- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,428
- Reaction score
- 907
- Points
- 113
If they thought Moats was a starter they wouldn't have signed and started Harrison ahead of him.
Moats
- Thread starter LeXX75
- Start date
If they thought Moats was a starter they wouldn't have signed and started Harrison ahead of him.
The same could be said for Shamarko last year, they started Will Allen over him yet they seem content with letting Allen walk and cutting or retiring Troy which would indicate that they plan to start Shamarko this year. So even though these two may not have been chosen to start over others last season, this isn't necessarily an indication they won't be considered for the starting jobs this year.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2014
- Messages
- 13,022
- Reaction score
- 17,711
- Points
- 113
They are but that would have to come in the draft. Any free agent better than Worilds will also have a higher price tag and likely be unaffordable. Pernell McPhee signed for 8 Mill per year. That's probably a bit out of the steelers price range.
Do you take a chance on Orakpo? Teams have to be scared of his injury history. Maybe he comes at an affordable price because of that.
No matter how you look at it, the Steelers need to hit on a pass rusher in the draft. That's why they are in this mess in the first place.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 1,428
- Reaction score
- 907
- Points
- 113
The difference is we've seen much more of Moats play throughout his career to make an assessment. Solid depth guy who had a few good games as a starter but also disappeared for a few games. The jury's still out on a younger Shamarko who could break out this year or be a bust. Could Moats start? Maybe, but only if the Steelers don't fill the spot in FA or draft with a better alternative. Don't expect the Steelers to stop looking just because Moats is signed.
They knew that Harrison knew the D. Moats was still somewhat unknown at that point. I think he could be a Clark Haggans stopgap type player. It would be better to have him as a #3 but I think he'll be decent as a #2.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 706
- Reaction score
- 462
- Points
- 63
Uh, I think Moats is our #1 guy right now. More production than any of our OLBs from last year EXCEPT Deebo. First 339 snaps as an OLB in his career. Unless they bring Deebo back, he is our number one, IMO.
Maybe Jarvis pans out, maybe Worilds comes back at what he should have signed for last year but either way, Moats has shown more to this point as a 3-4 OLB to me.
Maybe Jarvis pans out, maybe Worilds comes back at what he should have signed for last year but either way, Moats has shown more to this point as a 3-4 OLB to me.
You just made a statement that with a lil tweak is equally true:
The difference is we've seen much more of Worilds' play throughout his career to make an assessment. Solid depth guy who had a few good games as a starter but also disappeared for a few games. The jury's still out on Moats who could break out this year with more playing time. Could Worilds be re-signed? Maybe, but only if the Steelers don't fill the spot in FA or draft with a better alternative. Don't expect the Steelers to stop looking just because Worilds is still available.
I like all of the edge rushers in the 1st except Randy Gregory, he turned out to be the small one and not Beasley. Also, he is atrocious against the run, while every single one of them needs to get better at setting the edge to defend the run, Gregory is by far the worst and he just didn't come across as special on tape as the media makes him out to be (I think he has bust written all over him).
Originally I wanted no part of Vic Beasley because of his assumed weight but I rethought Vic Beasley after the combine and went back to watch his tape, even though he needs to get better vs. the run, he is so quick and flexible off the edge he reminds me of Von Miller (I'd take a Von Miller type any day of the week). Some here will surely worry about his size, but he's no Jarvis, his agility tests, bench reps, and 40 proved he shows far more potential than that. Don't get caught up in weight even though he's 246 and carried that weight well, not all edge rushers of the same ht/wt are alike athletically or talent wise (Beasley shows much more potential as a consistent threat off the edge at the very least he's a situational pass rusher who gets to the QB, at best he is the next Von Miller who will only get better with coaching and strengthening).
I like both Dupree and Fowler Jr. as well. They are the bigger OLBs, although Fowler Jr. is almost guaranteed to be gone before we could sniff him (Most likely case with Beasley and Ray too). That leaves Dupree who for being 269lbs, he is extremely athletic but didn't have the production you'd hope for. That is not to say we shouldn't be looking at him, as we should. He may have the highest ceiling of any of the edge rushers in the 1st, but his inconsistency at Kentucky is why he may be available at 22. For a guy of his size and the freaky athletic ability he showed off at the combine, their is tremendous potential (If you were to build a 3-4 OLB, he would probably look and move like Dupree), yet he was so inconsistent in college that some scouts and pundits even questioning his work ethic and whether he took plays off (I don't think that is the case) but the fact remains he is going to be drafted based on measurables and potential. The reason you like "Bud" as he is nicknamed is because he could possibly be a great all around OLB if he puts it together, although another knock on him is he is slow off the snap (Unlike Beasley and Ray who are lightning when the ball is snapped). One thing that you do see if you watch his tape is he was so athletically gifted they even had him cover TEs and Slot WRs. He does show good strength and bend around the edge, but you'd like to see him be able to flatten while rushing the arc and get to the QB better.
I'm up for taking any of these guys in the 1st except Gregory. I have them ranked as
1- Dante Fowler Jr.
2- Shane Ray
3- Vic Beasley
4- Bud Dupree
5- Eli Harold? Not sure who to put here yet honestly
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 3,130
- Reaction score
- 3,932
- Points
- 113
yeah, because stats just multiply that easily. This is the dumbest argument I've ever seen when trying to compare someone who had less snaps than another at the same position. You can't say that if Moats had the same number of snaps he WOULD have had those stats. He might have finished with the same exact stats he ended the year with.
Moats is a backup and he just signed for backup money. Anyone predicting otherwise is out of their minds!
At one time, early in his career, James Harrison signed for back up money and was damned happy to get it. Not saying Moats is/will be Harrisonlike. Just an observation that some guys actually improve with playing time and dedication to their craft.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 706
- Reaction score
- 462
- Points
- 63
While some won't like the prospect of Moats being a starter for us, he started 9 games last year (2nd only to Worilds). He presently has more 2014 experience than any OLBs on our roster.
As far as statistical extrapolation goes...that IS how it's done. Players are rated statistically based on impact/production per defensive play. PFF grades players this way and as of now we can see that PFF's ratings held true with the contracts received by McPhee and Graham. Worilds was rated behind those two with regard to impact/production per defensive snap played.
Extrapolation is all you have when one player is on the field for 1/3 of the snaps yet manages production comparable to a full time starter. You might not agree but it's method is used in every sport and most business models throughout the world. If you cannot recognize this, you must be 'insaniti'.
Unless we end up re-signing Worilds, or another proven vet, Moats will have more starts again this year, IMO. History suggests this franchise is unlikely to start a rookie at such a key position regardless of where he is drafted. I am anxious to see what Moats can do on the field if given more snaps. I already know what Worilds is capable of doing and I don't think his (Worilds') upside is as high as our #1 OLB at present, Moats'. I just don't know what he can do from the left side IF we leave Jones alone on the right. Right now his size, speed and explosiveness is comparable to Porter when he came out.
As far as statistical extrapolation goes...that IS how it's done. Players are rated statistically based on impact/production per defensive play. PFF grades players this way and as of now we can see that PFF's ratings held true with the contracts received by McPhee and Graham. Worilds was rated behind those two with regard to impact/production per defensive snap played.
Extrapolation is all you have when one player is on the field for 1/3 of the snaps yet manages production comparable to a full time starter. You might not agree but it's method is used in every sport and most business models throughout the world. If you cannot recognize this, you must be 'insaniti'.
Unless we end up re-signing Worilds, or another proven vet, Moats will have more starts again this year, IMO. History suggests this franchise is unlikely to start a rookie at such a key position regardless of where he is drafted. I am anxious to see what Moats can do on the field if given more snaps. I already know what Worilds is capable of doing and I don't think his (Worilds') upside is as high as our #1 OLB at present, Moats'. I just don't know what he can do from the left side IF we leave Jones alone on the right. Right now his size, speed and explosiveness is comparable to Porter when he came out.
You cannot be serious. I can't respond to your comments anymore...
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 3,130
- Reaction score
- 3,932
- Points
- 113
While some won't like the prospect of Moats being a starter for us, he started 9 games last year (2nd only to Worilds). He presently has more 2014 experience than any OLBs on our roster.
As far as statistical extrapolation goes...that IS how it's done. Players are rated statistically based on impact/production per defensive play. PFF grades players this way and as of now we can see that PFF's ratings held true with the contracts received by McPhee and Graham. Worilds was rated behind those two with regard to impact/production per defensive snap played.
Extrapolation is all you have when one player is on the field for 1/3 of the snaps yet manages production comparable to a full time starter. You might not agree but it's method is used in every sport and most business models throughout the world. If you cannot recognize this, you must be 'insaniti'.
Unless we end up re-signing Worilds, or another proven vet, Moats will have more starts again this year, IMO. History suggests this franchise is unlikely to start a rookie at such a key position regardless of where he is drafted. I am anxious to see what Moats can do on the field if given more snaps. I already know what Worilds is capable of doing and I don't think his (Worilds') upside is as high as our #1 OLB at present, Moats'. I just don't know what he can do from the left side IF we leave Jones alone on the right. Right now his size, speed and explosiveness is comparable to Porter when he came out.
A website uses this method, yay... oh it's PFF, nevermind who cares. Everyone loves to say that in a third of the snaps he produced similar stats to Worilds. The problem is that stats can be misleading. Moats had four sacks, one was a botched play, the QB had to eat the ball and Moats was unblocked. Another came late in a blowout game against Carolina, and one of his two sacks in the Cincy blowout game came late after they were down 20 and passing every down. He was inconsistent and that's why Harrison was brought in, and why Harrison started IMMEDIATELY upon being signed.
And IF those stats held true, and you extrapolate the **** out of them, Moats should have got a larger contract than he did... I mean since he was as good as Worilds and all. You think Worilds will sign a 3 year deal for less than he played last year for?
It might work for internet draft gurus such as yourself, but it doesn't apply in the real world. Very few people live up to these full time extrapolated stats that are thrown out by simple math.
This whole history suggests this franchise argument is LOOOOOOONNNNNNNNGGGGGGG gone. Jones started his rookie year, Shazier started his rookie year until he got hurt. Tomlin does not hold players back for the veterans. This isn't the 80's, 90's or even the 00's anymore.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 7,497
- Reaction score
- 5,032
- Points
- 113
I don't need to extrapolate anything with Moats. He outplayed Worilds in 1/3 the time. He was going against LTs not RBs and TEs like Worilds. I have no problem seeing if he can play LOLB or ROLB. Who else on the roster is better?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,569
- Reaction score
- 4,321
- Points
- 113
Just saying if you do the math. Worilds was god awful and half his sacks were either given to him or coverage sacks so I understand you can't just look at the numbers. I was just stating if you do the math that is what Moats would have mathematically did last year. I am more than happy having Moats at 2.5 million than Worilds at 9 million no matter what Moats does this year.
If you do the math, a major league hitter who hits 2 home runs in the first game of the season, is on pace to hit 324 home runs. If you do the math.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,569
- Reaction score
- 4,321
- Points
- 113
If you do the math 337 compared to 978 is 35% playing time of Worilds. If you do the MATH 1 baseball game is 0.6% of the games in a season. The only way to know for sure is to have Moats play an entire season as the starter. But 35% of the snaps is at least a decent sample size.
Dri Archer .....
That's fair (and obviously I was exaggerating to make a point), but extrapolating - even from a 35% sample size - is dangerous business. Anyone who has spent time watching the NFL has seen the RB who looks amazing when he's the "change of pace" back only for the same guy to look incredibly ordinary when he has to shoulder the full load. It is much easier to be productive in spurts when you have fresh legs (true for both running backs and pass rushers) than to be consistently productive over the grind of a 16 game season especially when all your moves are on tape for the world to see.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,089
- Reaction score
- 13,449
- Points
- 113
isn't this true for McPhee and others too?
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 12,089
- Reaction score
- 13,449
- Points
- 113
I agree but it doesn't mean that Worilds deserves an 8M/year contract either. rather have a patch solution than getting hooked up on a high priced long term contract for Worilds
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 3,130
- Reaction score
- 3,932
- Points
- 113
Most definitely, and I for sure wasn't one to say we should go after and break the bank on any of them. I would have liked to have McPhee for the simple fact that it gives us more depth at a weak position and weakens a division opponent all at the same time. I have no issues with Worilds coming back either, just not anything close to what we paid him last year. It just drives me crazy when people say "well if he would have played as many snaps he would have had so and so stats" like it's a fact.
on the weak side 4 years 18 million or see how much pernell wants and try try to hammer out a deal with him.
since we play so much nickel it won't matter if moats lines up inside or outside, unless butler is going to remodel our base nickel.
another option is trade down with say denver, so they can secure max williams and we take olb/de eli harold and he is the future lolb he for this year rotate moats, harrison and harold on the weakside.
as well with a 4-3 spence was a stud lolb at the u, can even play timmons or shazier on the weakside as well.
since we play so much nickel it won't matter if moats lines up inside or outside, unless butler is going to remodel our base nickel.
another option is trade down with say denver, so they can secure max williams and we take olb/de eli harold and he is the future lolb he for this year rotate moats, harrison and harold on the weakside.
as well with a 4-3 spence was a stud lolb at the u, can even play timmons or shazier on the weakside as well.