Some embarrassing behavior in this thread over football draft picks.
Steelers Draft
- Thread starter Gunga_Galunga
- Start date
breakout age? Barry Sanders rode the bench for 2 years at Okie State before becoming one of the greatest rb's of all time. Why? He had Thurman Thomas in front of him. Larry Johnson rode the bench for what - 3/4 years at PSU before becoming a dominant rb in the NFL. Frank Gore sat behind Clinton Portis, Willis McGahee, Najeh Davenport, etc... Jerome Bettis never played tailback at ND because they had other NFL runners in front of him. Derrick Henry rode the bench his 1st 2 years at Bama. Alvin Kamara had to transfer because he couldn't beat out the Bama backs. There are other examples. When you play college ball at blue chip factory, you often don't get on the field right away. What runners did Etienne compete with @ 18?
Would you say that Etienne was a better receiver than Leveon Bell coming out of college? Based on stats - you probably could. Or was it that Leveon wasn't featured like Etienne was? When Lev Bell got in the league he proved pretty quickly he really didn't have an equal as receiver from the RB position. Najee Harris might very well be better than Etienne in the receiving department.
Listen, I think Etienne was extremely good in college. But, imho I think Harris passes the eyeball test based upon his measurables and his output vs way better competition than the ACC.
can you cite these 1st and 2nd selections you speak of? go back through the last 15 years of the draft. the production from nfl backs the last decade and a half has not been from rounds 1 and 2
my take from that is 2nd round performs as well as 3 to 7 on production. and 1st round is a bust almost 50% of the time.
where are the udfa numbers
I think this has been a very solid draft for the Steelers so far. I'd be very happy if they used the next two picks for another lineman and some secondary depth. But I can't really fault the picks they've made too much, even if they waited a little longer than expected to start addressing the line.
Last edited:
Stick to the Men's Book Club of the Month.. When it comes to football, you always seem to be lagging behind.
UDFAs are going to be worse. It's like picking the successful 2 star recruit and citing him as why 2 stars are worth recruiting.
Harris was a good pick at 24 by the Steelers.
These are just factors, they're not the end all be all of the evaluation. I'm just pointing out that one dude was 18 and beat 20-22 year olds (and was in the top 86% all time in capturing targets despite the fact that all of his teammates were NFL WR) than a 21-22 year old who beat younger players and who didn't test at his pro day.
True
You made a statement
It was proven inaccurate
You do your favorite thing as pretending to be the greatest football mind assistant coaching middle school
Agree but i was kinda making sense of the TE pick. Tons of motion if you remember but all NFL schemes have some to an extent. Should free up the gifted wideouts with threats underneath and down the middle. We’ll see I guess.
Harris has more treadlife at this point thanks to runaway games. Dabo abused Etienne (wouldnt you) and kept starters in long after games were decided.
I get what you're saying but I don't think this reflects reality anymore in college football. Good players play early and they go to the NFL early. And anyway, "breakout" for a RB is only 15% of a team's yards and touchdowns. You could absolutely accomplish that without getting 90% of the RB touches if you're a good player (e.g., Kamara).
Receiving market share is literally a percentage of the offense's pass yards. Good players have a high percentage. So 30% can mean a smaller volume on a worse offense but it more accurately reflects a receiver's true talent rather than making James Washington into the best receiver of all time because he played 4 years in the Big12 and compiled a lot of volume. In other words, you'd rather have a player with 30% of his team's passing yards - even on a bad team - than a player with 12% of his team's yards (e.g., Henry Ruggs) because again, good players get the ball. Lev Bell had 11% of his team's receiving yards which is extremely high for a RB, almost as high as Etienne.
You and I have different perspectives. You analyze things with your eyes and then construct a narrative. I look at the numbers first to weed out the bad players and then I use my eyes to find what I think are really special. Nevertheless, going in the 1st round as a RB portends good things and I think both Harris and Etienne are some of the better backs to come out in the last 5 years. I think they're both going to have good careers.
I agree that they need a better running game. IMO, that's why they should take linemen. To run the ball, you need a good OL but you don't need a good RB, just an average one (see my earlier stat about no First Team All Pro RB winning the Super Bowl in 22 years).
Again, I think the board is really failing to address my point about value over replacement. It's comparatively easier to find production at the RB position than at most other positions. Since all teams have the same cap space and same number of draft picks (to start with anyway), all efforts should be made to maximize those resources. If the delta between what you can get on the market and what you can get in the 1st round of the draft is smallest at RB, then a value-based approach suggests taking another player at a more premium position.
Anyway, I do agree that their first round picks (except in the secondary) are usually very good players. I think Harris is a good player. I just personally would have gone with that OT from Oklahoma State with the rec specs. Hopefully I'm wrong and Najee is a top 5 RB for the next 5 years because that's really what he needs to be. If he rushes for 800 yards and adds 300 more in the air next year he just didn't produce enough to deliver on that pick.
But you think if they take an OT with that pick they get that same production from snell and McFarland ?
the question becomes what helps us convert first downs and win next year -
The top running back who is a nfl ready 3. Down back -
Or a rookie ol who may not even start next year to unseat a veteran ?
Personally I would have probably re-signed Conner for the pennies he got in Arizona and then taken the OT. Or taken the OT and traded a 6th for Ke'Shawn Vaughn.
Typical I wouldn't expect you to understand context.
BTW, I've never coached middle school football.
I guess I will stick with seeing the actual player and the variables he was working with and against.
If analytics were the primary factor in player evaluation - NFL teams could saves of money in not scouting players via film and in person. The could probably cut 1/2 of their staff.
Conner is a nice story and I hope the best for him.
it’s feasible the ol just got old and much worse the last 2 years and I couldn’t argue that point
but Conner isn’t durable and regressed when he tried to do a leveon bell impersonation instead of being the downhill rusher we needed
Even at Pitt, he often had issues taking what was available. It was less pronounced for him because he had more physical advantage. But, in some ways, he is a very contradictory player in that he does have solid vision, but he often tries to bounce or take an unexpected route instead of taking the basic yards available. Because he tries to bounce and overly use his feet at times, it takes away from his power game as well. He has power when he wants to use it, but has generally seemed more reticent to use it since he broke out at Pitt.
In his defense, he has had a lot of bad luck between then and now, but I do not view James as a guy that gets the most out of what he has. He leaves a lot of yards on the table from play to play over the course of games.
Pittsburgh had an extended look at him and did not want to pay a very low price. They also did not extend him prior for what was likely a reasonable price when they could jumped in and gotten a good deal. Finally, they know that they will have to pay Harris more than Conner got (and have seemingly identified Harris for a long time). That tells you how they evaluated his play and durability over the past few years.
Does it help to have "good" lineman to run the ball - sure.
Is it mandatory - no.
Have RB's over the course of time proven to be productive without a "good" OL - all the time.
A few that come to mind -
Edgerrin James
Barry Sanders
Both were ultra productive but both did it in different ways.
Barry basically produced because of his unique talent to find seams when seams didn't seem to exist. There weren't too many years that the Lions were fielding a "good" OL. OJ Simpson was before my time, but I don't think he had a pro bowl OL during his time in Buffalo. And, I couldn't even tell you who his QB or receivers were.
Edgerrin never really had road graders and his OL often would get overwhelmed at the point of attack. What allowed Edge to produce? He was very talented but you couldn't stack the box. He had unique talent at the other skill positions.
Running the ball successfully from a scheme standpoint is usually credited to either employing road graders up front and creating gaps with personnel. Or, the more recent trend in the past 20-25 years is creating the #'s advantage by spreading people out, utilizing option principals either through the run or RPO.
When the Steelers won their last super bowl vs the Cards - that OL was not very "good." . It might be one of the worst OL's to win a super bowl. How did they make that late run in winning the big one? For one thing Willie Parker got healthy (I believe he was battling turf toe). Secondly, they had the skill guys in place with Ben, Hines, Santonio, and Heath.
Bottom line - there are a few ways to skin a cat.
Robert Smith said it best. When asked what impact Randy Moss had on the Vikings. He said, when Randy came in, he never saw so many running lanes because you couldn't walk a safety into the box. He helped the running game more then any OL could. Does it mean, I want to go into next season with a bunch of guys who can't execute up front - no. There has to be some balance within the personnel and scheme.
I do not think that you can look at football completely through the Moneyball/analytic type lenses. And, even then, there are variables that you cannot quite capture.
If they look at Najee Harris and see something like Derrick Henry or prime Le'Veon Bell, it is easy to say that they should make that pick. Guys like that are not easy to find and they make huge differences on the field. They change the game and the fortunes of everyone around them.
I look at this draft for Pittsburgh and I generally think that they have done the right thing. The only other options they had were to try to trade back and get more overall value over a course of drafts. But, considering it appears that they liked the TE from PSU enough to consider him much higher, and Harris was clearly their identified guy, they have hit the notes that they have wanted to hit.
You can disagree with their evaluation of their situation, but it looks like they have been true to themselves. They seemingly think the RB position was more issue than the OL position (though it needed to be addressed) and they saw Freiermuth as a guy that fell and will be a long-time starter for them.
As far as next year goes, if he goes 800 and 300, that is fine. First round picks (and really all picks) are to be measured over that first contract (and longer), not just their first year.
Another thing - for those who are killing the PSU TE pick and suggesting they needed to pick up an OL to run the ball better...
A great TE (I'm not sure this kid is) can dictate how a defense schemes an offense. If there is a threat in the seam, it almost becomes a de facto blitz control strategy. If you're going to either pass blitz or run blitz with an elite threat at TE, you put a ton of pressure on that back end of the defense. Most safeties need that PSLB to get a hand on the TE as he releases otherwise, it's almost free money.
Would, I rather have a stud tackle at that pick - probably. Was there one that had the value of the PSU TE - obviously not in Tomlin's eyes.
A great TE (I'm not sure this kid is) can dictate how a defense schemes an offense. If there is a threat in the seam, it almost becomes a de facto blitz control strategy. If you're going to either pass blitz or run blitz with an elite threat at TE, you put a ton of pressure on that back end of the defense. Most safeties need that PSLB to get a hand on the TE as he releases otherwise, it's almost free money.
Would, I rather have a stud tackle at that pick - probably. Was there one that had the value of the PSU TE - obviously not in Tomlin's eyes.
But if that is going to be your standard of what makes a good running back (and I don't think it should, but it's their argument, not mine) then that means that picking a running back in the first round has essentially coin flip chance of succeeding. And if you only hit on 50-ish% of your first round picks you are going to be in a lot of trouble long term.
The implication of their argument is that either Harris or Etienne will be a good pick and the other one won't. Is that really the odds you want with your first round draft pick?
Steelers have two picks in round four to begin the day. I’d love to see some defense, perhaps Michigan LB Jabril Cox or Ohio State CB Shaun Wade.
Shaun Wade got abused every game I watched. The Steelers starting OL is still bad. That still needs to be addressed. Hudson would look good.
Hudson from Cincy then Wade or an OLB would be pretty nice. I wouldn’t mind trading down to get a pick in the fifth and maybe another in the sixth.
They need to load up on the OL. Some people forget that DeCastro doesn’t have much mileage left. He isn’t the same player he once was. Dotson is the best OL, but after him I little confidence in anyone else.
He was mocked high in the way early mocks. Doesn’t he have some medical problems? Texas A&M had a left tackle who might go in this round is another one to watch to Pittsburgh.
I can't believe the rancor over the Steelers draft. They drafted 3 really good players. Really good. I know they needed OL, but at 24, really......even Tevin Jenkins had questions, Landon Dickerson was a huge risk....
I thought the prudent move and have said it all along, was to trade down and get an xtra 3rd and 5th, and select your OT/OC, then using those picks move up a bit in Rd 2 to take a RB. But guys, this year was different. So many speak to how many good RB's fall into Rd 2, this year was different. There were 3, and then a huge dropoff. And the 3rd went with pick 36. The Steelers had to get a good back. They did.
I thought for sure they would have drafted Humphrey in Rd 2. But Freiermuth on some boards was a 1st rd pick. So he was not a reach. The Illinois guy I identified as a possible 3rd rd pick for the Steelers, I saw him ranked around 84th overall, and the Steelers selected him at 87 so again, value not a reach.
They definitely need to take an OT.
The biggest concerning thing is Cleveland. They have figured this draft thing out appears, the no longer have these head scratcher picks. They nail every choice and Baltimore has always been like that. Cincy is still, well Cincy. They move up in Rd 2 to get an OL that likely might be there for them in Rd 4.
I thought the prudent move and have said it all along, was to trade down and get an xtra 3rd and 5th, and select your OT/OC, then using those picks move up a bit in Rd 2 to take a RB. But guys, this year was different. So many speak to how many good RB's fall into Rd 2, this year was different. There were 3, and then a huge dropoff. And the 3rd went with pick 36. The Steelers had to get a good back. They did.
I thought for sure they would have drafted Humphrey in Rd 2. But Freiermuth on some boards was a 1st rd pick. So he was not a reach. The Illinois guy I identified as a possible 3rd rd pick for the Steelers, I saw him ranked around 84th overall, and the Steelers selected him at 87 so again, value not a reach.
They definitely need to take an OT.
The biggest concerning thing is Cleveland. They have figured this draft thing out appears, the no longer have these head scratcher picks. They nail every choice and Baltimore has always been like that. Cincy is still, well Cincy. They move up in Rd 2 to get an OL that likely might be there for them in Rd 4.
I would be perfectly fine with that. Then they shouldn't have brought Ben back, swallowed a bit, played Rudolph, if he succeeded then great, if he failed then maybe you are 4-12 and in position to draft your next franchise QB. But that's not "the Steelers Way". Especially with Dan Rooney gone. Remember, the Steelers were all set to booster their OL for Tommy Maddox when Roethlisberger was available and Cowher wanted Shawn Andrews. and luckily was overruled.
Yeah
People tend to judge based on who they think they need positionally rather than quality
I think I read they haven’t taken an ol in the first round the last 20 years while winning a lot
Similar threads
