PDA

View Full Version : WR with the first pick?


lamberts-lost-tooth
02-17-2008, 05:25 AM
Most of you have seen my draft so you KNOW that I want to grab a Offensive Tackle when #23 rolls this year

However....

Can a case be made to grab a Wide Receiver?

Hypothetically lets say that there is a run on OT's in the first 20 picks...and one of the top WR's are still on the board.

Would we pass on a Malcolm Kelly, DeSean Jackson, Early Doucet, or Limas Sweed?

Where is the cut off?........ WR/Doucet over OT/Cherilus?....OT/Williams over WR/Sweed?

I take into consideration a couple of things....
1) Ward is a stud...but not a young stud and has been struggling to stay on the field for the last two years
2) Holmes is very good but has also missed time and really hasnt got to that place in his career yet where he terrifies opponants
3) Wilson is a bust...say what you will but his lack of TDs is why is our 4th reciever
4) I like Washington , but its now time to realize he is a good player...but will never be a great player.
5) With the drafting of some of those WR's we could actually boost our return game.


All that being said...I still think that with Long, Clady, Baker, Otah, Williams, and Cherilus...all possibly being worthy of the #23 pick ...we PROBABLY will still go OT.

Aussie_steeler
02-17-2008, 05:56 AM
The WR corp and Ben were very productive this season gone. Strengthen the O line and reduce the ridiculously high number of sacks and imagine what could happen then with their production.

I would take a DE like Balmer over a WR personally if no OT's were left. If WR is really a need it can be addressed in the mid rounds.

Otah, Williams or Cherilius will do nicely.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-17-2008, 06:29 AM
The WR corp and Ben were very productive this season gone. Strengthen the O line and reduce the ridiculously high number of sacks and imagine what could happen then with their production.

I would take a DE like Balmer over a WR personally if no OT's were left. If WR is really a need it can be addressed in the mid rounds.

Otah, Williams or Cherilius will do nicely.

But what if the #1 WR is available at #23....and the best OT left is ...say...Nicks....hypothetically what do you do?

Galax Steeler
02-17-2008, 06:46 AM
But what if the #1 WR is available at #23....and the best OT left is ...say...Nicks....hypothetically what do you do?
I see your point why have an ot that may never be that great when you can get a reciver that could boost your offensse that is something to think about.

FourThreeMafia
02-17-2008, 06:48 AM
With our current needs, I dont see any possible way we would ever take a WR in the first round in the 2008 draft.

A first round WR is usually an immediate starter. Despite the fact that Holmes and Ward are always getting hurt, we dont need another starter right now.

Obviously our biggest need is on the OLine. Clady and Long will definitely be gone, and there is a good chance that Williams and Otah are gone to.

Gosder Cherilus is not great value at 1:23. He is a career RT, and while we need a RT, that would be a reach since he is not a first round calber pick.. My next pick after that would be Branden Albert. He can play guard his rookie year, and in 2009, slide to LT. He is very versatile and can play both T and G.

If he is somehow off the board as well, I would take either Phillip Merling or Jonathan Stewart if one of them happened to be avaiable. Merling could provide a interior pass rush we need and Stewart is just an animal. I know we have bigger needs at CB as well, but there isnt a huge talent gap in who we could find in the late first and late third.

My Steelers first round Big board:
1. Chris Williams
1b.Jeff Otah
2. Branden Albert
3. Jonathan Stewart
4. Phillip Merling
5. Dominique Rodgers Cromartie

lilyoder6
02-17-2008, 11:22 AM
i would take one of the top cb's in the draft over a wr with deshea getting old

TheWarDen86
02-17-2008, 11:45 AM
Most of you have seen my draft so you KNOW that I want to grab a Offensive Tackle when #23 rolls this year

However....

Can a case be made to grab a Wide Receiver?

Hypothetically lets say that there is a run on OT's in the first 20 picks...and one of the top WR's are still on the board.

Would we pass on a Malcolm Kelly, DeSean Jackson, Early Doucet, or Limas Sweed?

Where is the cut off?........ WR/Doucet over OT/Cherilus?....OT/Williams over WR/Sweed?

I take into consideration a couple of things....
1) Ward is a stud...but not a young stud and has been struggling to stay on the field for the last two years
2) Holmes is very good but has also missed time and really hasnt got to that place in his career yet where he terrifies opponants
3) Wilson is a bust...say what you will but his lack of TDs is why is our 4th reciever
4) I like Washington , but its now time to realize he is a good player...but will never be a great player.
5) With the drafting of some of those WR's we could actually boost our return game.


All that being said...I still think that with Long, Clady, Baker, Otah, Williams, and Cherilus...all possibly being worthy of the #23 pick ...we PROBABLY will still go OT.


I think the only way we draft a WR in round 1 is if the Steelers get Matt Millen to run the show.

Mistah_Q
02-17-2008, 12:09 PM
If there really are no OTs or OGs on the board worthy of that #23 spot, I'd have to say first look at DE, then CB, then OC, then LB, then S, then RB, before you think about a WR. If the top WR is available, that's probably DeSean Jackson, and the last thing I want is another midget WR.

19ward86
02-17-2008, 01:22 PM
if (not including jake long) the top 3 tackles are gone, i would either take desean jackson or malcom kelly. (sorry i dont remember their names) but if the guy from boise state, jeff otah, and the other guy(not Cherilus) are gone then a receiver is a big option, i either want a tall guy who can be a third down machine or a lightning fast guy who can boost special teams and enhance our big play game.

rbryan
02-17-2008, 01:30 PM
Theres too many OL projected to go first round for them all to be gone before 23. I'd like to see the Steelers go 1 and 2 on the OL and not draft anyone less than 290 lbs until round 5.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Steelers traded up 7 or 8 spots in rd 1.

MDSteel15
02-17-2008, 03:22 PM
Tooth, I agree. If the top 5 tackles are gone and Doucet is there, TAKE HIM!!! He can not be passed up....

SteelCityMan786
02-17-2008, 03:31 PM
2nd Round maybe. Not first. Usually the years we draft WRs Round 1, we don't have a good year.(2000-Plax, 2006-Santonio) Although they're productive, I just think luck is on our side if we don't go that way in the draft.

Black@Gold Forever32
02-17-2008, 03:37 PM
Basically you're saying the Steelers should draft best available player....Which I agree with....I always like that approach rather reaching for a need....There is bigger needs then a WR currently.....I would like to see an OT or a DL drafted in the first round....But if there isn't any worthy lineman worth taking then I would have no problem with drafting a WR...You can never have enough weapons for your QB....

But I would like to see Talib the corner from Kansas drafted if the top lineman are gone by 23......

xXTheSteelKingsXx
02-17-2008, 03:52 PM
If there is not a worth while tackle left come our pick I say that we really need to think about trading it for say an '09 first round pick and a 4th or 5th this year.

Rhee Rhee
02-17-2008, 04:20 PM
But what if the #1 WR is available at #23....and the best OT left is ...say...Nicks....hypothetically what do you do?

i completely understand where you are coming from and this is what i feel the steelers area of needs are:

1. OT
2. OG
3. CB
4. FS
5a. C
5b. WR

personally i'd rather take DB or chilo rachal or branden albert instead of the #1 reciever on the board... although those guys are very talented i'd rather wait and try to get "the next hines ward" in Early Doucet in the second... (hopefully we trade up or he falls)

brsteelers
02-17-2008, 06:02 PM
Definitely think that an offensive lineman is the way to go and all indications are that one would be around. Still, I'm a believer in taking the best player. But if it's close, and it's hard to fathom a scenario presenting itself where it wouldn't be, then the Steelers have to take an offensive lineman in my opinion.

Dylan
02-18-2008, 03:40 PM
The only receviers i would go for in the 1st is Sweed or Jackson. Jackson will be for special temas and will be groomed to replace ward sometime soon. and sweed will give us the size that we and ben want

MDSteel15
02-18-2008, 06:58 PM
What about an earlier idea in some mocks about trading back with maybe Atlanta, for their 2 2nd rounders?

Dylan
02-18-2008, 07:07 PM
What about an earlier idea in some mocks about trading back with maybe Atlanta, for their 2 2nd rounders?

that wouldnt be a bad idea, because to me this years class is very strong. we could get our lineman we want and also get a wr or whatever is our top priority.

MasterOfPuppets
02-18-2008, 09:17 PM
What about an earlier idea in some mocks about trading back with maybe Atlanta, for their 2 2nd rounders?never happen...atlanta is ditching players bigtime. they need everypick they got to replenish thier roster

DACEB
02-19-2008, 06:51 AM
LLT, I think it is highly irresponsible of you to get people worked up for a 1st round WR!! just kidding LOL

Seriously, I would be shocked if we took any offensive player besides O-line in the 1st. I would'nt surprise me at all if we do not draft any offensive player besides O-line in this draft.

Besides the O-line,all of our immediate and future needs are on defense. Whether for reasons of age, quality of depth or salary. For the team to strengthen the special teams we need DB's and LB's. An infusion of youth on the D-line is necessary for the future and the depth is lacking as we saw when Ar. Smith went down. There is no quality depth at the safety position besides An. Smith. Players at key positions Townsend, Farrior, Smith, Harrison and Hampton (will be) are all over 30.

The Steelers historically spend more on the defensive side of the ball. At this point the team is overpaying for declining play at too many positions. An infusion of youth now on D can open the door for more spending on the O in the future. It would most likely serve our STs well also.

I don't think it is too far fetched to think the team puts the franchise tag on Starks. I agree with LLT on this one, I could easily see on O-line made up of guys we currently have on the roster.

LT Starks
LG Colon, Kemo, Mahan (not that I want this)
C Stapelton, Simmons, Colon
RG Simmons, Kemo, Colon
RT Smith

We have the players we need on offense to win now, besides a cohesive O-line. We need help on defense to line up man to man and shut down a drive when we need to.

GBMelBlount
02-19-2008, 07:50 AM
I don't think it is too far fetched to think the team puts the franchise tag on Starks. I agree with LLT on this one, I could easily see on O-line made up of guys we currently have on the roster.

LT Starks
LG Colon, Kemo, Mahan (not that I want this)
C Stapelton, Simmons, Colon
RG Simmons, Kemo, Colon
RT Smith

We have the players we need on offense to win now, besides a cohesive O-line. We need help on defense to line up man to man and shut down a drive when we need to.

Sorry, Gotta disagree here. No offensive line that gives up close to 50 sacks a year will be cohesive no matter how you shuffle them IMO. Not addressing O-line last year was a big mistake and if we don't this year we'll be even worse off.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 08:03 AM
Sorry, Gotta disagree here. No offensive line that gives up close to 50 sacks a year will be cohesive no matter how you shuffle them IMO. Not addressing O-line last year was a big mistake and if we don't this year we'll be even worse off.

I DO believe we have to ..and will...address the line by drafting two linemen in the first three rounds...However...I think a good portion of our O-line problems were a direct result of having two Guards playing at the wrong position. Mahan should never have been put at Center with his lack of upper body strength, (especially with the bull-rushing NT's in the AFCN) and Colon would be a much better Guard than a Tackle.
Moving those two to their natural positions will make them both better lineman. Simmons is stronger than Mahan...and should be tried at center.
OT and Guard are priorities in this draft with a Center not far behind but if Simmons can not make the transition to Center than we make Mahan a backup Guard and Colon and Simmons become our Starters..then OT and Center become priority and Guard not far behind.
Our Tackle situation is obvious and perhaps teh immediate band-aid is to move Starks to LT and Marvel to RT...with the drafted OT getting reps in anticipation of moving into the starting lineup next year.

TackleMeBen
02-19-2008, 08:08 AM
Sorry, Gotta disagree here. No offensive line that gives up close to 50 sacks a year will be cohesive no matter how you shuffle them IMO. Not addressing O-line last year was a big mistake and if we don't this year we'll be even worse off.
:iagree: i dont think we will keep our qb healthy if he has to take another 50 sacks this season. we need to fix the o line. i think we can make do with the WR we already have. we just need to teach ced how to hold onto the ball.

DACEB
02-19-2008, 08:09 AM
Hey, I'm not saying to not address it, GBMB. I just don't think that any other offensive position, besides O-line, is a greater need than DL, DB or LB.

I think it would be foolish to go O-line crazy in the draft, and neglect the other needy positions. The team has a bunch of interior linemen even with Faneca leaving, so the need is at tackle. I would be perfectly happy drafting one of the stud OTs in the 1st and possibly another or a center in the later rounds, but to sit here and say we need to draft three or four O-linemen is absurd. And to think we can afford to splurge on offensive players we don't need while neglecting the positions we do would be irresponsible.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 08:38 AM
:iagree: i dont think we will keep our qb healthy if he has to take another 50 sacks this season. we need to fix the o line. i think we can make do with the WR we already have. we just need to teach ced how to hold onto the ball.

Cedric only has two more TD's than I have since the Steelers picked him up!!!!!

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 08:45 AM
Hey, I'm not saying to not address it, GBMB. I just don't think that any other offensive position, besides O-line, is a greater need than DL, DB or LB.

I think it would be foolish to go O-line crazy in the draft, and neglect the other needy positions. The team has a bunch of interior linemen even with Faneca leaving, so the need is at tackle. I would be perfectly happy drafting one of the stud OTs in the 1st and possibly another or a center in the later rounds, but to sit here and say we need to draft three or four O-linemen is absurd. And to think we can afford to splurge on offensive players we don't need while neglecting the positions we do would be irresponsible.

Thats what I think people are missing by this thread....Both of us understand that we WILL address the line very early in this years draft. But that we have been saying there COULD be a scenerio where the best OT or Guard left, that will fit our system could be had in the 2nd and 3rd round....and WHO WOULD WE TAKE AND AT WHAT POSITION IF THAT IS THE CASE?

I think we may actually draft three O-lineman in this draft unless we pick up someone in FA.

DACEB
02-19-2008, 08:51 AM
I think a good portion of our O-line problems were a direct result of having two Guards playing at the wrong position. Mahan should never have been put at Center and Colon would be a much better Guard than a Tackle. Simmons is stronger than Mahan...and should be tried at center.
Our Tackle situation is obvious and perhaps teh immediate band-aid is to move Starks to LT and Marvel to RT...with the drafted OT getting reps in anticipation of moving into the starting lineup next year.

I think we can all agree on a few things;

1. Mahan sucked so bad last season it is amazing a change was not made during the season. The change to guard might not yield better results.

2. Colon was not much of an improvement at RT over Starks the year before.

3. Colon is a keeper, and a change to guard would be better for him and the line overall.

4. Smith, Simmons and Colon will be starting on the line in '08.

These things we know and believe to be true. That means that our biggest problem is who will play center, because we at least have options for the other positions.

I find it difficult to understand how many believe a rookie or FA is automatically an upgrade over Starks or better yet Smith. Starks was brought in to eventually replace Smith at LT, so why not atleast keep the option open of moving both to thier natural positions. Why spend on a FA that is just as old or older and costs just as much.

I agree we need to address the O-line, but IMO the center position is the most glaring need for '08 because we have guys to field every other position. I think if we had better play from the center position this past season it would have trickled thru the rest of the line.

Mosca
02-19-2008, 09:02 AM
I'm with those who say that if the O-linemen are gone by our pick we should go with defense. A DL or a CB, specifically. Would it be tempting to take a WR? Sure; Ward would put up the best numbers of his career in '08 if we did that.

But, for all the problems we had on offense during out record offensive year, the reason we faded at the end was our lack of depth on defense, on the D-line and in the backfield. We need guys who can rush the passer in a 4-rush, without blitzing, and guys who can go one-on-one with the receivers when we send more than four. My dollars to donuts wager is that contrary to conventional wisdom, this will be a defensive draft, and you won't see us take those o-linemen until later rounds.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 09:16 AM
I'm with those who say that if the O-linemen are gone by our pick we should go with defense. A DL or a CB, specifically. Would it be tempting to take a WR? Sure; Ward would put up the best numbers of his career in '08 if we did that.

But, for all the problems we had on offense during out record offensive year, the reason we faded at the end was our lack of depth on defense, on the D-line and in the backfield. We need guys who can rush the passer in a 4-rush, without blitzing, and guys who can go one-on-one with the receivers when we send more than four. My dollars to donuts wager is that contrary to conventional wisdom, this will be a defensive draft, and you won't see us take those o-linemen until later rounds.

I can see a scenario where we take a CB in the 2nd and a DE in the 4th....but for the record...I am still hoping that we get a WR in FA and get rid of Wilson.

DACEB
02-19-2008, 09:26 AM
I'm with those who say that if the O-linemen are gone by our pick we should go with defense. A DL or a CB, specifically. Would it be tempting to take a WR? Sure; Ward would put up the best numbers of his career in '08 if we did that.

But, for all the problems we had on offense during out record offensive year, the reason we faded at the end was our lack of depth on defense, on the D-line and in the backfield. We need guys who can rush the passer in a 4-rush, without blitzing, and guys who can go one-on-one with the receivers when we send more than four. My dollars to donuts wager is that contrary to conventional wisdom, this will be a defensive draft, and you won't see us take those o-linemen until later rounds.

Great points Mosca!! That is exactly my point!!

Injuries and lack of depth is exactly why our D faded (and the team overall) at the end.

The point you bring up about the D-line rush and the DBs is right on also. This is the reason we have a hard time stopping the late game drives and long 3rd downs. When the defense steps away from 'the scheme' and just mans-up the defense struggles.

Everyone think about this; Who here wants to see our defense drop out of the top 10?
I for one want to remain THE #1 DEFENSE in the NFL!!

DACEB
02-19-2008, 09:28 AM
I think we may actually draft three O-lineman in this draft unless we pick up someone in FA.

That's the scenerio that worries me.

The Duke
02-19-2008, 09:50 AM
Everyone think about this; Who here wants to see our defense drop out of the top 10?
I for one want to remain THE #1 DEFENSE in the NFL!!

not gonna happen with our schedule

if we stay in the top 10 that means the defense is playing great, which ultimately means the team is doing great

When the defense steps away from 'the scheme' and just mans-up the defense struggles.

interesting point, maybe LeBeau should work on that

they were very exposed in game ending drives(jets, broncos, jags, even the 2nd browns game), and thats mainly due to lack of pass rush, so hopefully woodley and timmons change that

The Duke
02-19-2008, 09:52 AM
sorry, double post

TackleMeBen
02-19-2008, 10:11 AM
does anyone know what timmons health status is? if he is healthy and woodley they could be a force there.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 10:17 AM
That's the scenerio that worries me.

More reason to cross your fingers that the Steelers pick up Locklear.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-19-2008, 10:18 AM
does anyone know what timmons health status is? if he is healthy and woodley they could be a force there.

Last I heard...Timmons is healthy and will be competing at the ILB position.

DACEB
02-19-2008, 10:27 AM
they were very exposed in game ending drives(jets, broncos, jags, even the 2nd browns game), and thats mainly due to lack of pass rush, so hopefully woodley and timmons change that

It's a personell issue not scheme. Your right on about the pass rush, and I expect Woodley to help in that regard. I expect Timmons speed to make a difference also.

The team lacks D-linemen that can line up and get pressure on the QB without a blitz.

Rhee Rhee
02-19-2008, 02:44 PM
More reason to cross your fingers that the Steelers pick up Locklear.

if there's anyone in FA that i don't want it would be locklear... remember during superbowl XL we heard about locklear and his legal troubles?? yea same guy... also he was the weakspot on that solid seahawks o-line... if u noticed the seahawks always ran alexander to that left side with hutch, and jones....

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-20-2008, 07:41 AM
if there's anyone in FA that i don't want it would be locklear... remember during superbowl XL we heard about locklear and his legal troubles?? yea same guy... also he was the weakspot on that solid seahawks o-line... if u noticed the seahawks always ran alexander to that left side with hutch, and jones....



I had forgot about Locklear getting in trouble.

Last January, Sean Locklear who plays for the Seattle Seahawks, was arrested for assaulting his girlfriend. Locklear is a right tackle that is a large part of the team strategy. Allegedly, Locklear was upset about his girlfriend dancing with another man at a night club. They allegedly engaged in an argument on the street.

When the police arrived, Locklear’s girlfriend was less than cooperative. She did have red marks on her, but refused treatment or photographs of her injuries. She even stated that Locklear did not do anything wrong.

With that being the case, Locklear did get off rather easy for this charge. Instead of option for a trial that would have likely torn through his image and his girlfriend’s image, he chose to take a deal. His lawyers wanted him to go to trial, but he resisted.

He was sentenced to community service for the next two years
http://ezinearticles.com/?Sean-Locklear:-Sentencing&id=258825


Even more reason to believe they will try and fix the line with reshuffling and through the draft

tony hipchest
02-20-2008, 10:47 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d806c11f3&template=with-video&confirm=true

long article with plenty of stats, and prospects. alot of options make me hope we dont piss away a 1st rounder on a wr.

Every front office and personnel department worked overtime last weekend trying to get a grip on their own free agents, potential free agents around the league, the upcoming Combine for draftable players and what the market may be at each position.

A number of front office people from around the league told me they anticipate what one GM called irresponsible spending when free agency opens up. Another front office executive said, "Just because we need a certain position player doesn't mean we should spend $15-20 million in guaranteed money for an average guy. That was done here in the past and it disrupts the locker room and distorts our draft process."

Getting a good feel for each position and the multiple talent pools from which to draw is critical for wise decision making and team building. Right now, the position that jumps out at me as hard to get a handle on is wide receiver.

It seems like every day the talent available is changing and it looks like it's turning into a buyer's market if a team is looking for wide receivers. Let's take a look at all of the talent pools for wide receivers. Keep in mind most NFL teams are going to carry five or six WRs on their roster when September rolls around.


There will be different levels of interest in free-agent receivers like Jerry Porter of the Raiders (44-705-6TD), Bryant Johnson of the Cardinals (46-528-2TD), Ernest Wilford of the Jaguars (45-518-3TD), Drew Carter and Keary Colbert of the Panthers, and David Patten of the Saints ... just to name a few. Keep in mind the best wide receiver in the draft last year was Calvin Johnson and he only caught 48 passes and four touchdowns. The most productive rookie was Dwayne Bowe of the Chiefs, who had 70 receptions and five TDs. But they were first-round selections and I'm fairly confident you can pick up a solid veteran from this list for less money than a first-round receiver this spring.

Finally, teams like Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Washington and Chicago may need a big wide receiver. Dallas, Minnesota, Tennessee, and Jacksonville may desire a speed receiver. A team like Philadelphia may need someone to put it over the top. There should be little problem satisfying a team need at receiver this offseason.

DACEB
02-20-2008, 12:20 PM
Good stuff Tony!!