Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Oct 01, 2014 at 19:50 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Dance with the Giants, Again?  (Read 2413 times)
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12191
Online Online

Posts: 22,285



« on: Apr 24, 2007 at 12:12 »

I was thinking about teams that would be interested in the never-popular trade up.  Trading up to 15 is a lot better than trading into the top-10, in terms of rookie contracts, and like Peter King said, teams seem down on the R1 talent -- if there are truly 17 guys who carry R1 grades, then teams may want to trade up to be part of that.  Of course, we know that a R1 draft grade translates to, well, nothing.  It's not a predictor of actual football talent, just assumed value.

Anyway, the most likely target for an up team would be, IMO, Lynch.  RB is thin, especially at the top, and Lynch is the only guy who might be around for about 6 teams to target.  If the Bills somehow pass on him, I can see lots of teams calling KC.

One I think would be very likely: the Tiki-less NYGs.  Save the Brandon Jacobs hype, he looks to me like a very good "2" in a 1-2 punch.  Don't forget, we dealth with the Giants last year to get Holmes, and I can see us wheeling and dealing again.  (Not saying prior trades mean we have favorites, but, for example, I don't see us dealing with AFCN teams, or probably the Raiders; there are teams we likely downgrade due to competition or insane owners.)

Here's how it goes down: our 1.15 + 3.77 for their 1.20, 2.51, and 6.189.  It's the most likely trade scenario if we do deal with NYG, and gives us not much loss in R1, and upgrades our R3 to a nice R2.  The R6 is a bonus.

And while the talk of trading Faneca to AZ seems mostly fan- and writer-based, who knows?  KC didn't dismiss it out of hand at the PC, and in fact I think losing Porter for zero return still lingers distastefully.  So, we could pull a rare draft-day trade of Faneca for their R2, and if we're smart, get a 2008 R3 thrown into the mix.  

That would give us 11 picks, so at some point I'd assume we might deal a day 2 pick to move up.  Best scenario, use the 4.119 to move up 5 or 6 from one of our three R2 picks, if we're locked into a guy.  Otherwise, 11 shakes out this way:

1.20 (NYG)
2.38 (AZ)
2.46
2.51 (NYG)

4.119
4.132 ©
5.156
5.170 ©
6.189 (NYG)
6.192
7.227

It wouldn't surprise me to see the NYG scenario happen, maybe less likely is the AZ.  But let's say I wouldn't be utterly shocked.

At 1.20, they could certainly take one of the OLBs, a CB, or even Zeirlein's man-love, Staley.  I'd assume we'd use one of the three R2 picks on a top OG.  Another IOL for OC (if Mahan moves to OG) or OG (if Mahan sticks at OC).  Probably a top RB or WR.  

Just using the team visits as a template:

1.20 (NYG) - Timmons, OLB
2.38 (AZ) - Sidney Rice, WR
2.46 - Antonio Pittman, RB
2.51 (NYG) - Ryan Harris, OG (listed at OT, but could move inside to LG)

4.119 - Anthony Waters, ILB
4.132 © - Brian Robison, OLB (played at DE)
5.156 - Dan Sepulveda, P
5.170 © - Ryan McBean, DE (played at DT)
6.189 (NYG) - Allen Barbre, OG (played at OT)
6.192 - Roderick Rogers, CB/S
7.227 - Cody Boyd, TE
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
Hercules50
Member
***

Karma: 158
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #1 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 13:35 »

peter king's article made me think the exact same thing -- if there are only 17 or so guys who really grade out as first-rounders, that could make our #15 a sought-after pick.

in fact, i have no doubt that it will. it all depends, of course, on how 1-14 shake out. the steelers could face a situation in which the top players left may not fill our biggest needs, which would make us willing trade partners.

for example, say there's a run on the D-linemen and LBs, and Levi Brown is gone. sure, we could just pick the next guy on our list of needs (Spencer, Grubbs), but that would be a reach. those players would be available later.

or, we could pick a top-tier player at a position of lesser need: Lynch, Meachem, or one of the CBs, Revis or Hall.

If any of those guys are still around, there are plenty of teams in the bottom half of round 1 who would love a chance to get a potential star at RB, WR, or CB. PLENTY. we would have no shortage of trading partners, I think.

In the end, this draft is going to be a win-win for us. Either Levi Brown or a top defensive front 7 talent falls to us, or we get to trade down and collect picks and build back the depth. the other option, of course, is that we land a potential star at rb, cb, or wr, and while these aren't our most urgent needs, landing a guy with a good chance of becoming an impact guy is never a bad thing with a round one pick.

My prediction: we're trading down, to somewhere in the mid-20s, and we're picking Spencer or Grubbs/Blalock/Staley.

but it's going to be interesting.
Logged
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #2 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 15:26 »

Quote

It wouldn't surprise me to see the NYG scenario happen, maybe less likely is the AZ.  But let's say I wouldn't be utterly shocked.

At 1.20, they could certainly take one of the OLBs, a CB, or even Zeirlein's man-love, Staley.  I'd assume we'd use one of the three R2 picks on a top OG.  Another IOL for OC (if Mahan moves to OG) or OG (if Mahan sticks at OC).  Probably a top RB or WR.  

Just using the team visits as a template:

1.20 (NYG) - Timmons, OLB
2.38 (AZ) - Sidney Rice, WR
2.46 - Antonio Pittman, RB
2.51 (NYG) - Ryan Harris, OG (listed at OT, but could move inside to LG)

4.119 - Anthony Waters, ILB
4.132
Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12191
Online Online

Posts: 22,285



« Reply #3 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 15:54 »

Splat, I like your mock much better than mine.  I was simply trying to use only known visits, and oddly, we've used none on IOL.  Also, as for Timmons, I'd much rather have Revis, but sometimes get the feeling they really like Timmons.  

If your draft came to pass, I'd be stoked.  
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
jonzr
Asst. VP, Jonzring
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 11363
Offline Offline

Posts: 11,532


Have a cup o' joe.


WWW
« Reply #4 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 16:36 »

Quote
Splat, I like your mock much better than mine.  I was simply trying to use only known visits, and oddly, we've used none on IOL.  Also, as for Timmons, I'd much rather have Revis, but sometimes get the feeling they really like Timmons. 

If your draft came to pass, I'd be stoked.
I like splat's draft, too.  You get a good skill guy with the first pick and beef up the lines with 3 picks in rd 2.  Add a WR and RB in the 4th and a bunch of depth projects for the rest of day two.
« Last Edit: Apr 24, 2007 at 16:38 by jonzr » Logged

"I like David Bowie, he was always my favorite member of Tin Machine."
- Rodney Anonymous

It's a Steeler Nation
VThrilla18
Member
***

Karma: 154
Offline Offline

Posts: 215



WWW
« Reply #5 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 17:29 »

I really beileve that Timmons is our guy.. and NYG wants him 2.. so a trade with them, i dont see happening.
Logged

steelers4lyfe333
Member
***

Karma: 153
Offline Offline

Posts: 141



« Reply #6 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 18:00 »

I used to believe Timmons was what we wanted.. After reading what I have about him I just cant see us burning a 1st rounder on him... They believe alot of James Harrison.. and so do I..I see the linebacker we want coming in the 2nd or 3rd..We dont need an immediate impact LB.. We need some who we can groom behind Harrison for some years. Hell James could be a gem..1st rounders are meant to be immediate impact players.. like Santonio and Heath...I still either like Revis or trading down and taking a CB 1st or out of the 1st all together..Just can't wait till Saturday to see it all go down
Logged
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #7 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 21:29 »

WHo knows, maybe Tomlin is going to be one of the draft gurus of the new millenium (*sp).  i wouldnt mind seeing him pulling furry fucking rabbits out of his hat if the end result was the draft scenerio like i depicted.

Even if they go with Timmons round one, there damn well better be a CB selected on day 1.  Im not as confident as some with the secondary that we have in place.  And i guess the demise of one Ricky Ricardo have been greatly exaggerated.  the fucker is still here..wtf..i thought he quit.  did he pull a Costanza or something hoping everyone would forget he quit?  fucker!  anyway, i would be geeked if we selected either Revis or hall and even a Houston to a lesser extent round 1.

its all a pipe dream...i didnt stretch on too far down the depth charts on the selections.  i gather they are either +/- 5 spots for the latter round selections.

we desperately need help at OLB, but that crop of "top" tiered OLBs leaves alot to be desired if you asked me.
 
Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
give'emthaboot
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1469
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,837



« Reply #8 on: Apr 24, 2007 at 21:37 »

i have a question just because ive never paid attention to it in the past:

Finny, you mocked out in this thread based on visits, do the Steelers in their recent history stick to guys they have had visits with prior to the draft or is it a mixed bag of visits/non-visits?  in other words, because we didnt visit a player, does that mean we arent interested?
Logged

'Oh, my, James Harrison is not going to the White House, he must be a devil worshiper!'
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12191
Online Online

Posts: 22,285



« Reply #9 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 07:33 »

Quote
i have a question just because ive never paid attention to it in the past:

Finny, you mocked out in this thread based on visits, do the Steelers in their recent history stick to guys they have had visits with prior to the draft or is it a mixed bag of visits/non-visits?  in other words, because we didnt visit a player, does that mean we arent interested?
Without any real way to back it up, I'd say it is a mixed bag.  IMO, you don't bring a guy in you have no interest in, which is why the guys like Rogers and Bliss seem odd visits; of course, maybe Colbert's dedicating more due diligence to day 2.

But you gotta figure guys on our list are also players other teams want.  And even if they visit, they may not be the top players on our board at a given spot.  There might just be unanswered questions.

Still, one thing the visits spell out pretty clearly: draft day intentions.  We're definitely looking at a bunch of OLB guys, CBs, WRs.  Not much IOL, curiously, though a few tackles -- maybe my theory of Mahan at center and a rookie tackle pushing Colon inside holds H2O after all.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
aj_law
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5533
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,061


« Reply #10 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 09:38 »

Quote
i have a question just because ive never paid attention to it in the past:

Finny, you mocked out in this thread based on visits, do the Steelers in their recent history stick to guys they have had visits with prior to the draft or is it a mixed bag of visits/non-visits?  in other words, because we didnt visit a player, does that mean we arent interested?
IIRC, (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong) of the last 7 first round picks, I'm pretty sure they brought in almost all of them.  Can't remember if Simmons was interviewed and oddly enough, I can't remember if they brought in San Antonio "John" Holmes last year.

The more I think about Holmesy, I think he might've been brought in late as sort of a late afterthought because it wasn't expected that he would be there when they picked.  Simmons...I can't remember.

The others...Miller, #7, #43, Hampton and Plax all visited...I believe.

Then again though, consider that all those picks were under the Cowher regime.  There's a new sheriff in town and nobody knows 'cept him whether he's going to continue that trend.
« Last Edit: Apr 25, 2007 at 09:39 by aj_law » Logged

We suck because our drafts have been THE SUCK.
mvk112
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: 186
Offline Offline

Posts: 557


WWW
« Reply #11 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 10:04 »

trade down with jets for #25, & #59, giving them #15 & 5th rounder
trade faneca to cardinals for #38 & next years 3rd rounder

1.25 - Lawrence Timmons, LB, Florida State
2.38 - Justin Blalock, OG, Texas
2.46 - Dwayne Jarrett, WR, USC
2.59 - Daymeion Hughes, CB, Cal
3.77 - Quinn Pitcock, DL, Ohio State

4.119 - Anthony Waters, LB, Clemson
4.127 - Lorenzo Booker, RB, Florida State
5.170 - Dan Mozes, C, West Virginia
6.192 - Clark Harris, TE, Rutgers
7.227 - Roderick Rogers, S, Wisconsin

I think the Giants take Pozlusny, and Timmons will still be there at 25.
Jarrett may drop to our original 2nd round spot.
Booker will give us a very good 3rd down back who is explosive, and a decent blocker.
Logged
aj_law
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5533
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,061


« Reply #12 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 10:23 »

Quote
1.20 (NYG)
2.38 (AZ)
2.46
2.51 (NYG)

Just using the team visits as a template:

1.20 (NYG) - Timmons, OLB
2.38 (AZ) - Sidney Rice, WR
2.46 - Antonio Pittman, RB
2.51 (NYG) - Ryan Harris, OG (listed at OT, but could move inside to LG)
 
Using your methodology and assumptions, I think my picks would end up being closer to Jack's than yours, Fin.

I fucking hate all the Timmons talk.  I just don't like it.  I can't put my finger on the main reason, I just know that it feels like the wrong pick.  Not very scientific or analytical and it certainly falls short of the unabridged War and Peace draft reasoning of that dude from BSG, but that's what my gut tells me and I'm stickin' to it.  The only college LB I'd be cool with them taking in the first is Willis.  After that, it's all tweeners or maybe a guy like Poz in R2 if he slips, but I doubt it.

Don't like the Rice or Pittman picks.  I firmly believe that if Faneca gets dealt, they have no choice but to take an OC or OG early and maybe even burn two Day One picks on the O-line.  Whether it's at 2.38 or 2.46 probably depends a lot on who's still on the board, but I don't see them burning one of those early ones on a WR.  As to RB, I really don't understand the reasoning behind the Pittman interest.  It really baffles me.  There's zero talk about a RB in R1.  None.  But, using a R2 pick on Pittman?  IMO, the difference in skill level between Lynch and Pittman is huge.  If they're going to burn an early pick on a RB, just fucking take Lynch already.  Pittman isn't even serviceable as a backup.  My $0.02 there.

Ryan Harris is the one pick I really like.  I think that's a sleeper pick.  Solid, solid fundamental lineman.  Exactly what I like to see from a front 5 prospect.  Mid to late R2 might be a little early, but I think it's a safe bet that he'll be long gone by the time their turn comes around again in R4.

With all that said, here's who I would take with those Day One picks you outlined:

(1.20) - Revis, Hall, or maybe Carriker if he slips that far.
(2.38) - Spencer or Woodley
(2.46) - Blalock or Grubbs
(2.51) - Ryan Harris or David Harris  
Logged

We suck because our drafts have been THE SUCK.
Hercules50
Member
***

Karma: 158
Offline Offline

Posts: 407


« Reply #13 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 12:26 »

Good points. I agree that if Faneca is traded, TWO Day One picks on O-linemen will probably be necessary. The team shouldn't be slavish about that -- if quality players are taken before each of our picks, reaching would only hurt us in the long run.

Second-- I really think the idea of getting two Day One picks for Faneca is a pipe dream. Think about it: he's old, he's expensive, he's got one year left on his deal, and, so far as we know, there is exactly one bidder for his services.

I, for one, will be thrilled if, in the event that we trade Faneca, we get one 2nd rounder for him. Would not shock me if we only get a 3rd rounder for him.

(In which case, I think it would be best if we made him play out his deal and part ways after the season. But if Faneca tells the team he's not going to play without a new deal, he could force their hand.)
Logged
TwistedLemon
Member
***

Karma: 777
Offline Offline

Posts: 493



« Reply #14 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 15:28 »

Somewhere in the mix.....assuming he is there at say last of 3 picks in round 2, or only round 3 (depending whose scenario is used) why not J Durant?
Logged

"My reality check bounced"
VThrilla18
Member
***

Karma: 154
Offline Offline

Posts: 215



WWW
« Reply #15 on: Apr 25, 2007 at 16:30 »

Quote
trade down with jets for #25, & #59, giving them #15 & 5th rounder
trade faneca to cardinals for #38 & next years 3rd rounder

1.25 - Lawrence Timmons, LB, Florida State
2.38 - Justin Blalock, OG, Texas
2.46 - Dwayne Jarrett, WR, USC
2.59 - Daymeion Hughes, CB, Cal
3.77 - Quinn Pitcock, DL, Ohio State

4.119 - Anthony Waters, LB, Clemson
4.127 - Lorenzo Booker, RB, Florida State
5.170 - Dan Mozes, C, West Virginia
6.192 - Clark Harris, TE, Rutgers
7.227 - Roderick Rogers, S, Wisconsin

I think the Giants take Pozlusny, and Timmons will still be there at 25.
Jarrett may drop to our original 2nd round spot.
Booker will give us a very good 3rd down back who is explosive, and a decent blocker.
No way Jarrett falls that far into the 2nd round.. something tells me he wont fall past Dallas in the first.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [All]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!