PDA

View Full Version : Steelers Meet With LSU TE Foster Moreau At Senior Bowl



Shoes
01-23-2019, 01:42 PM
Well, at least they are looking at the TE position....no more 5 & 6 round TE's, please. Now, I would really be getting excited if it was TJ Hockenson! Tomlins only chance to get me back on his side :lol:


https://steelersdepot.com/2019/01/steelers-meet-with-lsu-te-foster-moreau-at-senior-bowl/

steelreserve
01-23-2019, 02:34 PM
The only reason I can think of why this makes sense is if we are looking to move on from James or Grimble or both. TE is not really a "need" for us - we've got a pretty good starter, at least an all right backup, and ... a third tight end. (but how much can you really expect out of that position)

ILB, OLB, and DB all look to be bigger needs, and unfortunately we can't ignore OL now.

I mean, really what we need is a good LB coach, a good DB coach and a good OL coach, but as long as we're sticking with the strategy of zero player development and everyone plays the same as when they were a rookie - we need about 6 more first-round picks to be starters, plus 6 other first-round picks to be the busts who we won't admit are busts for two or three years too long.

Shoes
01-23-2019, 04:11 PM
The only reason I can think of why this makes sense is if we are looking to move on from James or Grimble or both. TE is not really a "need" for us - we've got a pretty good starter, at least an all right backup, and ... a third tight end. (but how much can you really expect out of that position)

ILB, OLB, and DB all look to be bigger needs, and unfortunately we can't ignore OL now.

I mean, really what we need is a good LB coach, a good DB coach and a good OL coach, but as long as we're sticking with the strategy of zero player development and everyone plays the same as when they were a rookie - we need about 6 more first-round picks to be starters, plus 6 other first-round picks to be the busts who we won't admit are busts for two or three years too long.


Agreed. At some point, we need to ask ourselves why we continue to draft the same positions every year. Why not run more two TE sets?. Ben could have a field day slinging it 10 yards at a time. :chuckle: If you draft a top TE you are set for 10 years, a TE like Hockenson is one I'd make an exception for, he does everything well, better than kittle imo.

pczach
01-23-2019, 06:24 PM
The only reason I can think of why this makes sense is if we are looking to move on from James or Grimble or both. TE is not really a "need" for us - we've got a pretty good starter, at least an all right backup, and ... a third tight end. (but how much can you really expect out of that position)

ILB, OLB, and DB all look to be bigger needs, and unfortunately we can't ignore OL now.

I mean, really what we need is a good LB coach, a good DB coach and a good OL coach, but as long as we're sticking with the strategy of zero player development and everyone plays the same as when they were a rookie - we need about 6 more first-round picks to be starters, plus 6 other first-round picks to be the busts who we won't admit are busts for two or three years too long.



If they really are looking to trade AB, getting another all-around TE makes sense.

A good blocking TE could lead to more 2 TE sets and improve the running game.

A greater focus on the running game is exactly what they need. As an added plus, with McDonald and another quality receiving TE, there will be two potential physical mismatches. Now if the team actually would use a little play action passing on top of that...big things can happen.

If the running game is more effective, there will be better numbers on the backend because they will see eight in the box more often. If they find a quality third WR in the draft or free agency, they are really on to something.

The way I see it, this is one of the directions they may elect to go if AB is moved.

Ben isn't getting any younger. A strong running game can be his best friend and the best friend of the defense. This may be the best chance of winning going forward.

El-Gonzo Jackson
01-25-2019, 01:06 AM
Agreed. At some point, we need to ask ourselves why we continue to draft the same positions every year. Why not run more two TE sets?. Ben could have a field day slinging it 10 yards at a time. :chuckle: If you draft a top TE you are set for 10 years, a TE like Hockenson is one I'd make an exception for, he does everything well, better than kittle imo.

Yeah, take the BPA in a position that you can improve. If you draft for need you end up reaching for guys like Artie Burns.

Sure I would like to see a ILB drafted, but if value isn't there, then take the BPA if he is TE, CB, OLB.

HollywoodSteel
01-27-2019, 10:32 AM
This is why you don’t trade AB. So that you don’t go around drafting TEs in the first round.

There is obviously a line to draw between reaching for a player of need and taking the BPA. But Artie Burns was not a bad pick because he was a position of need, he was a bad pick because he ended up sucking. There are no sure things except knowing what we already have and what we need. The only thing that makes a position of need a bad pick, assuming you are picking the best player at the position, is if you could get the same player (or very similar one) in the next round. Otherwise you take the piece of the puzzle to help get you to the Super Bowl. Not to help you win best overall draft.


Should we take an Olineman if that’s the BPA at pick 20? If there’s an ILB who is graded to go at pick 26 that would really fill a need?

There are obviously other factors, like how many ILBs are there. And can we get one who is basically the same talent that we can actually acquire with our next pick.

Of course, if we’re stupid enough to trade AB then we add positions of MAJOR need. Like new owner. But I’d much rather get a great value pick of a TE in round 3 or later (since the need right now that we still have AB and a #1 TE is a COMPLIMENTARY TE. And we can get a solid one in the mid rounds) and take the risk of reaching a bit to possibly get a couple of defensive needs met in the first couple rounds.

There are no parades for best value picking in the draft.

teegre
01-27-2019, 10:38 AM
The Steelers routinely meet with 5-7 TEs every off-season. This year should be no different... except, I expect it to be more towards 7.

McDonald is a keeper, but he is not without warts. Jesse James is gone. Grimble and the other three guys on the practice squad “could” be solid starters, but none of them have shown much.

The good news is: there are a dozen (literally: twelve) TEs worthy of being drafted this year.

Born2Steel
01-27-2019, 02:41 PM
I still have serious doubts about our current TE room. McDonald was a very good addition this past year. But we know better than to trust any player after only one year. I felt James was improving but fell off a bit last season. Grimble has shown me nothing to say he's a keeper. McGee is a wait and see guy now after his Achilles injury. And lastly who IS Bucky Hodges really? Hyped pre-draft but has not panned out so far.

DesertSteel
01-27-2019, 10:05 PM
I still have serious doubts about our current TE room. McDonald was a very good addition this past year. But we know better than to trust any player after only one year. I felt James was improving but fell off a bit last season. Grimble has shown me nothing to say he's a keeper. McGee is a wait and see guy now after his Achilles injury. And lastly who IS Bucky Hodges really? Hyped pre-draft but has not panned out so far.
Vance has actually been with the Steelers for two years. It just seems like one because he's always injured :).

teegre
01-27-2019, 10:12 PM
Vance has actually been with the Steelers for two years. It just seems like one because he's always injured :).

Which is exactly why drafting a TE early isn’t a bad idea.