Hitman Mock 1.0 1-26-18

[MDSteeler1971]

Like the players but we do not have a 4th or 6th round pick!

[warfelg]

On 1/26/2018 at 7:12 PM, Steeler Hitman said:

We do not stay in base 3-4 a lot and are in Nickel probably 60% of the time. However, my question is (rhetorical) how did you like our run defense?  Despite playing Nickel, we could also play a hybrid 3-4 which is basically a 4-3. Despite being a more traditional NG type, we can use a big body next to Hargraves. He is getting eaten up in the running game and is playing out of position at least 35% of the time. Many say no, no, no to NG high, but if we can get a talent that can do what Casey Hampton did, why not?

 

So let me play devils advocate here:

I'm an opposing OC.  I see that you as the Steelers DC throw out there a 2-4-5 when I go 3 wide, but you put Vati and Hargraves as downlinemen with Watt and Dupree.  Not being scared of those edge rushers, I decide to start hitting you with the deep pass game and screen game when that combo is in there.  And then I move with the hurry up knowing you don't have the pass rush to slow me down.

That's why I keep countering with if we had more solid tacklers it would be more beneficial than a NG who needs a double team.  All a NG who requires a double would be exposing poor tacklers need to make more tackles.

Like this gif is a perfect example of the things I'm talking about:

We got Heyward is unable to fight off a single blocker to take away the cutback lane.  Shazier over pursuit due to a Williams over pursuit.  Williams over pursues because Dupree was doubled and taken off the edge.  Mitchell never fills the gap, and comes in flat with a bad angle on top of that.

I know this is one example, but the question comes back.....how does a NG fix the contain double, and double over pursuit?  It doesn't.

[VigilantZombie]

Warfelg, i agree on the NG issue. However NG is a problem in situations where we need the NG to play well.

[warfelg]

56 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

Warfelg, i agree on the NG issue. However NG is a problem in situations where we need the NG to play well.

So then I ask, if it’s a situational player is that something you really waste a pick in an area where you expect an every down starter at?

[Chieferific]

4 hours ago, warfelg said:

 

So let me play devils advocate here:

I'm an opposing OC.  I see that you as the Steelers DC throw out there a 2-4-5 when I go 3 wide, but you put Vati and Hargraves as downlinemen with Watt and Dupree.  Not being scared of those edge rushers, I decide to start hitting you with the deep pass game and screen game when that combo is in there.  And then I move with the hurry up knowing you don't have the pass rush to slow me down.

That's why I keep countering with if we had more solid tacklers it would be more beneficial than a NG who needs a double team.  All a NG who requires a double would be exposing poor tacklers need to make more tackles.

Like this gif is a perfect example of the things I'm talking about:

We got Heyward is unable to fight off a single blocker to take away the cutback lane.  Shazier over pursuit due to a Williams over pursuit.  Williams over pursues because Dupree was doubled and taken off the edge.  Mitchell never fills the gap, and comes in flat with a bad angle on top of that.

I know this is one example, but the question comes back.....how does a NG fix the contain double, and double over pursuit?  It doesn't.

That play is all around terrible. Terrible recognition. Terrible angles. Terrible pursuit. The Defense was fooled completely. Hayward was way out of position. A better NG could have pushed the pocket and blow up that play. Better LBs would have had better recognition and better pursuit. A better FS would have taken a better angle and had better pursuit. Just a bad bad play defensively. As for the spreading out a 3-4, that's the advantage of the 3-4. Assuming you have a LB and a SS that can cover (we don't) nothing else changes. Remember, if they go No Huddle they have the same personnel on the field that put the 3-4 out there in the first place (presumably 2WR/2TE/1RB.  2 CBs on the WRs. 1 LB on one TE. 1 LB on the RB and the SS on the other TE. A true NT takes up the double team singling up you best OLB to rush the QB. Spreading the Defense out shouldn't matter if the Defense has the right talent. Unfortunately we don't. Now if your argument is that the team is closer to a 4-3 talent wise, that's a different story. 

[warfelg]

18 minutes ago, Chieferific said:

That play is all around terrible. Terrible recognition. Terrible angles. Terrible pursuit. The Defense was fooled completely. Hayward was way out of position. A better NG could have pushed the pocket and blow up that play. Better LBs would have had better recognition and better pursuit. A better FS would have taken a better angle and had better pursuit. Just a bad bad play defensively.

So again.....a NG may or may not have done that.  But better LB's and a better FS would have for sure resulted in a better outcome.

I was really trying to find the gif of Fournettes long run, because it was a great example of the DL doing what it should and LB/S not tackling.  And especially after Shazier went out, there was no LB in there with the ability physically to make up for mistakes mentally.

 

Quote

As for the spreading out a 3-4, that's the advantage of the 3-4. Assuming you have a LB and a SS that can cover (we don't) nothing else changes. Remember, if they go No Huddle they have the same personnel on the field that put the 3-4 out there in the first place (presumably 2WR/2TE/1RB.  2 CBs on the WRs. 1 LB on one TE. 1 LB on the RB and the SS on the other TE. A true NT takes up the double team singling up you best OLB to rush the QB. Spreading the Defense out shouldn't matter if the Defense has the right talent. Unfortunately we don't. Now if your argument is that the team is closer to a 4-3 talent wise, that's a different story. 

Not to sound insulting.....I said 2-4-5.  So 11 personnel by the offense.  Because the original statement was to put Vita and Hargrave in there in the 2-4-5 to help against the run.

[Chieferific]

5 minutes ago, warfelg said:

So again.....a NG may or may not have done that.  But better LB's and a better FS would have for sure resulted in a better outcome.

I was really trying to find the gif of Fournettes long run, because it was a great example of the DL doing what it should and LB/S not tackling.  And especially after Shazier went out, there was no LB in there with the ability physically to make up for mistakes mentally.

 

Not to sound insulting.....I said 2-4-5.  So 11 personnel by the offense.  Because the original statement was to put Vita and Hargrave in there in the 2-4-5 to help against the run.

A NG may or may not have done that. Heyward and Shazier are good players. They made a mental mistake and played themselves out of position. A "better" Rookie will surely make the same types of mental mistakes. So I don't know how valid that argument is. The 2-4-5 is a ridiculous formation. One that I have a hard time seeing any advantage to. The combo of Vita and Hargrave in that formation wouldn't make a difference IMO. Now a formation of Watt/Heyward/Vita/Tuitt/Player to be named later could be special. All in all I agree with most of what you're saying. If talent/impact of the Prospect is similar you take a Safety/LB over a NT if all are needed equally. My issue was with the assertion that the 3-4 can't handle a Spread Offense. One that you apparently weren't making. A mental mistake on my part. 

[jebrick]

The problem on that play and many others is that Watt and Dupree coiuld not hold an edge.  On that Play Watt is controlled by a TE and Heyward cannot get free.  The line is playing 2 gap.  The dline is flowing with the ZBing Oline.  Several holds are not called.  Bottom line.  Watt needs to beat a TE and hold the edge

[Chieferific]

16 minutes ago, jebrick said:

The problem on that play and many others is that Watt and Dupree coiuld not hold an edge.  On that Play Watt is controlled by a TE and Heyward cannot get free.  The line is playing 2 gap.  The dline is flowing with the ZBing Oline.  Several holds are not called.  Bottom line.  Watt needs to beat a TE and hold the edge

That's not Watt. That's Chick. But yes, the same explanation applies.

[VigilantZombie]

7 hours ago, warfelg said:

So then I ask, if it’s a situational player is that something you really waste a pick in an area where you expect an every down starter at?

Hell no.

[Steeler Hitman]

On 1/29/2018 at 8:57 AM, warfelg said:

 

So let me play devils advocate here:

I'm an opposing OC.  I see that you as the Steelers DC throw out there a 2-4-5 when I go 3 wide, but you put Vati and Hargraves as downlinemen with Watt and Dupree.  Not being scared of those edge rushers, I decide to start hitting you with the deep pass game and screen game when that combo is in there.  And then I move with the hurry up knowing you don't have the pass rush to slow me down.

That's why I keep countering with if we had more solid tacklers it would be more beneficial than a NG who needs a double team.  All a NG who requires a double would be exposing poor tacklers need to make more tackles.

Like this gif is a perfect example of the things I'm talking about:

We got Heyward is unable to fight off a single blocker to take away the cutback lane.  Shazier over pursuit due to a Williams over pursuit.  Williams over pursues because Dupree was doubled and taken off the edge.  Mitchell never fills the gap, and comes in flat with a bad angle on top of that.

I know this is one example, but the question comes back.....how does a NG fix the contain double, and double over pursuit?  It doesn't.

To that excellent point. However, if I am a DC, then I would counter by running 4-2-5.  I go big on the ends because II am satisfied with what Cam and Tuitt can do rushing the QB and playing the run as DE's.  I then have a penetration DT and a run stuffing NG type inside if you run.  Give me Watt and Shazier's replacement as my LB's along with 5 DB's to counter the three WR's.  I get what you are saying, but this is all about personnel and knowing your responsibility.

Let's talk about this play because it makes points for both of our arguments:

As you pointed out, Bud Dupree gets double teamed to create the hole going outside to the right. Vince Williams sees this and attempts to fill the hole to prevent the back from going up the lane.

DL - Tuitt gets eaten up by his blocker and Hargraves gets eaten up and driven into Tuitt and Williams on the right.  The play is a designed counter and Howard cuts back and has an outstanding lane left.  Here's why that happened. Cam didn't maintain his lane responsibility and moved right rather than stay in his lane. (I am sure he was trying to do anything to help slow down the running attack at this point). Chickello set the edge and if Cam stays home, Shazier now is one on one with Howard and should be coming downhill into where the hole would be instead of having to run around Cam and take an even poorer effort at making the tackle. Cam cut Shazier off and  If the defense does what it is supposed to here, Shazier should tackle him for a loss of one.  I will not get into what JJ Wilcox was reading or looking at, or Mike Mitchell's read, effort and tackling angle.  This is why I drafted a tackling safety and a developmental FS.  Certainly one play does not make a season, but this was a perfect storm of missed assignments and a missed hold by the ref that would have bailed us out, but the damage was done. 

Cam Heyward himself defended the defensive game plans and said in an article (which I will try to locate and add the link) paraphrasing, the coaches did not have a bad game plan against Jacksonville or in most games, we have to execute  it as players.

A big NG can be an every down player if utilized properly.  We didn't do it with Casey, but the Ravens did with Haloti Ngaga early in his career. Yes he is a special player.  You can tailor some things on defense to your personnel, especially if you have a team that is using the run to set up the pass like the Jags, Bears and Packers did to name a few. I still say we are a little soft in the middle. That is no insult to Hargraves, but he is no NG. If we are not going to change to a standard 4-3 with two traditional DT's, then we have to make adjustments to help our run defense with the scheme we use. In these games I mentioned, we could not stop the run in base or in a nickel.

 

[jebrick]

Heyward has bad technique as well as he should keep the Ot in front of him rather than play a 1 gap which is why the cutback is there.  Look up films of Aaron Smith to see how 2 gap is played by a DE.   Realize that this becomes tittyfighting and we really do not want Heyward doing that.  If Hargrave were not eaten up on the double team it might be a bit different.  But it still comes down to the LBs.  All of them.

 

The defense tends to work for all teams except those that will play smashmouth.  They had no counter against that.

[warfelg]

15 minutes ago, Steeler Hitman said:

To that excellent point. However, if I am a DC, then I would counter by running 4-2-5.  I go big on the ends because II am satisfied with what Cam and Tuitt can do rushing the QB and playing the run as DE's.  I then have a penetration DT and a run stuffing NG type inside if you run.  Give me Watt and Shazier's replacement as my LB's along with 5 DB's to counter the three WR's.  I get what you are saying, but this is all about personnel and knowing your responsibility.

Let's talk about this play because it makes points for both of our arguments:

As you pointed out, Bud Dupree gets double teamed to create the hole going outside to the right. Vince Williams sees this and attempts to fill the hole to prevent the back from going up the lane.

DL - Tuitt gets eaten up by his blocker and Hargraves gets eaten up and driven into Tuitt and Williams on the right.  The play is a designed counter and Howard cuts back and has an outstanding lane left.  Here's why that happened. Cam didn't maintain his lane responsibility and moved right rather than stay in his lane. (I am sure he was trying to do anything to help slow down the running attack at this point). Chickello set the edge and if Cam stays home, Shazier now is one on one with Howard and should be coming downhill into where the hole would be instead of having to run around Cam and take an even poorer effort at making the tackle. Cam cut Shazier off and  If the defense does what it is supposed to here, Shazier should tackle him for a loss of one.  I will not get into what JJ Wilcox was reading or looking at, or Mike Mitchell's read, effort and tackling angle.  This is why I drafted a tackling safety and a developmental FS.  Certainly one play does not make a season, but this was a perfect storm of missed assignments and a missed hold by the ref that would have bailed us out, but the damage was done. 

Cam Heyward himself defended the defensive game plans and said in an article (which I will try to locate and add the link) paraphrasing, the coaches did not have a bad game plan against Jacksonville or in most games, we have to execute  it as players.

A big NG can be an every down player if utilized properly.  We didn't do it with Casey, but the Ravens did with Haloti Ngaga early in his career. Yes he is a special player.  You can tailor some things on defense to your personnel, especially if you have a team that is using the run to set up the pass like the Jags, Bears and Packers did to name a few. I still say we are a little soft in the middle. That is no insult to Hargraves, but he is no NG. If we are not going to change to a standard 4-3 with two traditional DT's, then we have to make adjustments to help our run defense with the scheme we use. In these games I mentioned, we could not stop the run in base or in a nickel.

 

In all of that you glossed over the biggest issue with the play:

Vince Williams got up on the LOS too early cause the issues on the back end.  

Let's just say the DL still have the execution on their part wrong (mind you this was late in the game, when Chicago had already run the ball close to 35 times).  If VW doesn't get sucked up into the LOS, and is still 2/3 yards off the line, he's available to make the tackle in either A gap.  That's what his responsibility is on that play (reason I know this is I've seen this team run this same play with great success).  He's to read and hit the hole on the A gaps.  Wilcox has the B/C gaps to the defensive left.  Shazier has the B/C gaps on the defensive right.

So Williams get's sucked up and washed out.  On a piss poor read and react he washed himself out of the play.  Shazier is now trying to cover 4 gaps on his own.  That's the play right there.  It doesn't matter what the DL did.  If Williams sits on the play the run is stopped.  

This is also why our zone defense gets burned a lot on crossing and seam routes.  Williams has very very little field awareness.  He just doesn't know where he is in relation to the LOS.  He drifts up all the time.  He never keeps enough depth.  Coach O needs to nail him 5 yards behind the play and tell him to make 5 plays without going in front of that point.

 

And to me that's why VWill has never been and will never be a starting level LB in the NFL.  If that's your depth guy you expect those mistakes.  Having that out of your starter is inexcusable.

[MOSteelers56]

This is a very interesting discussion. I still maintain a FS is our biggest need but I think I've been convinced that attempting to get a NT will help the defense. I am a fan of switching to a 4-2-5 nickel defense. They don't have the ideal look but Tuitt and Heyward are strong pass rushers, as is Hargrave. If we can get a strong NT to plug in there it'll really help. Maybe trying a flyer on Ngata or another FA will be the best way to address this need.

[warfelg]

12 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said:

This is a very interesting discussion. I still maintain a FS is our biggest need but I think I've been convinced that attempting to get a NT will help the defense. I am a fan of switching to a 4-2-5 nickel defense. They don't have the ideal look but Tuitt and Heyward are strong pass rushers, as is Hargrave. If we can get a strong NT to plug in there it'll really help. Maybe trying a flyer on Ngata or another FA will be the best way to address this need.

I can almost guarantee a 4-2-5 with Tuitt and Heyward on the edges will end in disaster.  They can collapse an edge.  OT's are athletic enough to keep up with them.