Steelers select Dri Archer in Round 3

[Vader]

Ease up there cocksmoker. I seem to recall a BUNCH of us "nut huggers" saying "lets wait till he's played a few games to see if he can do it or not". TO THIS POINT, I'd say I was wrong about his ability, however, up till about two weeks ago, everyone ELSE was wrong about wonder boy Bryant too, looks like he indeed might turn out to be special, so I'm GLAD to be wrong thinking he'd be a class a **** up. I HOPE YOU are wrong about Archer, but I'll admit it if I am, I just won't be happy about it.

See the difference there? I'm HAPPY I was wrong about Bryant, and HOPE to keep being wrong. The guy looks like the real deal so far, which Archer does not, however, I will take ZERO joy in being RIGHT if Bryant becomes a ****** player, because I will always look at the highlight reels and HOPE that player is the guy we got. (I hoped Bryant was too, but his preseason SUCKED). Goes to show things can change, and still might for Archer. So far, yep, I was WRONG with Archer, I thought he'd be faster, but so far he doesn't LOOK as fast as he did in pre-season, is that because he's thinking too much, pressing too hard, or is he just not as fast? I don't know, hopefully we find out.

Joe

You cumtwats can try to change what was said but it won't work. A "few" of you may have said let's wait and see. But it was usually wrapped around the prediction that he was almost unstoppable. Then when his 2 pre-season plays happened the nut huggers brought this thread back up to say "NA NA I told you he was good". I guarantee you if he had 2 TDs on returns this thread would be exploding with "I told you so". Hell it happened after 2 pre-season games. He looks slower now because the players know it's not pre-season any more. No more 4th string players. Teams are playing their best players and game planning. And almost everybody is fast in the NFL. Shazier is 2 tenths of a second slower than Archer over 40 yards in SHORTS. I'll say they are closer than that in pads.

I liked the entire draft with the exception of Archer. I said so at the time. I loved Shazier, Tuitt, Bryant, and McCullers. Archer was a luxury pick for a team desperate for talent. Even if he works out as a KR/PR/ gimmick player he isn't worth a 3rd round pick to me. It's a value thing. I don't value small, injury prone, RBs that can never be starters in the league. Especially since the league has made void the KR in today's NFL. That was the point all along. Even at his very best he "might" take a swing pass or a PR to the house. But in order to do that it means that Bell, Blount, Brown, Wheaton, Miller, and now even Bryant won't have the ball in their hands. Which is what happens when you have a specialty player that has to be catered too.

 

[Badcat]

That's the ready-made excuse for any young player who looks like hot garbage. Fact is, he's contributed nothing so far despite plenty of opportunity, and he has a profile that succeeds 0% of the time.

I'll agree that he looks like hot garbage, there is no doubting that. My point is that it takes some players longer to adjust. We all know players who barely made the practice squads of several teams and end up being diamonds. I really believe that Archer is thinking too much and it's slowing him down. He looks slow, he is slow, and he's caught up as a gimmick back who needs to get into a rhythm and get the game jitters out. Build up some confidence and watch him fly. Unfortunately Tomlin gives him a poorly designed "splash play" and once that fails he sits on the bench scratching his nuts.

 

[t-man]

You cumtwats can try to change what was said but it won't work. A "few" of you may have said let's wait and see. But it was usually wrapped around the prediction that he was almost unstoppable. Then when his 2 pre-season plays happened the nut huggers brought this thread back up to say "NA NA I told you he was good". I guarantee you if he had 2 TDs on returns this thread would be exploding with "I told you so". Hell it happened after 2 pre-season games. He looks slower now because the players know it's not pre-season any more. No more 4th string players. Teams are playing their best players and game planning. And almost everybody is fast in the NFL. Shazier is 2 tenths of a second slower than Archer over 40 yards in SHORTS. I'll say they are closer than that in pads.

I liked the entire draft with the exception of Archer. I said so at the time. I loved Shazier, Tuitt, Bryant, and McCullers. Archer was a luxury pick for a team desperate for talent. Even if he works out as a KR/PR/ gimmick player he isn't worth a 3rd round pick to me. It's a value thing. I don't value small, injury prone, RBs that can never be starters in the league. Especially since the league has made void the KR in today's NFL. That was the point all along. Even at his very best he "might" take a swing pass or a PR to the house. But in order to do that it means that Bell, Blount, Brown, Wheaton, Miller, and now even Bryant won't have the ball in their hands. Which is what happens when you have a specialty player that has to be catered too.

The dude should be returning punts, there is NO reason to have Brown out there doing it. If he doesn't do that this year, they shouldn't have taken him where they did. In my mind, he was worth that pick to keep AB off the field for PR's, but that isn't happening, and I don't know if it's cause he can't, or the coaches just aren't willing to put him out there.

But yes, I was indeed one of them saying "lets not say the dude can't play till we've seen him in the regular season". As a matter of fact, just about every post I can remember started with "He hasn't even played a regular season game" and some started with "he hasn't even played in pre season game" when people were bashing the pic before the OTA's.

And yes, I did say "He's fast" and "He'll be hard to cover". I am pretty sure the first one is still true, and I haven't seen him on the field enough to say if I was wrong about the second or not.

Joe

 

[Hines57]

Not sure where he fits going forward. The opportunities to run gimmick or set plays just to him will decrease as guys like Moore, Bryant and even DHB get more reps. The kick return issue is a major problem for the team. Our field starting field position average on kicks is one of the worst in the league. I hope the kid can get some opportunities and do good things. The jury on him will be out for another year or so. Wonder who they have in mind for this year's 3rd round to start another firestorm? Its not quite mocking season yet.

 

[Vader]

The dude should be returning punts, there is NO reason to have Brown out there doing it. If he doesn't do that this year, they shouldn't have taken him where they did. In my mind, he was worth that pick to keep AB off the field for PR's, but that isn't happening, and I don't know if it's cause he can't, or the coaches just aren't willing to put him out there.

But yes, I was indeed one of them saying "lets not say the dude can't play till we've seen him in the regular season". As a matter of fact, just about every post I can remember started with "He hasn't even played a regular season game" and some started with "he hasn't even played in pre season game" when people were bashing the pic before the OTA's.

And yes, I did say "He's fast" and "He'll be hard to cover". I am pretty sure the first one is still true, and I haven't seen him on the field enough to say if I was wrong about the second or not.

Joe

If all you wanted was a PR to get Brown off the field then you could get that later in the draft or a cheap FA. Archer didn't even return punts in college often. When he did he had something like 2 returns for 6 yards. I'd never waste a 3rd round pick on just a PR... especially one that doesn't return punts.

 

[Superman]

apparently, the only player on our roster capable of returning punts is Brown.

 

[t-man]

If all you wanted was a PR to get Brown off the field then you could get that later in the draft or a cheap FA. Archer didn't even return punts in college often. When he did he had something like 2 returns for 6 yards. I'd never waste a 3rd round pick on just a PR... especially one that doesn't return punts.

Circular arguments are what got this thread to 150 plus pages, I have no doubt it can get it to 250 or 300 if you like. They took him where they took him, they took the guy everyone wanted WHEN they took him in the NEXT round. We will see how it pans out, I haven't had a look at my google document of the 10 people we SHOULD have taken instead of Archer lately, perhaps I'll do that later and compile their career stats to date, just to see.

Joe

 

[t-man]

Perspective, this is a list of the players we were going to be "kicking ourselves, wishing we had taken instead of Archer"

Ellington 4-45 yards (wr)
Reynolds- No starts, no stats
Antonio Richardson- No starts no stats
Carl Bradford No stats
Ryan Carrethers 9 tackles
Justin Ellis- 11 tackles
Daquan Jones- 0 tackles
Jarred Abbrederis no starts, no stats
Cameron Fleming - 4games played, 2 started week2 and week4
Nevin Lawson - 1 tackle

Dri Archer 7 carries 37 yards

Best stats of the group for yards- 45 from a wr with 4 catches.
Best stats of the group for tackles - 11 tackles (less than 2 per game)
Archer has 37 yards produced so far, which as I look at it, sucks, but as I look at the "other guys we will wish we had taken" doesn't exactly stack up too bad, does it?

Joe

 

[Idioteque]

And yes, I did say "He's fast" and "He'll be hard to cover". I am pretty sure the first one is still true, and I haven't seen him on the field enough to say if I was wrong about the second or not.

We were told for about 791 pages that the omniscient coaching staff knows what there is to know about these players, and that they drafted Archer for a reason. They only give him a small handful of snaps a game, so by this logic, they think either (a) he sucks a dick and shouldn't be on the field much, or (b) we're better off spreading the ball around to our actual playmakers.

 

[Drink IRON City]

Great post Joe, thank you


"spread Karma before giving"



Salute the nation

 

[FordFairLane]

Actually if you count his 9 receiving yards he leads the group from a yard from scrimmage stand point.

Again, not saying he is blowing it up but I am just not willing to give up on him this soon. I would love to see him used as a decoy once and then just as a dump off outlet for Ben. Have him do a drag route over the middle and be a dump pass 4th option for Ben. Maybe that gives him a little space with AB and the rest clearing out some DB's. But this screen pass BS is just not working!

 

[Idioteque]

We will see how it pans out, I haven't had a look at my google document of the 10 people we SHOULD have taken instead of Archer lately, perhaps I'll do that later and compile their career stats to date, just to see.

LOL, I have no doubt about that. It seems to be what keeps you going on here.

 

[Idioteque]

Perspective, this is a list of the players we were going to be "kicking ourselves, wishing we had taken instead of Archer"

Ellington 4-45 yards (wr)
Reynolds- No starts, no stats
Antonio Richardson- No starts no stats
Carl Bradford No stats
Ryan Carrethers 9 tackles
Justin Ellis- 11 tackles
Daquan Jones- 0 tackles
Jarred Abbrederis no starts, no stats
Cameron Fleming - 4games played, 2 started week2 and week4
Nevin Lawson - 1 tackle

Dri Archer 7 carries 37 yards

Best stats of the group for yards- 45 from a wr with 4 catches.
Best stats of the group for tackles - 11 tackles (less than 2 per game)
Archer has 37 yards produced so far, which as I look at it, sucks, but as I look at the "other guys we will wish we had taken" doesn't exactly stack up too bad, does it?

Joe

Uh huh. Now we're comparing Archer's yardage to tackle stats from reserve NTs.

THIS is what's needed to make Archer look worthwhile.

 

[t-man]

I advise for next year, we put all this bitching into ONE thread per pick, we get to list the player we would have taken, as the GM, instead of the guy selected. This needs to happen BEFORE OTA's, etc, so no one spots someone lighting it up in training camp or whatnot, and then can hop on that dudes bandwagon. Seems we have a LOT of armchair gm's here, I'm wondering how many would end up picking guys who actually perform better than the guy we select.

As I've said in plenty of threads, hindsight can make anyone look like a draft genius "I thought we should have taken Montana!" is easy to say looking back, but at the time, well, who knows how many thought that. That list of 10 does not really have any gang busters on it yet, I know we're only 8 games in, but it's the same 8 games in for all the guys, so it is what it is.

Joe

 

[t-man]

Uh huh. Now we're comparing Archer's yardage to tackle stats from reserve NTs.

THIS is what's needed to make Archer look worthwhile.

Dude, the only stats that actually "compare" on that list are the wr stats, but this isn't MY list. Point blank, it was stated there would be TEN GUYS WE WOULD WISH we had taken. That's the 10, implying every ******* one of em is going to without a doubt outperform our little fella. So far some of em haven't gotten on the field in a game. It is what it is.

Joe

 

[Idioteque]

I advise for next year, we put all this bitching into ONE thread per pick, we get to list the player we would have taken, as the GM, instead of the guy selected. This needs to happen BEFORE OTA's, etc, so no one spots someone lighting it up in training camp or whatnot, and then can hop on that dudes bandwagon. Seems we have a LOT of armchair gm's here, I'm wondering how many would end up picking guys who actually perform better than the guy we select.

Why is this important to you? It seems as Tape once said that you want to give people **** for making projections or taking a stance on something.

As I've said in plenty of threads, hindsight can make anyone look like a draft genius "I thought we should have taken Montana!" is easy to say looking back, but at the time, well, who knows how many thought that. That list of 10 does not really have any gang busters on it yet, I know we're only 8 games in, but it's the same 8 games in for all the guys, so it is what it is.

Joe

This doesn't hit the point, though.

Take the 10 names I gave you. It was a list of my top 10 remaining prospects at the time of the Archer pick. Now, I'm wrong on guys all the time. Those were 10 guys I liked that I could well be wrong on. Hell, I made that list expecting to be wrong on several. What I stated was that there would be 10 guys we'd rather have taken, not that I had some master list of The Untouchable Ten. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that 7-9 of my choices never amounted to anything, but I'd bet that about ten guys will have posted better careers than Archer.

 

[Idioteque]

But if you want to spend more than three seconds to evaluate these guys, we can:

Ryan Carrethers - 48 snaps with positive grades v. the run and the pass. Had 4 tackles against KC, 3 of them within 2 yards of the LOS. For comparison sake, he's drastically outplayed Tuitt on much fewer snaps.
Justin Ellis - 39 snaps per game (he plays more than half of each game) with an average grade v. the run. PFF gives him 4 hurries and 5 tackles within 2 yards of the LOS.
Cameron Fleming - has started two games, grading average in one and negatively in the other.
Bruce Ellington - 8th in the NFL in kick return average (ahead of Cordarrelle Patterson).
Nevin Lawson - played 82% of snaps in Week One before being lost for the year to injury. I don't know whom he covered in that game, but I know the Giants' outside WRs combined to catch two passes for one yard.

 

[Vader]

I don't care if nobody in the entire draft works out. That doesn't mean taking Archer was the right call. You have to play the odds when drafting. You don't draft small, oft injured, part time specialty players in the 3rd round. There are 0, ZERO, NONE, of them in the NFL that I would draft in the 3rd round. I think the stat is that only 12% of 3rd rounders work out. Ok out of that 12% how many of them are 5'7 3/4 and 173 lbs specialty players? Even at his best I'd rather have an average 3rd CB or blocking TE.

And as I've mentioned before... Almost everyone on this board at one time or another has blasted other teams for drafting players in shorts. I can't think how many times I've heard people on here ***** about team X taking someone based on a 40 time or because they ran track. Now when the shoe is on the other foot...... well.. um... he's fast.. oh I mean he's illusive. Yea, right.

 

[Hines57]

Yup that 2011 draft where we took Curtis Brown in round 3 and Cortez Allen in round 4 and some guy named Sherman was drafted in round 5......******* Archer.

 

[Steeltime]

Regarding possible replacement picks - what about Brashad Breeland? 5'11", 200 lbs. Now a starting CB for the Skins. 26 tackles, 5 passes defensed, 1 interception, 2 stuffs.

I think I would take him over Archer.

 

[t-man]

Listen, either you ************* want to say 'I can do a better job' or you don't. I'm just big on put the **** up, or shut the **** up. The R E A S O N, I don't ******* go around bashing on this pick or that is I don't have the knowledge to do so. YOU ************* are the ones telling all of us that YOU know so and so should have been taken instead of this guy or that guy.

****, I LOVE it when someone takes a position, I'd just like them to not be a ***** and take it at the same ******* time our GM has to take it, not 5 ************* years later. I'm odd that way.

Joe

 

[Hollywood Bags]

I advise for next year, we put all this bitching into ONE thread per pick, we get to list the player we would have taken, as the GM, instead of the guy selected. This needs to happen BEFORE OTA's, etc, so no one spots someone lighting it up in training camp or whatnot, and then can hop on that dudes bandwagon. Seems we have a LOT of armchair gm's here, I'm wondering how many would end up picking guys who actually perform better than the guy we select.

As I've said in plenty of threads, hindsight can make anyone look like a draft genius "I thought we should have taken Montana!" is easy to say looking back, but at the time, well, who knows how many thought that. That list of 10 does not really have any gang busters on it yet, I know we're only 8 games in, but it's the same 8 games in for all the guys, so it is what it is.

Joe

How about we don't and say we did?

 

[Vader]

Listen, either you ************* want to say 'I can do a better job' or you don't. I'm just big on put the **** up, or shut the **** up. The R E A S O N, I don't ******* go around bashing on this pick or that is I don't have the knowledge to do so. YOU ************* are the ones telling all of us that YOU know so and so should have been taken instead of this guy or that guy.

****, I LOVE it when someone takes a position, I'd just like them to not be a ***** and take it at the same ******* time our GM has to take it, not 5 ************* years later. I'm odd that way.

Joe

So having an opinion is "I can do a better job?" I didn't like him the second he was drafted NOT 5 years later. What's your position? And if you give an opinion does that mean you can do a better job?

 

[t-man]

Regarding possible replacement picks - what about Brashad Breeland? 5'11", 200 lbs. Now a starting CB for the Skins. 26 tackles, 5 passes defensed, 1 interception, 2 stuffs.

I think I would take him over Archer.

Yep, and that's AWESOME, but it's also very easy to do. This is how things usually go around here-

On draft day- Man I HATE that ******* pick, why did we take that guy?

Reply- Who should we have taken?

Well ANYONE but him, blah blah blah.

Two years later,

Yeah, I SOOO would have taken *Now well established player* over that ******* scrub we have.

Problem is, it's using hidnsight, and bashing the guy who does NOT have the ability to know what's going to happen with a guy 2 years from now any more than you do. ****, none of your jobs rest on picking the right guy, but when I suggest we do it, just to see how many of those picks would pan out, people start calling ME out, WHY do I want to know these things? Hmmmm? WHY would I want to know WHO you WOULD pick?

Well, senior ********, it's because when you're on here bashing the pick of the guy who DOES have the job, I'd like to know who YOU might have taken, so we have something to compare that DOES NOT have the benefit of hindsight.

Joe

 

[Steeltime]

Listen, either you ************* want to say 'I can do a better job' or you don't. I'm just big on put the **** up, or shut the **** up. The R E A S O N, I don't ******* go around bashing on this pick or that is I don't have the knowledge to do so. YOU ************* are the ones telling all of us that YOU know so and so should have been taken instead of this guy or that guy.

****, I LOVE it when someone takes a position, I'd just like them to not be a ***** and take it at the same ******* time our GM has to take it, not 5 ************* years later. I'm odd that way.

Joe

But I think Vader's point - a valid one - is that he can name 10 guys he would have picked in the 3rd round, and every one of them would have been a better pick.

Why? Because Archer is small, oft-injured, without a position, and very limited in what he can do. His one possible skill - kickoff returns - has been basically eliminated by the NFL with kickoffs from the 35-yard line.

So the fact is that any one of 50 possible selections would have been better. These posters said this in April, they said it in August, and they are saying it now. I thought, "Ehhh, give the guy a chance."

I did. Archer was not a good pick. His deficiencies are many, and his contributions few. Take a shot at a CB. At the very worst, the guy can help special teams. At best, he turns into Breeland, a talented starting CB.

That has been the point the entire time. (And I don't speak for Vader or anybody else, I am just offering what I think their point is to answer your criticism.)