great coach and when I spoke to him at the combine I could see that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 https://x.com/dlolley_pgh/status/1778772764951752783?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA Very interesting thought process here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 6 minutes ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/dlolley_pgh/status/1778772764951752783?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA Very interesting thought process here. I kind of already figured Friermuth and maybe even Washington would have expanded roles in the pass game next year. We still need to add at least one more decent WR, though. If Pickens went down, we'd have nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 12 minutes ago, 43M said: I kind of already figured Friermuth and maybe even Washington would have expanded roles in the pass game next year. We still need to add at least one more decent WR, though. If Pickens went down, we'd have nothing. Agreed. But it’s an interesting thought. If you are running the ball a ton, you best asset is the TE in the passing game because they are the ones run game will open space for. Effectively they are the second most important member of the pass game. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben07MVP Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 1 hour ago, 43M said: I kind of already figured Friermuth and maybe even Washington would have expanded roles in the pass game next year. We still need to add at least one more decent WR, though. If Pickens went down, we'd have nothing. That’s why I’m high on a guy like Polk on day 2. He’s not an elite athlete or separator but he’s savvy, tough as hell, can block, and do all the little things at a high level. We don’t necessarily need a high volume guy at WR2. Think Robert Woods. And I love the idea of Washington being more involved in the pass game. He has the potential to be a mismatch nightmare and he’s a tank after the catch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywlker32 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 39 minutes ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/dlolley_pgh/status/1778772764951752783?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA Very interesting thought process here. Yea, I don't think this should be a surprise to anyone really. We will likely have at least 2 TEs on the field most of the time based on his history of his offense. One TE will be in-line (likely Washington) and one will be a "move" TE (Friermuth). The move TE is effectively then our slot WR. We will still need a reliable number 2 that will likely rotate with a H-back type (Heyward/Pruitt). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 5 minutes ago, skywlker32 said: Yea, I don't think this should be a surprise to anyone really. We will likely have at least 2 TEs on the field most of the time based on his history of his offense. One TE will be in-line (likely Washington) and one will be a "move" TE (Friermuth). The move TE is effectively then our slot WR. We will still need a reliable number 2 that will likely rotate with a H-back type (Heyward/Pruitt). I'm assuming you mean Number 2 TE, which is Washington. If you mean WR2 - I feel like what's being alluded to is WR2 isn't that important because your move TE, in this case Muth, is effectively your WR2 in terms of role but not where he lines up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywlker32 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 6 minutes ago, warfelg said: I'm assuming you mean Number 2 TE, which is Washington. If you mean WR2 - I feel like what's being alluded to is WR2 isn't that important because your move TE, in this case Muth, is effectively your WR2 in terms of role but not where he lines up. I would think we will run a decent bit of 2TE, 2WR, single back sets, so we would still need someone at WR2 that can contribute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 3 minutes ago, skywlker32 said: I would think we will run a decent bit of 2TE, 2WR, single back sets, so we would still need someone at WR2 that can contribute. So I feel like that’s the point of the article. Don’t expect the WR2 classic production to come from a WR. It will be a TE (Muth) while the WR2 gives you more classic slot production. Which if that’s the plan then Jefferson/Watkins/Rookie can give you that easily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywlker32 Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 15 minutes ago, warfelg said: So I feel like that’s the point of the article. Don’t expect the WR2 classic production to come from a WR. It will be a TE (Muth) while the WR2 gives you more classic slot production. Which if that’s the plan then Jefferson/Watkins/Rookie can give you that easily. Same page, "can contribute" just means someone filling a #3/#4 receiving threat role. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben07MVP Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 (edited) https://x.com/steelernation/status/1778835487987208371?s=46&t=qcRuXjH2St1oLeP8Aph7Og Poni “reporting” the Steelers are discussing trading for Tee Higgins Edited April 12 by bigben07MVP 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben07MVP Posted April 12 Share Posted April 12 29 minutes ago, warfelg said: So I feel like that’s the point of the article. Don’t expect the WR2 classic production to come from a WR. It will be a TE (Muth) while the WR2 gives you more classic slot production. Which if that’s the plan then Jefferson/Watkins/Rookie can give you that easily. Are you suggesting we do not need to add another WR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 12 Author Share Posted April 12 6 minutes ago, bigben07MVP said: Are you suggesting we do not need to add another WR? No - if you look at that grouping I do have rookie listed in there. More suggesting no matter who WR2 is Muth may end up with better stats than them because the offensive priority for touches by group will go RB, WR1, TE1, TE2, WR2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.