Jump to content

Official NFL Draft Thread (General Discussion for Draft)

steelcurtain29

By steelcurtain29
in Pittsburgh Steelers

Recommended Posts

Dcash4

Dcash4

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, warfelg said:

Ok, but what about that makes him a 1st round pick?  You plugged the biggest hole with 2/5ths of what we need out of that position.  We also needed a guy that can stop the run coming downhill or sideline to sideline.  A smart guy that can diagnose the play and make that call and change his intent on the fly.

Not saying we replaced all of it, Saying it could be a means to replace it. Between Edmunds, Burnett, and Bostic -- is there a realistic chance that we are better in those areas post Shazier? I think there is a good chance we have improved since last year. 

Ok, here's where IMO you put yourself in a hole:

So you said this when I said we have a bunch of similar players.  So if you're going to say that to me saying we brought in another of what we have a bunch of, and you argue that using a pick on a guy to be the future at the spot is silly because we have a guy for another year, you can't also argue Edmunds is a good pick because he's the future at a place we just signed a terrific player in that role.  So why is it at safety it's ok to have extra players that play the same style, but at other positions its not ok to take players to rotate in and groom at other positions?  Sorry but this is coming off very hypocritical to say both things.

Don't really understand this. You argued at one point that we didnt need a safety because we had a FA there and a 2nd rounder, I argued that there were other positions you could say that at. I think they COULD use Edmunds both as a means to a replacement of a Shazier style of play this year in sub packages immediately, as well as be the future of the position post either Davis or Burnett...not sure how I boxed myself into a hole here. Never made the argument that it would be stupid to take a player at a position with people already there, rather argued that you could make that excuse for multiple positions when you claimed we didn't need him because we already had guys there.

Safety can be a little different as far as the way we operate however.We have played in 3 safety looks but I cannot recall one time we ever ran out 3 OLB, at least with any consistency. Safety/Hybrid guys are becoming more popular in the league. You can find a use for him as more than just a rotational guy. 

Sorry but what?  Your not going to try to convince anyone that he's the right player, but then you say he's the right player?  This reads very much like you were deciding to plug a hole there no matter what, no matter who was there.  Lets say Josh Allen was still there (I know hypothetical); would you have skipped him with a higher grade just because you put yourself in this spot that you feel like you needed to draft a 3rd safety type?  What if ti was Jiare Alexander?  Marcus Davenport?  I think it's hard to tell yourself "this is what we need and this is what we're going to take for our team".  That's how GM's lose their jobs.  Stay true to your board, let the draft come to you, and don't force yourself to have to take something.  If you get down to this spot and no one really dropped, the needs don't match the top of your board, you can look to move.  Because of the 5th year options teams look to move up; personally I don't think it's as valuable as most other people think.  You don't think the Giants (34), Broncos (40), Dolphins (42), even to the Bengals (44) weren't trying to call to get into the late first for the purpose of taking Guice, Jones, Jackson, Rudolph, or maybe a few others?  I would be willing to get if you were a fly on the wall you would see those calls coming into the war room.

I dont claim to be some sort of prospects expert and I really dont like mock drafts other than seeing some names that could go. So what I am saying is that I wont argue the actual player in Edmunds with you because I am not qualified enough or cared enough to research these guys to have that conversation. What I am confident in, is that his specific position should not be a reason to hate this pick because there is a variety of ways they can use that skill set in today NFL. It could end up being a gigantic boost in the area we needed help in most. I'm not saying it works out or not, but I can at least see and argue the path as to how a player like that (nameless player) can have a direct impact and be worthy of a first round selection after missing out on the actual specific positional piece we needed. 

So no, I am not trying to convince you that Edmunds himself is the right player, rather that the TYPE of player that he is can be the exact thing that our first round pick needed to be. The talent of the actual player -- I dont care about opinions till we see him on the field. Excited for the upside, but I have no clue who he will be -- and no one else does either.

You dont like him and that is completely fine, but please understand that this isnt some dart board throw from and NFL team that continues to have success whether spoiled steelers fans like to believe they can put together a competent team or not. My guess is they thought he was the best player, and the best player that can fill a role the team desperately needs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...