PDA

View Full Version : Folks like Massie & Zeitler but 24 is too high & 56 is too low. How about this trade?



RuthlessBurgher
04-22-2012, 02:21 PM
The Rams are likely to take WR Justin Blackmon at #6, and their next biggest need is probably to get at least one dominant DT type between DE's Chris Long and Robert Quinn. They cut their two starting DT's Fred Robbins and Justin Bannon this offseason, and signed Kendall Langford from Miami (who will likely start at one DT spot) and Trevor Laws from Philadelphia (who will likely be a rotational backup type). If someone like Michael Brockers were still on the board at #24, St. Louis might want to move ahead of the Broncos at #25, since they also have a huge need at DT.

Typically, rebuilding teams like the Rams aren't looking to trade up and lose precious picks in the process, but they happen to have two 2nd round picks this year (their own and Washington's as a part of the RG3 trade), and this particular deal will not result in them having less picks...they will still have the same number of picks overall.

The Rams give us both of their 2nd round picks (#33 and #39) in exchange for our 1st and 2nd round picks (#24 and #56).

According to the trade value chart:
2.33 = 580 pts.
2.39 = 510 pts.
Total = 1090 pts.

1.24 = 740 pts.
2.56 = 340 pts.
Total = 1080 pts.

If we had two early 2nd round picks like this, we could theoretically get both Massie and Zeitler, and still have all of the rest of our 8 picks in rounds 3-7 to address our other needs (we could still go after a Mike Martin or Josh Chapman to fill our hole at NT in round 3, or maybe go for a dynamic option at RB like Isaiah Pead to pair with Redman instead, etc.).

Having an OL like this: Massie-Zeitler-Pouncey-Colon-Gilbert would be a strength overall, I would think, instead of a weakness.

I know that there are folks on this board who are against taking OL early this year (never mind two of them) and others who will applaud it in terms of eliminating a major weakness that has plagued this team for year. In general, though, what do you think about the idea of this trade overall (even if you didn't to use the picks on a couple of o-linemen like Massie and Zeitler in particular). Would you rather have a couple of early 2nd rounders instead of having a late first and a late second as usual?

Flasteel
04-22-2012, 02:49 PM
I think you obviously have to wait until you see who falls to 24, but if our top rated players are off the board or if we covet a player we feel we can pick up at 33, I would be all over this trade. Good job of thinking outside the box and backing it up with the value chart Ruthless. That said, I doubt I would burn both picks on the o-line.

Sugar
04-22-2012, 05:35 PM
Even though I'm against taking an OL first (unless he's BPA), I'm impressed by the homework you've done here.

Oviedo
04-22-2012, 07:38 PM
If Zeitler is the player you like best, why the machinations? It's not like you get penalized for taking the player you want when you can get them. You don't get picks taken away.

Never understood the logic that you are willing to lose a player you want unless you trade back.

insanesteelersfan
04-22-2012, 10:11 PM
I want a Dodge Neon, but I'm not gonna pay 50,000 dollars for it. Same goes for Zeitler. He is okay, a decent Guard. But you don't select him at 24. But bottom line, I highly doubt he is on the steelers Radar. I think Brandon Brooks is, and he is way better then Zeitler is.

Mister Pittsburgh
04-22-2012, 10:37 PM
I think it all works out in the end money/draft slot wise. If the Steelers felt Zeitler could play a great LOG for the next decade & potentially do it at a pro bowl level, but at least play solidly, then I wouldn't cry if they dropped the 24th pick on him.

Alan Faneca was picked 26th overall.

RuthlessBurgher
04-22-2012, 11:51 PM
If Zeitler is the player you like best, why the machinations? It's not like you get penalized for taking the player you want when you can get them. You don't get picks taken away.

Never understood the logic that you are willing to lose a player you want unless you trade back.

Well, for me, Zeitler is not the player that I like best. In my mock, I'm hoping for Jonathan Martin to fall to 24 and Alshon Jeffery to fall to 56, but in reality, I highly doubt that either happens. If Martin didn't fall to 24 (I'm assuming that DeCastro and Glenn are off the board as well), and I was able to pull off this deal with the Rams, what I would likely do is try to land Jeffery and Massie in the 2nd, and then hope that Brandon Brooks falls to me in the 3rd. Even though Brooks may not be able to start as soon as Zeitler might, I think Brooks has a higher ceiling (and admittedly, a lower floor as well) than Zeitler. I'd be happy to be able to (eventually) field an OL of Massie-Brooks-Pouncey-Colon-Gilbert, while also getting a big target who will fight for balls in the red zone (which is where we tend to experience most of our problems on offense).

phillyesq
04-23-2012, 09:41 AM
If Zeitler is the player you like best, why the machinations? It's not like you get penalized for taking the player you want when you can get them. You don't get picks taken away.

Never understood the logic that you are willing to lose a player you want unless you trade back.

It's all about value. The Steelers wanted Hampton a few years ago, but were able to trade down and acquire extra picks as well as the guy they wanted. If you can get extra picks and the guy you want (or one guy from among a group) then that is the only prudent course.

phillyesq
04-23-2012, 09:42 AM
The Rams are likely to take WR Justin Blackmon at #6, and their next biggest need is probably to get at least one dominant DT type between DE's Chris Long and Robert Quinn. They cut their two starting DT's Fred Robbins and Justin Bannon this offseason, and signed Kendall Langford from Miami (who will likely start at one DT spot) and Trevor Laws from Philadelphia (who will likely be a rotational backup type). If someone like Michael Brockers were still on the board at #24, St. Louis might want to move ahead of the Broncos at #25, since they also have a huge need at DT.

Typically, rebuilding teams like the Rams aren't looking to trade up and lose precious picks in the process, but they happen to have two 2nd round picks this year (their own and Washington's as a part of the RG3 trade), and this particular deal will not result in them having less picks...they will still have the same number of picks overall.

The Rams give us both of their 2nd round picks (#33 and #39) in exchange for our 1st and 2nd round picks (#24 and #56).

According to the trade value chart:
2.33 = 580 pts.
2.39 = 510 pts.
Total = 1090 pts.

1.24 = 740 pts.
2.56 = 340 pts.
Total = 1080 pts.

If we had two early 2nd round picks like this, we could theoretically get both Massie and Zeitler, and still have all of the rest of our 8 picks in rounds 3-7 to address our other needs (we could still go after a Mike Martin or Josh Chapman to fill our hole at NT in round 3, or maybe go for a dynamic option at RB like Isaiah Pead to pair with Redman instead, etc.).

Having an OL like this: Massie-Zeitler-Pouncey-Colon-Gilbert would be a strength overall, I would think, instead of a weakness.

I know that there are folks on this board who are against taking OL early this year (never mind two of them) and others who will applaud it in terms of eliminating a major weakness that has plagued this team for year. In general, though, what do you think about the idea of this trade overall (even if you didn't to use the picks on a couple of o-linemen like Massie and Zeitler in particular). Would you rather have a couple of early 2nd rounders instead of having a late first and a late second as usual?

Ruthless, I like this idea. Another thought is potentially trading down with the NY Giants. They are a team that will be looking for a linebacker, and moving up to our spot puts them in front of the Pats* and Ravens, among others.

RuthlessBurgher
04-23-2012, 10:05 AM
Ruthless, I like this idea. Another thought is potentially trading down with the NY Giants. They are a team that will be looking for a linebacker, and moving up to our spot puts them in front of the Pats* and Ravens, among others.

Interesting...that would be almost exactly like a reverse Santonio trade (one pick off)...that year we were #32 and the Giants were at #25, and this year the Giants are at #32 and we are at #24.

Steelersrock151
04-23-2012, 10:31 AM
Ruthless, I like this idea. Another thought is potentially trading down with the NY Giants. They are a team that will be looking for a linebacker, and moving up to our spot puts them in front of the Pats* and Ravens, among others.

Other reasons to like this trade scenario: A) we get their first, third, and probably either a third or 4th next year. B) the 32nd pick in the draft, along with the 33rd, have additional value for trades down. People who can't believe someone fell to day 2, or want to get their guy before the mad rush at 33 on day 2, will be willing to trade up to jump them. Clevaland wants Weeden, afraid the competition for him will be too steep on Friday, may offer a 2nd and 4th for our first and fifth. Would give us pick 37, 56, 86, 96, 101, and 120.

Oviedo
04-23-2012, 10:43 AM
It's all about value. The Steelers wanted Hampton a few years ago, but were able to trade down and acquire extra picks as well as the guy they wanted. If you can get extra picks and the guy you want (or one guy from among a group) then that is the only prudent course.

That's my point, what is the "value?" You don't get dollars or extra picks. You have to find a trade partner which is extremely problematic. Why lose a player being a slave to arbitrary ratings that vary between dozens of pundits?

Value would seem to me to be getting a player who fills a weakness on your roster.

MeetJoeGreene
04-23-2012, 11:26 AM
If we could do that and also swap Mendenhall for Jackson in the same trade, I would be all over it.

:D

phillyesq
04-23-2012, 11:56 AM
That's my point, what is the "value?" You don't get dollars or extra picks. You have to find a trade partner which is extremely problematic. Why lose a player being a slave to arbitrary ratings that vary between dozens of pundits?

Value would seem to me to be getting a player who fills a weakness on your roster.

The value placed by pundits is not really relevant to the consideration. The only thing that matters is the value placed on the players by the Steelers FO. Assume, for the sake of argument, that the Steelers value 20 players as first rounders and see another group of 12 players who they value equally. If the first group is gone at 24, and they are assured of getting somebody that they want in the next group, they should absolutely trade down to add additional picks (assuming, of course, that they find a partner). Even if there are 4 players on the board that they value equally at 24, why not move back 3 spots and add another mid-round pick?

There are certainly variables involved and a need to find a trading partner. And if there is one guy at 24 you can't live without, absolutely, take him. But, if there are a range of guys that the Steelers value equally, and they have a trading partner, trading down makes sense and maximizes the value you receive in the draft.

Slapstick
04-23-2012, 03:05 PM
The value placed by pundits is not really relevant to the consideration. The only thing that matters is the value placed on the players by the Steelers FO. Assume, for the sake of argument, that the Steelers value 20 players as first rounders and see another group of 12 players who they value equally. If the first group is gone at 24, and they are assured of getting somebody that they want in the next group, they should absolutely trade down to add additional picks (assuming, of course, that they find a partner). Even if there are 4 players on the board that they value equally at 24, why not move back 3 spots and add another mid-round pick?

There are certainly variables involved and a need to find a trading partner. And if there is one guy at 24 you can't live without, absolutely, take him. But, if there are a range of guys that the Steelers value equally, and they have a trading partner, trading down makes sense and maximizes the value you receive in the draft.

This.

The draft is not really about filling holes as much as improving and ensuring the long term health and competitiveness of the football team...

The way that GMs do this is to draft for value...if you can fill a need while drafting for value, then great...the long term health and competitiveness of a team is eroded by overdrafting to fill needs...

Also, I agree with not giving a crap about draft pundits...set up your board with the best information available to you about your team and stick to that board...

Oviedo
04-23-2012, 03:21 PM
This.

The draft is not really about filling holes as much as improving and ensuring the long term health and competitiveness of the football team...

The way that GMs do this is to draft for value...if you can fill a need while drafting for value, then great...the long term health and competitiveness of a team is eroded by overdrafting to fill needs...

Also, I agree with not giving a crap about draft pundits...set up your board with the best information available to you about your team and stick to that board...

The health and success of this team is predicated on our QB staying healthy. How does yet another LB or DL help that happen? Not at all. Maybe we get to say we are a "Top 5 defense" again right before the worst QB in the league knocks us out of the play offs.

Big Ben is the key. We need to protect him with the best players.

Eddie Spaghetti
04-23-2012, 03:39 PM
teams that draft for need only, usually fail.

ovi, I know that you are fixated on the OL, but the steelers won't be. They have their board and they will stick to it. If however, "need" and "value" axis near one another they might give a little, I suspect.

we could very well see 2 OL with the first 2 picks, but I hope they stick to the board and don't reach, which I feel we did with timmons.

the last few drafts has been very suspect and we need to hit on some guys.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
04-23-2012, 04:56 PM
The value placed by pundits is not really relevant to the consideration. The only thing that matters is the value placed on the players by the Steelers FO. Assume, for the sake of argument, that the Steelers value 20 players as first rounders and see another group of 12 players who they value equally. If the first group is gone at 24, and they are assured of getting somebody that they want in the next group, they should absolutely trade down to add additional picks (assuming, of course, that they find a partner). Even if there are 4 players on the board that they value equally at 24, why not move back 3 spots and add another mid-round pick?

There are certainly variables involved and a need to find a trading partner. And if there is one guy at 24 you can't live without, absolutely, take him. But, if there are a range of guys that the Steelers value equally, and they have a trading partner, trading down makes sense and maximizes the value you receive in the draft.

I agree and I made this point in an earlier thread giving Timmons as an example. As fans, is it easy to say that we should drop back and pick one of the three or four players who drops to us. To us, it isn't as important if we get Timmons, Beason, or Poz, they are all similarly valued LBs. There were also a few other players who were available at the time - Staley, Grubbs, and I forget who else at the moment, but there were a lot.

The thing is though that none of us attended the workouts, none of us sat in on the interviews, none of us sat in on the pre-draft meetings. For some reason that the FO did not consult with this board about, it was determined that they really wanted Lawrence Timmons. Considering this team's record on first rounders over the last 10-15 years, I say we wait until they pick and accept their selection because they have earned that.

hawaiiansteel
04-23-2012, 04:59 PM
For some reason that the FO did not consult with this board about


there is no valid reason why the Steelers' FO did not consult with us geniuses that post on this board...:D

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
04-23-2012, 09:57 PM
there is no valid reason why the Steelers' FO did not consult with us geniuses that post on this board...:D

Come on Hawaiian, I was kidding. I got my call, didn't you?:D

Dee Dub
04-23-2012, 11:25 PM
Too me, this....

According to the trade value chart:
2.33 = 580 pts.
2.39 = 510 pts.
Total = 1090 pts.

1.24 = 740 pts.
2.56 = 340 pts.
Total = 1080 pts.

..is flawed in regards to the Steelers. On the Steelers draft board to them the #24 overall pick may be worth as much to them as the #5 overall pick. Hear me out here. Since they have absolutely no need for a franchise QB in this draft as well as a first round WR, SS, OLB, C, and TE, that makes the other positions of greater value. And it makes to them, pick #24, far more valuable than two second round picks. On their board Andrew Luck has no value.

RuthlessBurgher
04-23-2012, 11:53 PM
Too me, this....

According to the trade value chart:
2.33 = 580 pts.
2.39 = 510 pts.
Total = 1090 pts.

1.24 = 740 pts.
2.56 = 340 pts.
Total = 1080 pts.

..is flawed in regards to the Steelers. On the Steelers draft board to them the #24 overall pick may be worth as much to them as the #5 overall pick. Hear me out here. Since they have absolutely no need for a franchise QB in this draft as well as a first round WR, SS, OLB, C, and TE, that makes the other positions of greater value. And it makes to them, pick #24, far more valuable than two second round picks. On their board Andrew Luck has no value.

It all depends on who is there. If DeCastro or Glenn or Martin fall within range, then no, we don't even consider trade down. But if all of the guys we consider to be true-first-round-worthy prospects are off the board by the time we come up to the podium at #24, then trading down makes sense (in that case, I'd rather 2 early 2nd round picks than a late first and late 2nd, rather than reaching for a guy at #24 without getting proper value).

ikestops85
04-24-2012, 10:39 AM
It all depends on who is there. If DeCastro or Glenn or Martin fall within range, then no, we don't even consider trade down. But if all of the guys we consider to be true-first-round-worthy prospects are off the board by the time we come up to the podium at #24, then trading down makes sense (in that case, I'd rather 2 early 2nd round picks than a late first and late 2nd, rather than reaching for a guy at #24 without getting proper value).

My thoughts exactly. If we can't get a guy we really like at #24 then trading back seems like a smart move. The added bonus to this is you shut people up who complain that you reached for a guy that shouldn't have gone for another 10 picks.

Shawn
04-24-2012, 11:13 AM
I would love this move. I want OL early and often.

hawaiiansteel
04-24-2012, 11:27 PM
Vinny Curry among potential second-round steals in 2012 draft

By Charley Casserly NFL Network
Published: April 20, 2012


By now, you've read plenty of analysis on the projected first-round selections in the 2012 NFL Draft. But there will be plenty of talent left over after the first 32 picks on Thursday night.

The following six prospects (in alphabetical order) could be steals in Round 2. These are the value picks I would be ecstatic to make next Friday evening.

Vinny Curry, DE, Marshall: Curry's best asset is his pass-rush ability. Even though he posted 40 times only in the 4.8 range, he has fine skills to get after the quarterback. Curry is quick off the ball with a natural bend ability in rushing the passer. He has good strength and definite bull-rush ability. He displays good hand use, as well as an effective inside move. Curry also played the run fairly well at Marshall, using his leverage and strength to effectively shed blocks.

Coby Fleener, TE, Stanford: As one of Andrew Luck's go-to options over the past few years, Fleener showcased natural hands and an ability to make the difficult catch. He is a big target at 6-foot-6, which should help his QB in the league. Fleener's smooth in his routes and gets good separation off cuts. He will be adequate as a blocker in the NFL because of a nice competitive streak and good balance. I believe he will be the first tight end off the board, so he could sneak into the first round. Regardless, he can help a team's passing game as a rookie.

Doug Martin, RB, Boise State: I have him rated as this draft class' No. 2 running back (behind Trent Richardson). Martin's a fine all-around back with the tools to succeed at the next level. He's a physical inside runner who has good vision and can accelerate through the hole. On outside plays he can stretch it to the corner and has a good feel of when to cut it up. In the passing game, he displays good hands and is an effective runner after the catch.

Amini Silatolu, OG, Midwestern State: Silatolu lined up at offensive tackle in college, but I think his athletic ability makes him a better guard prospect for the NFL game. He's a powerful player who dominated Division II, knocking overmatched counterparts off the ball. In addition to his physical nature, he's also very good at pulling and blocking in space. He shows enough foot quickness to pass protect at effectively at the guard position. At the NFL Scouting Combine, he displayed the athletic movement to play in the NFL. In fact, he moved as well as any of the offensive lineman in Indianapolis during drills.

Harrison Smith, S, Notre Dame: Smith has very good size (6-2, 213 pounds) and speed (4.57) for the position. I like his range and instincts against the run and pass. He is aggressive against the run, but must do a better job of breaking down before attempting to tackle a ball carrier. Even though there is some tightness to him, I believe he will be able to cover most tight ends because of his speed.

Kevin Zeitler, OG, Wisconsin: Zeitler is a classic Wisconsin lineman: a strong and physical blocker. He can move defenders and sustains blocks very well at the line of scrimmage. He also does an above-average job of sustaining blocks in space. He moves his feet well as a pass blocker, sliding to mirror the defender. He can effectively anchor against the bull rush. Zeitler has also worked out as a center during the pre-draft process.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/09000d5d82878fe9/article/vinny-curry-among-potential-secondround-steals-in-2012-draft

buckeyehoppy
04-26-2012, 01:46 AM
Harrison Smith, S, Notre Dame: Smith has very good size (6-2, 213 pounds) and speed (4.57) for the position. I like his range and instincts against the run and pass. He is aggressive against the run, but must do a better job of breaking down before attempting to tackle a ball carrier. Even though there is some tightness to him, I believe he will be able to cover most tight ends because of his speed.

This guy is a total beast! Being a Domer apologist, I watch quite a bit of ND Football. I guarantee that Smith would be starting for the Steelers by the start of his second season. I didn't figure that we would get him in my mock. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be elated if we picked him.

BTW, HS, I'd be grinning ear to ear if your mock came true!:Cheers

buckeyehoppy
04-26-2012, 01:48 AM
It all depends on who is there. If DeCastro or Glenn or Martin fall within range, then no, we don't even consider trade down. But if all of the guys we consider to be true-first-round-worthy prospects are off the board by the time we come up to the podium at #24, then trading down makes sense (in that case, I'd rather 2 early 2nd round picks than a late first and late 2nd, rather than reaching for a guy at #24 without getting proper value).

Absolutely covet Glenn in the 1st. I just don't think he'll fall to us. OTOH, if he did, I'd be overcome with glee!

RuthlessBurgher
04-26-2012, 10:24 AM
HS, I'd be grinning ear to ear if your mock came true!:Cheers

I think Hawaiian's sig mock is quite possibly the most realistic of all the mocks out there on this site:

1 Dont'a Hightower ILB Alabama
2 Brandon Brooks OG/OT Miami, Ohio
3 Isaiah Pead RB Cincinnati
4 Trenton Robinson FS Mich St
5 Hebron Fangupo NT BYU
6 Keith Tandy CB W Virginia
7a Akiem Hicks DE Regina, Canada
7b Toney Clemons WR Colorado
7c Austin Davis QB S Miss
7d Randy Bullock K Texas A&M

All picks seem to be guys that our team is interested in, and all seem to be projected in realistic rounds where they should be available to us. I'm still holding out hopes that others like a top OL like DeCastro/Reiff/Glenn/Martin or a potentially dominant speciman like Poe in round 1, a red zone weapon like Jeffery or a high upside guard prospect like Silatolu in round 2, etc. fall to us (or at least within reasonable range for a trade-up), but I could absolutely see things unfolding the way Hawaiian lists them, and I would be happy with that haul overall as well.