Wasted Picks and Alternative History

[Mojouw]

https://www.nfl.com/draft/tracker/picks?round=3

So that is the third round of the 2018 draft. I realize this is a bit of a straw man, but where is the "win now" player the Steelers missed on?

Look at the guys that went between Rudolph and Chuks.

I see a couple of WR - already got one of those. Plus if everyone is healthy and Washington is good almost no snaps left for a 2018 contribution.
I see a TE that maybe helps. BUT rookie TEs are notorious for NOT making an impact in year one, often at all. Again, little chance of a 2018 contribution.
An edge rusher that has a position fit question in the NFL (Hubbard) and an edge rusher that has character and effort flags (Key) - neither guy was getting picked by Colbert and company. Maybe an edge has a rotational role in 2018? But they are almost certainly going to run Dupree and Watt out there 9/10 snaps.
And ILBer Malik Jefferson who tests out of this world, but fell to the third round because many believe he is simply too stupid to play "fast" in college, let alone the NFL. Well the Steelers got that exact same player in the UDFA kid from FSU.

This is not meant as a defense of the Rudolph pick, but every single time I see the "But WIN NOW!" argument being made, I almost never see an alternative scenario with specifics provided - just some nameless faceless prospect that will rise out of the third round and help the franchise do win now things.

In contrast, there is a direct path to a 3rd Round QB helping the Steelers "win now". How many seasons hang on a thread when Ben R gets dinged up and misses 1-4 games? Then Landry or some other dirtball comes in and limps through a few games. Ben rushes back to salvage the season, never looks quite right for the majority of the rest of the season, and then the Steelers have to go on the road for the playoffs and lose? Yeah, that has NEVER happened. Maybe, Rudolph can step up and be the guy that, for almost the first time ever (because Dixon and Lefty got hurt) IF Ben R has to sit a few games, he actually can because the team will be able to run a competent NFL offense. Do I or anyone else know that for sure? Absolutely not. But I do know that back-up QB is far more critical to a playoff team's success (Foles, Nick; Keenum, Case; Hoestetler, Jeff) than a 3rd string rotational DE is gonna be.

[hawaiiansteeler]

ILB Malik Jefferson
ILB Oren Burks
DE/OLB Sam Hubbard
DE/OLB Arden Key
TE Mark Andrews

[86WARD]

We probably won’t know until three years from now if there was a guy...a will never know if he would’ve made a difference.

I thought this thread was going to bring up memories of that 2008 draft...MAN I HATED everything about that draft except for the Limas Sweed pick. Loved that pick. Bruce Davis over Cliff Avril...I was so mad!! So mad...

[Dwinsgames]

We may never know until three years from now if there was a guy...

and even then we still may not know just perhaps have a better feel for what might have been / glad it wasnt ...

different systems/ schemes /outcomes ...

Case Keenum sucked ass with the Rams ... looked like a world beater with the Vikes 1 year later , he did not magically get better , the system fit him perfectly and he excelled within its confines

[86WARD]

and even then we still may not know just perhaps have a better feel for what might have been / glad it wasnt ...

different systems/ schemes /outcomes ...

Case Keenum sucked ass with the Rams ... looked like a world beater with the Vikes 1 year later , he did not magically get better , the system fit him perfectly and he excelled within its confines

Look no further than Mike Wallace...looked like the next big thing with the Steelers...less than mortal since...

[steelreserve]

Rudolph is not the pick I would be criticizing there. If he pans out into a decent starter, we saved ourselves minimum two R1 picks, maybe three. You don't often have a guy who rates highly fall that low, usually you're taking shots in the dark picking QBs that late and get lucky once every 20 years. So that was a good idea, we would have been dumb not to.

What I'm more interested in is: What player could we have drafted in R2 instead of Washington, and then grabbed a WR later in R3 when there are always receivers available.

[hawaiiansteeler]

What I'm more interested in is: What player could we have drafted in R2 instead of Washington, and then grabbed a WR later in R3 when there are always receivers available.

who would you have selected instead of James Washington in Round 2?

[Born2Steel]

Does anyone really believe that the steelers had a round 1 grade on a QB and waited until the 3rd round to draft him? We have discussed on here at great length that the QB is the mostest importantest position ever. You take the franchise QB over ANY other player need. Even if they had Edmunds ranked higher than Rudolph but both still with a 1st round grade, they would have selected QB over WR in the 2nd round. Rudolph was the highest value in the 3rd round because he IS a QB. I do not criticize taking Rudolph in the 3rd simply because he was the best value and the highest valued position on the board at that time. He was the most logical pick there. I thought it was surely going to be Jefferson. Then when they selected Rudolph, I thought it made more sense.

[steelreserve]

who would you have selected instead of James Washington in Round 2?

Possibly Lorenzo Carter at OLB, possibly a tight end. Not really a clear-cut choice there since the ILB prospects were not really good and we already got a safety, and the RB we might have taken went one pick before. The whole thing just kind of stunk.

[Cyphon25]

I know you are addressing the "win now" argument but I still go back to value. I have already said Rudolph was good value in the third but there is still the thought of if Ben really does play 3-5 more years you will likely get almost nothing out of Rudolph which makes the value terrible. So from that side of the argument almost any other position could be argued as more valuable.

Chuks is where I had an extremely large complain and still do. They took a 3rd string project OL instead of picking Josey Jewell who could have possibly been a day 1 starter and a good one at that. Great tackler, solid athlete, great instincts, and good in pass coverage. Still can't figure out what teams weren't liking there. I would have taken him over any ILB outside of Roquan Smith.

[Craic]

Does anyone really believe that the steelers had a round 1 grade on a QB and waited until the 3rd round to draft him? We have discussed on here at great length that the QB is the mostest importantest position ever. You take the franchise QB over ANY other player need. Even if they had Edmunds ranked higher than Rudolph but both still with a 1st round grade, they would have selected QB over WR in the 2nd round. Rudolph was the highest value in the 3rd round because he IS a QB. I do not criticize taking Rudolph in the 3rd simply because he was the best value and the highest valued position on the board at that time. He was the most logical pick there. I thought it was surely going to be Jefferson. Then when they selected Rudolph, I thought it made more sense.

I think you're forgetting that a round 1 grade doesn't mean a round 1 pick for your team. It means you think he's worthy of a round one pick even if you have no desire to pick him because you have other holes to fill/areas of impact that can help you more. However, when a round 1 player drops to you in the third round, you snag him anyway. That's exactly what I think happened.

- - - Updated - - -


I know you are addressing the "win now" argument but I still go back to value. I have already said Rudolph was good value in the third but there is still the thought of if Ben really does play 3-5 more years you will likely get almost nothing out of Rudolph which makes the value terrible. So from that side of the argument almost any other position could be argued as more valuable.

Chuks is where I had an extremely large complain and still do. They took a 3rd string project OL instead of picking Josey Jewell who could have possibly been a day 1 starter and a good one at that. Great tackler, solid athlete, great instincts, and good in pass coverage. Still can't figure out what teams weren't liking there. I would have taken him over any ILB outside of Roquan Smith.

On the other hand, Ben has a history of not playing every game of the season due to injury. And, he's getting older so injuries take a little longer to heal. I'd much rather face a three-game stretch with Mason as QB than Jones, and that's long before we even see him in training camp.

[pczach]

I understand both sides of the argument.

I completely understand the team drafting a guy they think has a chance to be a great QB, while Ben is getting up there in age. Ben is getting up there in age, and the team legitimately evaluated Rudolph as a first round pick that they believed was as good or better than all the top rated QBs coming out this year. It's hard to argue with that when they have him that high on their board.

I also understand Ben thinking.....Why the F are you drafting quarterbacks when the team needs a couple players to get over the top now.

The one thing that nobody has been saying is that the Steelers have drafted three quarterbacks in the last six years while the roster was weak, they had a franchise quarterback and future HOF player, and there were many holes to fill on the roster.

I truly had more of a problem with the Landry Jones and Josh Dobbs picks than the Rudolph pick because the team needed so much roster help in those years, and you need to get every available ounce of potential out of your team when you have a great quarterback that you know is going be playing for a while.

Fans can say that it is only one draft pick when they take a quarterback that has not shot at starting, but I'm sure Ben is looking at it like.....you guys have used three draft picks in the last six years that could have been used to make my team better while I'm still able to do this. I believe the argument about naming the player they should have drafted that would make a difference just doesn't hold water. We don't know the team's draft board, or any of the team needs they didn't try to fill because they took a shot at using a pick on a quarterback. It could have been anyone that was available in the draft from the moment they used the pick on the QB.

The team made some tough choices. Whether Ben or I or any of us here agree or disagree with how things went down doesn't matter. What's done is done. All everyone can do going forward is to embrace the challenges with the players that are on the roster. Ben needs to take care of his business, prepare as hard as he can, lead the team, and do everything he can to help the team win....including helping the other quarterbacks whenever possible. That's what good teammates do. and good leaders do.

The only things that really matter from here from a football perspective is how Ben handles things going forward, and how the team is able to further improve the roster.

If both do everything they can, they have a chance to do great things.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

So you are saying that the Steelers could have drafted TE Jake Butt in 2016 in the 4th round, or TE George Kittle, or TE Jordan Leggett or DB Damonte Kazee instead of wasting the pick on Josh Dobbs, who will be working as an engineer in 3 years or less from now?

[Steeldude]

So you are saying that the Steelers could have drafted TE Jake Butt in 2016 in the 4th round, or TE George Kittle, or TE Jordan Leggett or DB Damonte Kazee instead of wasting the pick on Josh Dobbs, who will be working as an engineer in 3 years or less from now?

I wanted Kittle.

[pczach]

So you are saying that the Steelers could have drafted TE Jake Butt in 2016 in the 4th round, or TE George Kittle, or TE Jordan Leggett or DB Damonte Kazee instead of wasting the pick on Josh Dobbs, who will be working as an engineer in 3 years or less from now?



Yeah, I think so.

After the team had to start rebuilding the old roster after the 2011 season, I could never understand why they would use a draft pick on a quarterback when they had a HOF quarterback in his prime. They could just pick up anybody off the street, or sign a veteran that was willing to work at a low salary to play for a winner. The team would lose if Ben went down anyway, so why even address the QB position when they should have been using every single draft pick to get quality position players to put around him.

It's not even a statement on Dobbs' ability. It's just my opinion of how they should have handled rebuilding the roster.

[El-Gonzo Jackson]

Yeah, I think so.

After the team had to start rebuilding the old roster after the 2011 season, I could never understand why they would use a draft pick on a quarterback when they had a HOF quarterback in his prime. They could just pick up anybody off the street, or sign a veteran that was willing to work at a low salary to play for a winner. The team would lose if Ben went down anyway, so why even address the QB position when they should have been using every single draft pick to get quality position players to put around him.

It's not even a statement on Dobbs' ability. It's just my opinion of how they should have handled rebuilding the roster.

Yeah, I think when your QB is 36 and been talking about retiring in the media, its time to look at if you can find a successor. But IMO, they could have drafted a starting TE in the 4th round instead of a successor to the backup QB role in the 2017 draft.

I understand this season that the Steelers and others had Rudolph as maybe a guy that would be drafted from position 25-45, so when he was still there in the 3rd, why not pick him. I heard a Miami media member yesterday just shocked that they didn't draft Rudolph in the 2nd and instead choose to still ride with Tannehill.

[Mojouw]

I know you are addressing the "win now" argument but I still go back to value. I have already said Rudolph was good value in the third but there is still the thought of if Ben really does play 3-5 more years you will likely get almost nothing out of Rudolph which makes the value terrible. So from that side of the argument almost any other position could be argued as more valuable.

Chuks is where I had an extremely large complain and still do. They took a 3rd string project OL instead of picking Josey Jewell who could have possibly been a day 1 starter and a good one at that. Great tackler, solid athlete, great instincts, and good in pass coverage. Still can't figure out what teams weren't liking there. I would have taken him over any ILB outside of Roquan Smith.

That entire argument hangs on whether or not you see the next Sean Lee or a below the line NFL athlete when you watch Jewell play. Clearly you see the next Sean Lee. I don't. Assuming the Steelers don't either, than a potential swing tackle or starting LT in the NFL is a far better use of resources than a rotational ILB who largely contributes on ST's as a moderately better version of Matakevich.

Of course, the above response is built on the idea that Chuks can play at least RT in the NFL and likely LT as well in 2 years. Is that correct? No idea.

Bottom line is the Steelers think Chuks is an NFL tackle and they (based on draft actions and Colbert's numerous comments on the ILB class) thought that Jewell was a flawed ILB that would not be able to contribute over all 3 downs in all situations at the NFL level.

Honestly, all I am pointing out is that can we take Jewell=Day 1 starter as a given? I don't think we can for any draft pick outside of the top 10-15 guys in a given class.

[Mojouw]

Yeah, I think so.

After the team had to start rebuilding the old roster after the 2011 season, I could never understand why they would use a draft pick on a quarterback when they had a HOF quarterback in his prime. They could just pick up anybody off the street, or sign a veteran that was willing to work at a low salary to play for a winner. The team would lose if Ben went down anyway, so why even address the QB position when they should have been using every single draft pick to get quality position players to put around him.

It's not even a statement on Dobbs' ability. It's just my opinion of how they should have handled rebuilding the roster.

OK. But turn the argument on it's head. If you ignore the back-up QB position in the draft and with a maxed salary cap each off-season (which they have basically had since 2010) you have to pass on the top tier vet FA guys - you are essentially saying that the roster will be loaded, but if Ben goes down the season is over and the team has no chance to win anything meaningful.

On one hand that maximizes the roster that Ben has to work with and opens a championship window a bit wider for his prime. On the other hand it puts AB's, Bell's, Heyward's, etc Championship window entirely on Ben R and potentially allows seasons of their prime to be wasted due to lack of competent to good back-up QB play.

For example, look at the Packers versus Vikings or Eagles this season. The Pack had a wasted season after Rodgers went down - the others went to the playoffs and beyond.

[Cyphon25]

That entire argument hangs on whether or not you see the next Sean Lee or a below the line NFL athlete when you watch Jewell play. Clearly you see the next Sean Lee. I don't. Assuming the Steelers don't either, than a potential swing tackle or starting LT in the NFL is a far better use of resources than a rotational ILB who largely contributes on ST's as a moderately better version of Matakevich.

The odd part of this argument though is that there isn't a lot backing up the complaints on Jewell. How did guys like Edmunds, Smith, and Evans have 1st round grades when Jewell blew them out of the water in production, particularly in the passing game where you think his limits as an athlete would show. He certainly didn't play slow on tape and at the combine he had the 2nd best 3 cone of all ILB's. I have yet to see any reasonable explanation as to why Jewell shouldn't be more than just a rotational guy.

Of course even if he is he still offers immediate ST value whereas Chuks offers you nothing. So regardless, the better value as we sit here today was with Jewell. Now of course if Chuks becomes a starting tackle and Jewell is always just a backup then the debate is over and Chuks wins but we can't predict the future. So as it stands today is all we have to go by the value was easily in picking Jewell based off of everything we know.


Bottom line is the Steelers think Chuks is an NFL tackle and they (based on draft actions and Colbert's numerous comments on the ILB class) thought that Jewell was a flawed ILB that would not be able to contribute over all 3 downs in all situations at the NFL level.

Honestly, all I am pointing out is that can we take Jewell=Day 1 starter as a given? I don't think we can for any draft pick outside of the top 10-15 guys in a given class.

Well sure, it is obvious what they thought, I just think they got it wrong and badly so. At a minimum Jewell would be a day 1 ST starter so there is that. Chuks will be a 3rd string tackle.

[teegre]

Mason Rudolph may or may not be the next franchise QB. If he is, he cost us almost nothing.

In other words, there are two ways to find your franchise QB:
a) overpay to get onto the top 5
b) draft a QB in R3-R4 and hope to strike gold

Ir appears that the Steelers are using Option B. Dobbs may not (probobsly won’t) pan out, but I understand the logic of “wasting” a R4 pick on a QB... as opposed to trading away two future R1 picks in order to make a similar gamble on a guy at #3 (who is probably overvalued anyway).

Furthermore, in response to the “We could have had X instead of Dobbs”, well we also could have had Dak Prescott instead of Jerald Hawkins.

[GBMelBlount]

Mason Rudolph may or may not be the next franchise QB. If he is, he cost us almost nothing.

In other words, there are two ways to find your franchise QB:
a) overpay to get onto the top 5
b) draft a QB in R3-R4 and hope to strike gold

Ir appears that the Steelers are using Option B. Dobbs may not (probobsly won’t) pan out, but I understand the logic of “wasting” a R4 pick on a QB... as opposed to trading away two future R1 picks in order to make a similar gamble on a guy at #3 (who is probably overvalued anyway).

Furthermore, in response to the “We could have had X instead of Dobbs”, well we also could have had Dak Prescott instead of Jerald Hawkins.

IF Rudolph does not pan out when Ben retires, what about c) grab an above average free agent QB that is a good fit for our system? I would imagine Pittsburgh is a very attractive place for a FA QB to land, or any FA for that matter.

[teegre]

IF Rudolph does not pan out when Ben retires, what about c) grab an above average free agent QB that is a good fit for our system? I would imagine Pittsburgh is a very attractive place for a FA QB to land, or any FA for that matter.

True... although, option C costs the most.

[GBMelBlount]

True... although, option C costs the most.

Maybe in straight dollars, but what about the opportunity cost.

Let's say you decide you will only get someone who is proven in the NFL and pay the market value.

Then you do not have to waste years of picks, money and losing seasons on QB's that probably won't work out.

[Mojouw]

The odd part of this argument though is that there isn't a lot backing up the complaints on Jewell. How did guys like Edmunds, Smith, and Evans have 1st round grades when Jewell blew them out of the water in production, particularly in the passing game where you think his limits as an athlete would show. He certainly didn't play slow on tape and at the combine he had the 2nd best 3 cone of all ILB's. I have yet to see any reasonable explanation as to why Jewell shouldn't be more than just a rotational guy.

Of course even if he is he still offers immediate ST value whereas Chuks offers you nothing. So regardless, the better value as we sit here today was with Jewell. Now of course if Chuks becomes a starting tackle and Jewell is always just a backup then the debate is over and Chuks wins but we can't predict the future. So as it stands today is all we have to go by the value was easily in picking Jewell based off of everything we know.



Well sure, it is obvious what they thought, I just think they got it wrong and badly so. At a minimum Jewell would be a day 1 ST starter so there is that. Chuks will be a 3rd string tackle.

I dunno. I just figure that these are the first two "scouting" reports that I could find on Google. Both are far from glowing.

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/josey-jewell?id=32462018-0002-5598-194c-8a71e8b56260 - special teams guy that will struggle to disengage with NFL level blocking
https://www.milehighreport.com/2018/4/5/17201534/2018-nfl-scouting-report-scouting-iowa-linebacker-josey-jewell - ambivalent at best. Tops out as a Borland type 2 down backer - which would be great for the Steelers in 2018.

But that is the thing, for me. And this is just opinion. But it seems that Jewell projects (and who knows if this is correct at all!) to fill a need in 2018 and maybe 2019. Heck if Bostic plays well in camp - everyone seems to forget about him - then Jewell doesn't have a role besides back-up while Bostic is under contract. But there is a slim chance, based on current available info, that Jewell doesn't have limitations in the NFL. Most likely the same limitations that VW has. So, at best, I figure that in 2-3 years (right around that first contract expiration) you are looking to upgrade from Jewell for a "3-Down Backer".

In contrast, Washington, Rudolph, and Chuks -- IF they all hit their projections are 2 contract NFL players. At either starting spots or back-up positions that success in the contemporary NFL requires play at the level of starters.

So on one hand we have a ILB with problematic projections that is blocked by a FA who is league average at worst with some upside in his prime. And blocked by your best run-stuffing LBer and most likely candidate to call your defense at the other spot who is also in his prime. So Jewell doesn't play much in year one - he has no sub package role. Year two he tries to beat out Bostic, VW, and almost certainly a 2019 draft pick.

On the other you have a WR who will play somewhere around 700 snaps (roughly what Juju and Bryant played last season). Interestingly, that is only 30-40 snaps less than VW played all last season (Jewell's best case for rookie year snaps as he will NOT be on the field in sub-packages). I mean, the value is there for a WR and the path to playing time in 2018 is far more open than it is for a limited coverage rookie LBer. I honestly think one of the top 4 draft guys might've found their way on the field for 25-40% of the defensive snaps in 2018 because of their coverage ability, but outside of that it was going to be hard for a rookie ILB to over-take Bostic and this 3 down ability and VW being the vet of the group.

[hawaiiansteeler]

Heck if Bostic plays well in camp - everyone seems to forget about him - then Jewell doesn't have a role besides back-up

or Matakevich...

[Mojouw]

Maybe in straight dollars, but what about the opportunity cost.

Let's say you decide you will only get someone who is proven in the NFL and pay the market value.

Then you do not have to waste years of picks, money and losing seasons on QB's that probably won't work out.

I would rather have to draft a Mason Rudolph type every year in the third round until that roll of the dice pays out than give Kirk Cousins or a 3 years from now Ryan Tannehill 30+ million per year to run my offense.

I wonder if between all of us we can even come up with 6 guys that were "sign a vet FA type" QB's that won anything. I guess we could start with Kurt Warner and end with - ??? I mean Josh McCown is gotta be the poster boy for "vet FA back-up" and near as I can tell he has never appeared in a post-season game. Maybe late-career Favre?

And Warner didn't have proven NFL value. So our list of FA QBs that helped teams win some things and be any better than 6-10 to 9-7 is comprised of who? Culpepper? Cunningham?

[GBMelBlount]

I would rather have to draft a Mason Rudolph type every year in the third round until that roll of the dice pays out than give Kirk Cousins or a 3 years from now Ryan Tannehill 30+ million per year to run my offense.

I wonder if between all of us we can even come up with 6 guys that were "sign a vet FA type" QB's that won anything. I guess we could start with Kurt Warner and end with - ??? I mean Josh McCown is gotta be the poster boy for "vet FA back-up" and near as I can tell he has never appeared in a post-season game. Maybe late-career Favre?

And Warner didn't have proven NFL value. So our list of FA QBs that helped teams win some things and be any better than 6-10 to 9-7 is comprised of who? Culpepper? Cunningham?

How many elite QB's are there at any one time? 6? What is there average career length? 15 years? That is basically, what, 2 1/2 years of draft picks (maybe 25 picks?) for each one that is elite? Not good averages. Even picking one every year middle rounds the chances are pretty low. A lot of arguably wasted picks. We got VERY lucky with Ben. Maybe this translates the same for most positions and I am just being myopic. I dunno.

[Craic]

I still don't get this "wasted pick" nonsense. It's anachronistic and benefits from hindsight. In the 2017 offseason leading up to the season, Ben talked seriously about retirement. In order not to be caught completely flatfooted, the Steelers drafted a 4th round QB that had lots of potential knowing they'd have at least a year to develop him. They weren't going to spend the picks necessary to get high enough in the first round to get one of the top prospects. Now, a year later, a round-one talent according to their draft boards fell to them in the third round. Seeing how QB can make or break a team faster than any other position, the Steelers draft that QB because he fell to a place where they could grab him at a bargain price.

Now, while completely ignoring context, people are projecting the ramifications of Rudolph's pick back into the 2017 draft and calling a 4th round QB pick a wasted pick. It is at the very least, unfair.

[Mojouw]

How many elite QB's are there at any one time? 6? What is there average career length? 15 years? That is basically, what, 2 1/2 years of draft picks (maybe 25 picks?) for each one that is elite? Not good averages. Even picking one every year middle rounds the chances are pretty low. A lot of arguably wasted picks. We got VERY lucky with Ben. Maybe this translates the same for most positions and I am just being myopic. I dunno.

Absolutely the percentages are low, but they are still higher than the FA route. I mean the FA route is statistically just above zero. Unless there are a bunch of guys that I'm forgetting about and that is completely possible.

[Cyphon25]

But that is the thing, for me. And this is just opinion. But it seems that Jewell projects (and who knows if this is correct at all!) to fill a need in 2018 and maybe 2019. Heck if Bostic plays well in camp - everyone seems to forget about him - then Jewell doesn't have a role besides back-up while Bostic is under contract. But there is a slim chance, based on current available info, that Jewell doesn't have limitations in the NFL. Most likely the same limitations that VW has. So, at best, I figure that in 2-3 years (right around that first contract expiration) you are looking to upgrade from Jewell for a "3-Down Backer".

Again though, I am talking about current value based on what we know, not projections. The problem with projecting is that it is all 100% opinion. For example, you are viewing him as a backup and maybe a 1 year contract guy whereas I think he could potentially win the starting job at either spot and even if he didn't would be top backup and an upgrade over the current backups. On top of that, he offers immediate ST value.


In contrast, Washington, Rudolph, and Chuks -- IF they all hit their projections are 2 contract NFL players. At either starting spots or back-up positions that success in the contemporary NFL requires play at the level of starters.

Who's projections though? Again, that is why I am talking about current value and not projected.


So on one hand we have a ILB with problematic projections that is blocked by a FA who is league average at worst with some upside in his prime. And blocked by your best run-stuffing LBer and most likely candidate to call your defense at the other spot who is also in his prime. So Jewell doesn't play much in year one - he has no sub package role. Year two he tries to beat out Bostic, VW, and almost certainly a 2019 draft pick.

On the other you have a WR who will play somewhere around 700 snaps (roughly what Juju and Bryant played last season). Interestingly, that is only 30-40 snaps less than VW played all last season (Jewell's best case for rookie year snaps as he will NOT be on the field in sub-packages). I mean, the value is there for a WR and the path to playing time in 2018 is far more open than it is for a limited coverage rookie LBer. I honestly think one of the top 4 draft guys might've found their way on the field for 25-40% of the defensive snaps in 2018 because of their coverage ability, but outside of that it was going to be hard for a rookie ILB to over-take Bostic and this 3 down ability and VW being the vet of the group.

I am a bit confused by this. I am really only comparing Chuks and Jewell because they were drafted around the same time.

I have no argument against Washington offering immediate value, I just think there was too much value placed (2nd round pick) on a 3rd or 4th WR. If you taking a receiver that high it should be a number 1 or number 2 guy in my opinion.

[Mojouw]

Again though, I am talking about current value based on what we know, not projections. The problem with projecting is that it is all 100% opinion. For example, you are viewing him as a backup and maybe a 1 year contract guy whereas I think he could potentially win the starting job at either spot and even if he didn't would be top backup and an upgrade over the current backups. On top of that, he offers immediate ST value.



Who's projections though? Again, that is why I am talking about current value and not projected.



I am a bit confused by this. I am really only comparing Chuks and Jewell because they were drafted around the same time.

I have no argument against Washington offering immediate value, I just think there was too much value placed (2nd round pick) on a 3rd or 4th WR. If you taking a receiver that high it should be a number 1 or number 2 guy in my opinion.

What are you basing value on beside expected playing time in 2018? Based on responses scattered across this thread and others, I conflated others arguments that Washington was a bad value because he is only a #3 WR with some of your postings. Only real point was that the #3 wideout in this offense plays almost as many snaps as the starting 2 down ILB. So IF Jewell was able to start in 2018, he could play the same snaps as Washington. So don't they have similar value?

If we are not projecting guys forward into roles and playing time, what is your valuation coming from? I mean until these guys play "current value" is based on a projection from draft scouting. Additionally, if we are going to restrict our value evaluations of draft picks to simply what they could do in the NFL if they had to lace 'em up tomorrow - isn't that the most short sighted filter we could use? For instance, if in 2019 Jewell is a back-up ILB and a special teams guy (Matakevich 2.0) and Chuks is the swing tackle pushing for an expanded role who has more value? If in 2020 Chuks steps into the spot vacated by a 32 year old free agent Marcus Gilbert at RT and Jewell takes over for Vince Williams, who has more value? What if in 2021, Chuks slids over to the left side and takes over for an aging Villenueva and Hawkins slots in on the RT spot. Jewell is a 2 down average LB. Who has more value? I would argue in most of those scenarios, the starting OT drafted in the third round provides more value than the LB. But, that is just my opinion and your mileage may vary.

[pczach]

OK. But turn the argument on it's head. If you ignore the back-up QB position in the draft and with a maxed salary cap each off-season (which they have basically had since 2010) you have to pass on the top tier vet FA guys - you are essentially saying that the roster will be loaded, but if Ben goes down the season is over and the team has no chance to win anything meaningful.

On one hand that maximizes the roster that Ben has to work with and opens a championship window a bit wider for his prime. On the other hand it puts AB's, Bell's, Heyward's, etc Championship window entirely on Ben R and potentially allows seasons of their prime to be wasted due to lack of competent to good back-up QB play.

For example, look at the Packers versus Vikings or Eagles this season. The Pack had a wasted season after Rodgers went down - the others went to the playoffs and beyond.



I'm only talking about a couple year window when the team would be good enough to do anything without Ben in there anyway. Remember, I'm talking about when Ben was carrying the team to 8-8 records and then when they started to improve to go 10-6 or 11-5, but still had huge holes on the roster. Without an elite QB, they are a 7-9 team.

In that situation, I don't care if they sign Sally the cashier from the 7 Eleven to play backup to save money. If Ben goes down, the team isn't going anywhere. Once the team is capable of a championship, things change.

The other thing is that when they drafted Dobbs, they already had Landry Jones as the backup. They didn't need another backup. If they thought he could be Ben's replacement and they are drafting a guy they think can be Ben's replacement the very next year, it says something about the quarterbacks already on the roster. If Landry Jones isn't traded or cut, the Dobbs pick was a complete disaster.

I'm hoping It's Ben, Dobbs, and Rudolph in the quarterbacks room at the start of the season. We're simply discussing the timing of drafting quarterbacks.

In the case of the Eagles and Vikings, they had rosters like Cowher's teams that were loaded at nearly all positions but they had competent quarterback play. The Steelers roster isn't at that level yet. I hope it is soon.

[Cyphon25]

What are you basing value on beside expected playing time in 2018? Based on responses scattered across this thread and others, I conflated others arguments that Washington was a bad value because he is only a #3 WR with some of your postings. Only real point was that the #3 wideout in this offense plays almost as many snaps as the starting 2 down ILB. So IF Jewell was able to start in 2018, he could play the same snaps as Washington. So don't they have similar value?


Some of it is expected playing time and some of it is value of the position/projection.


So Washington for example gets good value as far as potential snaps but bad value on position for me. I don't think a 3rd receiver (potentially 4th if we project targets and account for Bell) is worth a 2nd round pick. So that hurts his value.


Jewell on the other hand, is a backup/ST guy at worst, and a starter at best but he is also a round later so the scale changes for value. So if you dropped Washington to the third there would be a much stronger case for his pick value being higher than Jewells. The thing is, I was never really comparing these 2 though. I am comparing Chuks and Jewell because they were picked close together and the Steelers passed on one and took the other.


I don't love the value of the Washington pick but I am also not out to really knock it. I am knocking the Chuks pick, particularly in relation to passing on Jewell.



If we are not projecting guys forward into roles and playing time, what is your valuation coming from? I mean until these guys play "current value" is based on a projection from draft scouting. Additionally, if we are going to restrict our value evaluations of draft picks to simply what they could do in the NFL if they had to lace 'em up tomorrow - isn't that the most short sighted filter we could use? For instance, if in 2019 Jewell is a back-up ILB and a special teams guy (Matakevich 2.0) and Chuks is the swing tackle pushing for an expanded role who has more value? If in 2020 Chuks steps into the spot vacated by a 32 year old free agent Marcus Gilbert at RT and Jewell takes over for Vince Williams, who has more value? What if in 2021, Chuks slids over to the left side and takes over for an aging Villenueva and Hawkins slots in on the RT spot. Jewell is a 2 down average LB. Who has more value? I would argue in most of those scenarios, the starting OT drafted in the third round provides more value than the LB. But, that is just my opinion and your mileage may vary.


The reason I am avoiding projecting forward is because it is almost 100% guesswork and because our evaluations are completely different. You say Jewell is Dirty Red 2.0 and I say he has very real potential to be a pro bowl ILB. So if all things are equal yes, a starting tackle has more value than a starting ILB but we don't have any clue what level these guys will reach so there isn't much to really talk about there. On the other hand, we do have a very good idea of how their careers will start. Chuks is a developmental linemen on a team that has 2 really good starters already in place so he isn't passing either of them up. After them are 2 other guys with starting experience and a year or 2 of knowledge on him. So he has a shot at being number 2 on the depth chart with a very real possibility of being 3rd string with no special teams value. Jewell on the other hand, has 1 starter in front of him in Bostic with injury history and who we haven't play a snap with the Steelers and another who is a good, but not great player in Vince Williams. So the first thing is, Jewell would have a better chance of earning a starting job early than Chuks would. I don't think there should be any disagreement there. Because even if you consider Matekevich top backup there are 2 seperate ILB positions so that could still leave Jewell as a 2 on the depth chart. And of course Red is coming off of injury anyway. Outside of that, Jewell would certainly be a 2-3 phase ST guy so there is immediate value there as well.


That is the point I am getting at. We can almost factually say as we sit here today that Jewell would have been a more valuable pick in the third. We can talk about long term but it is all guesswork so I don't really see where that conversation would get us. You have to consider long term I agree, but as I said our evaluations are very different. So even talking long term I think Jewell probably has more value because I think he will be a great ILB whereas Chuks I just have no idea.

[Mojouw]

Some of it is expected playing time and some of it is value of the position/projection.


So Washington for example gets good value as far as potential snaps but bad value on position for me. I don't think a 3rd receiver (potentially 4th if we project targets and account for Bell) is worth a 2nd round pick. So that hurts his value.


Jewell on the other hand, is a backup/ST guy at worst, and a starter at best but he is also a round later so the scale changes for value. So if you dropped Washington to the third there would be a much stronger case for his pick value being higher than Jewells. The thing is, I was never really comparing these 2 though. I am comparing Chuks and Jewell because they were picked close together and the Steelers passed on one and took the other.


I don't love the value of the Washington pick but I am also not out to really knock it. I am knocking the Chuks pick, particularly in relation to passing on Jewell.





The reason I am avoiding projecting forward is because it is almost 100% guesswork and because our evaluations are completely different. You say Jewell is Dirty Red 2.0 and I say he has very real potential to be a pro bowl ILB. So if all things are equal yes, a starting tackle has more value than a starting ILB but we don't have any clue what level these guys will reach so there isn't much to really talk about there. On the other hand, we do have a very good idea of how their careers will start. Chuks is a developmental linemen on a team that has 2 really good starters already in place so he isn't passing either of them up. After them are 2 other guys with starting experience and a year or 2 of knowledge on him. So he has a shot at being number 2 on the depth chart with a very real possibility of being 3rd string with no special teams value. Jewell on the other hand, has 1 starter in front of him in Bostic with injury history and who we haven't play a snap with the Steelers and another who is a good, but not great player in Vince Williams. So the first thing is, Jewell would have a better chance of earning a starting job early than Chuks would. I don't think there should be any disagreement there. Because even if you consider Matekevich top backup there are 2 seperate ILB positions so that could still leave Jewell as a 2 on the depth chart. And of course Red is coming off of injury anyway. Outside of that, Jewell would certainly be a 2-3 phase ST guy so there is immediate value there as well.


That is the point I am getting at. We can almost factually say as we sit here today that Jewell would have been a more valuable pick in the third. We can talk about long term but it is all guesswork so I don't really see where that conversation would get us. You have to consider long term I agree, but as I said our evaluations are very different. So even talking long term I think Jewell probably has more value because I think he will be a great ILB whereas Chuks I just have no idea.

OK. I can get all that. I just wasn't clear how we were both defining value. Looking just at Chuks and Jewell, I think you are right that it all depends on what anyone sees when they look at Jewell. I am totally willing to acknowledge I am wrong, but I don't see an impressive pro. But I didn't when I watched Chris Borland either and aside from injury, Borland was on track to have a darn good career. I also don't think Matakevich belongs on an NFL field besides ST's. Clearly Colbert disagrees, so again we can see why I don't get paid to do this! I guess it will be interesting to see.

Parting shot on the issue is that if we are trying to focus on keeping Ben's window open, he will need more and more protection from his blockers as he ages. Gilbert will be 32 and asking for the dreaded 3rd contract in 2020. AV will be 32 in 2021. Currently, there are only 8 starting OT's 32 or older in the league. It is possible that both will be retained. It is also possible that by 2021, Hawkins and Chuks are the starting tackles and Feiler is the swing tackle. Getting developmental guys in teh middle rounds that take 2 years to work into the line-up ensures continuity and (hopefully) average to above average play without premium cost - you just have to buy early. Of course it is equally possible that Ben doesn't play past then either. Oddly not talked about that if he does play the far side of his 3-5 years projection, he will be 41!