bigben07MVP Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 https://x.com/adamschefter/status/1783084094001172969?s=46&t=qcRuXjH2St1oLeP8Aph7Og Interesting. 92% of Centers drafted in the first round get a 2nd contract with the team that drafted them. Next highest is 59% for OTs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 6 hours ago, 43M said: I dont think it will be that hard to find at least a Dan Moore caliber RT before the season to allow Jones to move to LT...but maybe thats me. If you are talking the draft, I think there's a bunch of us in agreement. I think if you are talking FA, the reason why I'm ok with Dan Moore is the cap spend it would have taken just to know before the draft that Jones would be at LT is not worth that impact, because this would likely be about $4-6MM to do this. IMO this means you are spending just to spend because you would still be taking OT early in this draft. If you went in early on that market you are talking $10MM+ to get that, which also means you are likely taking OT off your board enough that you don't get a quality player there. Anywho, long winded way to say I'm with you if you are talking via the draft. All it would take is the OT draft to be better at RT than Moore is at LT. I think the camp battle should go with the LT being where Jones gets 60% of the work, Moore 40%, Rookie gets 70% of the work at RT and Jones gets 30% of the work there (talking first team reps). 6 hours ago, 43M said: I dont think it will be that difficult to find a stop gap C before the season, even if its a lateral move from Cole....or even Cole himself. I also wouldn't be shocked if a mid rd center beat a guy like Cole out. Cole and Allen are two sides of the same coin. I think if we get a C we feel good about (Khan did say that he feels there's a handful of starters) then we don't need to bring in one of the stop gap guys. Because if Herbig is "penciled" in at starter, he was the backup last year, so him being the backup last year puts him in position to be the backup again. I think the only change there would be Anderson becoming improved at C through last year. As for the pick, I think that handful of players that can start would be immediate upgrades over Cole, making bringing him back just a waste of time and cap. Also - I just posted above a tweet for an article that we are 25th in draft capital on OL from 2019 to now. Below us are (in order): Bills (good line), LV (bad line), Rams (good line), Broncos (average line), KC (good-ish line?), SF (great line), Colts (good-ish line). Effectively, us and the Raiders stick out like sore thumbs here for lack of investment in the OL but having bad lines. What's funny is if you go up a bit you see Dallas, Detroit, Cleveland, Washington, Arizona, so only 1 more team joins us there. I know spending picks on it doesn't guarantee a better line but it's concerning that you have a bad line and are not investing. 6 hours ago, 43M said: CB and WR are the positions I question the most. I think we draft someone day 2 and bring in another vet before the season. They could potentially even bring back former Steelers like Patrick Peterson or Steven Nelson. There also seems to be some decent vet CB options every year towards the end of preseason when rosters are being finalized. Ok, so I know for sure I'm going to be in a HUGE minority on this, but a healthy Jackson is good man. I watched that tape again from 2020-2022 before the Achilles injury and, man that is a good corner right there. Last year was his first year off his Achilles and everyone is always a little slower off of that. But I think a healthy Jackson will be better for our defense than DJ would have been for our offense. 6 hours ago, 43M said: WR is odd because we have exactly one guy who has proven anything, limited quality vet options left in free agency and while its a deep WR class, its doubtful we get one that makes the type immediate impact we may need. Then again, Id rather take my chances than laughably overpay for a WR the way some teams did. As for WR, I understand the concern, but I think there's a trade coming or an early pick. This draft is really deep at WR so I wouldn't mind that either. I think the thing about drafting a WR potential is that this offense is going to be a run and deep pass offense. Muth is our possession WR/route runner, Pickens is going to take the mid-depth action, that means a rookie really needs to come in and block well, along with a few deep routes time to time. That means Watkins, Jefferson, and Austin will be in a battle for a "sprinkle in" type guy who is mostly a slot but get's some outside snaps along with being the 'gadget' guy. I think Watkins would end up being the outside guy looking in unless he can also be a gunner. 6 hours ago, 43M said: Its funny being on the more "optimistic" side for one. And its not even that Im necessarily optimistic right now. I just want to see how the draft shakes out before I really critique the approach, because it could range from "Good draft, now lets see who else they bring in over the next few months" to "What in the bloody hell are they ******* doing?" And even at that, I think that we need to see through the end of September before we hit the "bloody hell" moment. Lets say we are the team that feels like Fautanu is a C, and we draft him along with moving him, we won't know until that point if it's working or not. I'm optimistic because we've had so many years of poor drafting that this is going to take time. Even though we know RT, C, CB, WR are some big areas of need, OGx2, DL, and RB are coming up on you quick along with QB still being an issue. So we might be looking at a similar situation next year too where we're going into the draft with "holes" that need to be plugged. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 25 minutes ago, bigben07MVP said: It’s a good point. I think @Ward4HOF is correct in that we can “agree” to the trade without announcing a contract restructure elsewhere. I do not think we would have to restructure both Highsmith and Minkah though. And fwiw, Aiyuk’s cap hit would go down after the new contract extension with us that would be agreed to before the trade. And the rumor is no one is trading for Aiyuk without an extension. Basically there's a lot of FO's that thought the Ridley deal was the way of the future for WR trades, but after the way he "screwed" ATL by waiting to sign, then NE felt "screwed" because his waiting for the deadline meant Tennessee could jump in, teams are hesitant to have deals be dependent on extensions. We would really only have to offer up a restructure for one of them, because you need about $5MM for the draft class, we always keep about $6-7MM for in season emergencies. I really wonder if there's an agreement with Cam for an extension with void years in place in case this happens, but they won't do it without a trade. I really think that's what makes the most sense to have happen TBH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, bigben07MVP said: https://x.com/adamschefter/status/1783084094001172969?s=46&t=qcRuXjH2St1oLeP8Aph7Og Interesting. 92% of Centers drafted in the first round get a 2nd contract with the team that drafted them. Next highest is 59% for OTs. OL overall having the most. CB, RB, S, TE, WR being the least is actually kinda shocking. Just kinda looking through out timeframe with it our 1st round picks in this study have been: Plaxico Burress - WR, Casey Hampton - DT, Kendall Simmons - OG, Troy Polamalu - S, Ben Roethlisberger - QB, Heath Miller - TE, Santonio Holmes - WR, Lawrence Timmons - LB, Rashard Mendenhall - RB, Evander Hood - DT, Maurkice Pouncey - C, Cam Heyward - DT, David Decastro - G, Jarvis Jones - EDGE, Ryan Shazier - LB, Bug Dupree - EDGE, Artie Burns - CB, TJ Watt - EDGE, Terrell Edmunds - S, Devin Bush - ILB I know in one case there was extenuating circumstances (Shazier), but average across all positions hit rate is 43%. 11/20 puts it at just above average. By positions: QB - 1/1 RB - 0/1 WR - 0/2 TE - 1/1 OG - 2/2 C - 1/1 DT - 1/3 EDGE - 1/3 LB - 1/3 CB - 0/1 S - 1/2 Didn't really beat the odds anywhere, had a few spots of total failure. EDIT: An interesting thing, looking at a cross section of the OL taken, it's interesting because if you are taking interior OL, there's something really special about those guys then. And OT I think is so high because often times if those guys fail out there, teams will extend them and move them to RT or into OG making it much more likely they are retained. I really think that goes to show though that your best bet on building a successful team in the draft, you go to the trenches first. Edited April 24 by warfelg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigben07MVP Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 https://x.com/adamschefter/status/1783109300644159924?s=46&t=qcRuXjH2St1oLeP8Aph7Og Officially not picking up the 5th year option on Fields, but we knew that. Big question is will they sign him to a mini-extension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 https://x.com/insidebirds/status/1783119153244651534?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA Good read on cash vs cap and hope the Steelers stay as one of the “of interest” teams in the study. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 13 minutes ago, warfelg said: https://x.com/insidebirds/status/1783119153244651534?s=46&t=xd5QJpZuXv2k7qD0xqd6aA Good read on cash vs cap and hope the Steelers stay as one of the “of interest” teams in the study. Interesting. for the Steelers, it shows the owner's either lack of cash or willingness to spend cash. That is just my take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Tony Pauline is saying that Zach Frazier at 51 is a most likely landing spot. Jeremy Fowler saying Courtland Sutton to the Steelers is a move to watch. Sounds like Suttons issue is more about GTD money than actual money. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 1 minute ago, warfelg said: Tony Pauline is saying that Zach Frazier at 51 is a most likely landing spot. Jeremy Fowler saying Courtland Sutton to the Steelers is a move to watch. Sounds like Suttons issue is more about GTD money than actual money. He fits what A. Smith looks for in WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 The 33rd team final mock for the Steelers: 20 traded straight up for Brandon Aiyuk 51 Blake Fisher OT Notre Dame 84 Jaden Hicks S Washington State 98 Sedrick Van Pran C Georgia 119 DJ James CB Auburn 178 Ty’Ron Hopper LB Missouri 195 Xavier Thomas Edge Clemson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chieferific Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 4 minutes ago, warfelg said: Tony Pauline is saying that Zach Frazier at 51 is a most likely landing spot. Jeremy Fowler saying Courtland Sutton to the Steelers is a move to watch. Sounds like Suttons issue is more about GTD money than actual money. That would be great! FWIW, almost every Mock I've done has Frazier going to either the Chargers or the Panthers before pick #51. I know, it's just a simulator but apparently there are OC needs in LA and Carolina. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 5 minutes ago, jebrick said: He fits what A. Smith looks for in WR. Here's a though I've been kicking around. I rather give up 98 and sign Sutton to a new 3 year deal at $17.5MM a year with high GTD money over giving up 20 and signing Aiyuk to a 4-5 year deal at $25+MM a year in high GTD money. Why? Trading for and signing Aiyuk to WR1 money most likely means moving on from Pickens at the end of his contract, so you better hope he balls out and you can move him for a 1st or 2nd. Trading for Sutton is a lower entry cost, and he's likely then on a WR2+ contract which means Pickens is an affordable WR1 and you can have both guys. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 4 minutes ago, Chieferific said: That would be great! FWIW, almost every Mock I've done has Frazier going to either the Chargers or the Panthers before pick #51. I know, it's just a simulator but apparently there are OC needs in LA and Carolina. Chargers signed Bradley Boseman and are moving Corey Linsley to C. Most likely they would draft one later or look for a G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jebrick Posted April 24 Share Posted April 24 Somehow, the Steelers are going to get a Wr that fits A. Smith's scheme. That means big 220 Wr that can block because in Smith's offense, everyone blocks. This draft is thin on those types unless they take one at 20 or trade up from 51. Brian Thomas Jr. Adonai Mitchell Xavier Legette Javon Baker The top 3 will not last until 51. Maybe add Coleman to the list but he does not offer much. Then we have the flyers that will fit much later in the draft Bub Means David White, Jr. Cole Burgess Ogie-Kellogg Josh Cephus Luke McCaffrey Cornelius Johnson Ryan Flournoy Jalen Coker Casey Washington So trading for Sutton would be much better (IMHO) in this draft that spending a high pick when there are other needs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warfelg Posted April 24 Author Share Posted April 24 Quote @MoveTheSticks · 1m Looking at possible teams for an Aiyuk trade and I keep coming back to the same two- Colts & Jags. If someone takes Bowers before 20, I could see the Colts giving up 15 and 47 for Aiyuk and 31. 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.