OT: The Pittsburgher Thread: Off Season We dont need a QB Edition

[WickedWrister]

QB Sch

Yeah from what I can tell, Sanders feels like a QB prospect that should actually be going in the 15-20 range in the draft. QBs always get overdrafted and it costs a fortune to trade up, so him somehow falling to 21 would be really good value for the Steelers. That's a big reason why I don't think he makes it to the Steelers, I can't see a way that someone doesn't trade up to the 10-12 range if New Orleans passes on him. It would be so odd to see him somehow slide to #21 after the QB draft picks last year.

I think the debate is which one of these two options do you like more:

1. Likely using the 2027 1st to trade up in the 2026 1st to get a QB
2. Take Sanders in 2025 1st

Where Sanders is falling in 2025 determines which one of #1 or #2 I think is the correct option here. The max I'd be willing to pay to trade up to get Sanders is a 2026 3rd, which I figure only gets them to maybe #17 or #18 in the draft.

Or the Browns taking Travis Hunter at 2 and then trading back up (they have pick 33) in front of us to pair with Sanders

 

[Empoleon8771]

Or the Browns taking Travis Hunter at 2 and then trading back up (they have pick 33) in front of us to pair with Sanders

Yeah the Browns and Giants both seem like teams that can trade up from their early 2nds to the teens to get Sanders. That's why I think it's probably a moot point to debate it, I just can't see him falling to the Steelers pick.

Like I said, I'd be willing to do their 2026 3rd to trade up a couple of spots in the 2025 draft to get him. More than that, I'd just wait until 2026. I'm not sold enough on Sanders to trade up with a 1st or 2nd to make sure I get him this year.

 

[Peat]

The common pro comparison I've seen for Sanders is Tua, which I'd be pretty damn happy with as an outcome if I'm drafting a QB at #21. I think Sanders is a bit less turnover prone but is more sack prone, so they're not exactly identical, but I think the comparison is appropriate.

I understand not wanting to take a shot on Dart at #21, but I cannot see a justification for not taking Sanders if he slides to #21. I'm really skeptical Sanders even makes it that far, he's a guy that teams usually have to be picking around #10 or higher to get in the draft. I don't see how he realistically gets by NO at #9, he shouldn't go lower than that.

I think it's a pretty easy argument that you're better off with taking Sanders at #21 this year than packaging their 1st next year with a 2027 1st to trade up to #10 and get a QB next year.

See, imo, Sanders is a QB who should be going around 15-25. I don't think he's a top 10 most drafts - hell, the fact it looks like he's maybe not even that in this high end starved draft says it all. Imo, there's serious questions about his ceiling. I can see him as a Tua, and I'd say I regard Tua as that sort of 2nd/3rd tier QB who can do serious damage if you surround him with weapons, not an elite guy.

And I am personally of the opinion that if you draft a Tua you move ahead and do your best, you shouldn't be spending a 1st round pick on a QB unless you believe there's a higher ceiling there. I can respect the argument it's better not to spend all the extra capital on a guy who's still a crapshoot, but I think I'd rather do it as to me the biggest cost with a QB is all the time you spend on him. If you're gonna invest the time, invest it on the best return you can.

That said, I shall not complain too much if they go with him. There is at least a high ceiling shot there, a chance he's the next Burrow. I don't favour him as an option but won't think they're insane if they say otherwise

When it comes to Smith/Sanders, I feel like Sanders fits pretty well with Smith? A play action/timing based offense in theory fits what Sanders strengths should be. At least I think.

Smiths passing offense should be pretty simple for a rookie QB so I actually kind of like him as the OC early in a QBs career. I’ve seen people describe his passing offense as point and shoot. There’s much to it, which is kind of nice for a young QB to get his feet wet.

Iirc, part of the play action stuff puts an emphasis on QB mobility, which he doesn't have?

 

[Empoleon8771]

See, imo, Sanders is a QB who should be going around 15-25. I don't think he's a top 10 most drafts - hell, the fact it looks like he's maybe not even that in this high end starved draft says it all. Imo, there's serious questions about his ceiling. I can see him as a Tua, and I'd say I regard Tua as that sort of 2nd/3rd tier QB who can do serious damage if you surround him with weapons, not an elite guy.

And I am personally of the opinion that if you draft a Tua you move ahead and do your best, you shouldn't be spending a 1st round pick on a QB unless you believe there's a higher ceiling there. I can respect the argument it's better not to spend all the extra capital on a guy who's still a crapshoot, but I think I'd rather do it as to me the biggest cost with a QB is all the time you spend on him. If you're gonna invest the time, invest it on the best return you can.

That said, I shall not complain too much if they go with him. There is at least a high ceiling shot there, a chance he's the next Burrow. I don't favour him as an option but won't think they're insane if they say otherwise

I think this is correct (I'd put Tua firmly in that 2nd tier though), but I also think a 2nd tier QB that can do damage with talent is absolutely a QB you can win a super bowl with. I would be very happy if this team got a Tua caliber QB to be their long-term starter. Tua's only issues are injury related, he's 38-24 in his NFL career on a team that seems to not be super well run. I think Tua is better than Purdy and Purdy has made a super bowl and a conference championship in his 3 years as a QB in the NFL.

Sanders limitations as a Tua upside QB do make me unwilling to trade much to move up to get him, if they're trading up and likely paying an additional 1st to do it, they need to get a guy that can carry the offense. But if he slides to #21 or you don't need to trade much to trade up to get him, I think you take him and you used the saved assets to build up a better support cast for him.

 

[Snooki Stackhouse]

Tua without the career-threatening concussion issues? Sign me up.

 

[xlm34]

See, imo, Sanders is a QB who should be going around 15-25. I don't think he's a top 10 most drafts - hell, the fact it looks like he's maybe not even that in this high end starved draft says it all. Imo, there's serious questions about his ceiling. I can see him as a Tua, and I'd say I regard Tua as that sort of 2nd/3rd tier QB who can do serious damage if you surround him with weapons, not an elite guy.

And I am personally of the opinion that if you draft a Tua you move ahead and do your best, you shouldn't be spending a 1st round pick on a QB unless you believe there's a higher ceiling there. I can respect the argument it's better not to spend all the extra capital on a guy who's still a crapshoot, but I think I'd rather do it as to me the biggest cost with a QB is all the time you spend on him. If you're gonna invest the time, invest it on the best return you can.

That said, I shall not complain too much if they go with him. There is at least a high ceiling shot there, a chance he's the next Burrow. I don't favour him as an option but won't think they're insane if they say otherwise



Iirc, part of the play action stuff puts an emphasis on QB mobility, which he doesn't have?

I know Cousins was one of the best play action passers and he was one of the more immobile guys in the league. I guess Smith may move the pocket a bit more so maybe he’s a bit different? Sanders definitely isn’t a great athlete but I feel like his mobility would be functional enough. You certainly wouldn’t see any of the QB run game that I think Smith is a big fan of though.

He’s just a weird one for me to really have an opinion on. I’d get it at 21 and think he’ll be a decent starter. I’m just so skeptical he’ll end up being what they kind of need an AFC QB to be.

 

[JTG]

The one thing I will say about this QB class is that I do think many of them could be really productive with Artie...but that's WITH Artie. For what Artie is, his offense is kind of different. In theory, I actually do like it, but I'd like to see a premier QB run it. That being said, I'm not sure a premier QB would ever f***ing want to.

All this tells me is that you don't actually intend on attempting anything to actually fix the QB situation, which makes no sense to me.

None of these guys are fixes. So yeah...

Ward may be. Sanders may be. Dart may be. And those are very maybe. Pickett/Willis/Ridder level maybes.

Not kidding - there are a good 13 Justin Fields level talents in college that are coming in the next 2-4 years depending on what happens. I have followed CFB recruiting since I was a kid, and this seems special to me. I could be wrong. I just look at odds for a living, so our odds of a Ben happening again in the next 2 years are pretty good.

When it comes to Smith/Sanders, I feel like Sanders fits pretty well with Smith? A play action/timing based offense in theory fits what Sanders strengths should be. At least I think.

Smiths passing offense should be pretty simple for a rookie QB so I actually kind of like him as the OC early in a QBs career. I’ve seen people describe his passing offense as point and shoot. There’s much to it, which is kind of nice for a young QB to get his feet wet.

I actually like Shadeur if he falls to the 2nd round. He'd fit in perfectly with Artie. He's not great, but he could probably turn into a serviceable enough QB that if we did draft a QB down the line with a 1st rounder, Sanders could be quite valuable.

 

[JTG]

I've watched Colorado maybe a half dozen times over the past two years, say what you want about Deion as a coach but he's totally revitalized that program.

I think I said earlier in this thread that I like Shedeur, not sure I love him. I saw good pocket mobility, accuracy, and anticipation. Also saw him take a lot of unnecessary sacks trying to play hero ball (bad scheme + OL doesn't help). Ballsy and doesn't shy away from confrontation - something I could see Tomlin absolutely loving lol. There was also pretty blatant stat padding, I'm not casting judgment but they absolutely let Sanders throw the ball in situations where most teams would run out the clock.

I don't think he's a top 5 or even top 10 talent in this already poor class but pick 21 seems like good value to me. The fact that he's willing to come here and take a visit should also be viewed favorably I guess.

QB School:

View attachment 1009332

Watching some Colorado games, Savell Smalls does stick out as a great player. That's funny. I like reading those.

 

[pistolpete11]

Yeah, I don't love Sanders, but passing on him at 21 would be pretty wild. Not sure that you're going to be able to do better next year even with trading up. Manning is probably staying in school, getting in a position to take Allar or Nico will probably be EXTREMELY expensive, and I think Sanders is on the same level as the rest of them.

Don't care about how he fits with Smith's offense really. As I've said before, Smith's time here is limited. Either the offense bombs and why would they keep him? Or it does well (relatively considering the QB situation) and he's going to get a HC gig. He might get a HC gig even if the offense isn't great. Sanders can sit for a year and then start fresh with a new OC who's going to be committed for a few years at least. Make that guy someone that works with Sanders strengths, not the other way around.

I think in the end he'll be taken before 21, though, so it won't matter, but taking a shot at him would be fine by me.

 

[pistolpete11]

One other comment about Sanders, I think a lot of the criticisms of him mostly boil down to playing heroball. I'd say that's not even really something I'd call 'coachable' but more requires experience. It's something that guys like Allen have struggled with, too, and I think we'd all gladly take someone like Allen if we could.

And to the extent that it is coachable, that's the one area where Tomlin actually does do a good job of coaching QBs. I'd argue too good of a job but could actually be a good ying and yang for each other.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I think in the end he'll be taken before 21, though, so it won't matter, but taking a shot at him would be fine by me.

This. Not spending a whole lot of mental energy on the idea of drafting Sanders.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10113180-colorados-deion-sanders-i-dont-want-shedeur-going-nowhere-cold-in-nfl

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/25168369-dk-metcalf-trade-rumors-wr-prefers-contender-warm-weather-other-teams-can-pay-more

 

[pistolpete11]

This. Not spending a whole lot of mental energy on the idea of drafting Sanders.

We're definitely at the point before the draft where we've discussed seemingly every possible outcome so now we're scrapping for stuff to talk about

I do think if he gets past the Saints, it starts to get interesting, though.

 

[Goalie_Bob]

None of these guys are fixes. So yeah...

Ward may be. Sanders may be. Dart may be. And those are very maybe. Pickett/Willis/Ridder level maybes.

Not kidding - there are a good 13 Justin Fields level talents in college that are coming in the next 2-4 years depending on what happens. I have followed CFB recruiting since I was a kid, and this seems special to me. I could be wrong. I just look at odds for a living, so our odds of a Ben happening again in the next 2 years are pretty good.

I actually like Shadeur if he falls to the 2nd round. He'd fit in perfectly with Artie. He's not great, but he could probably turn into a serviceable enough QB that if we did draft a QB down the line with a 1st rounder, Sanders could be quite valuable.

Pretty much all QBs coming out are maybes. The only QBs I have seen in the past 30 years that were definites were Payton Manning, Andrew Luck and Trevor Lawrence. Where there was a pre-draft consensus that this player will be great, e.g. Can't Miss.

Manning and Luck obviously delivered, Lawrence is still open but not trending in that direction. Luck was sabotaged by poor management and injuries.

If you are waiting for the Steelers to only draft a Can't Miss, then it may be decades before that happens.

Ward and Sanders are clearly in the mid maybe range. Right along with Nix, McCarthy, Penix from last years draft.

The race for the most accurate quarterback crown in the 2025 class ended in a massive landside win for Shedeur Sanders.

2025 NFL Draft: Ranking This Year's Most Accurate Quarterbacks

Explore our ranking of which 2025 NFL Draft quarterback prospects are the most accurate passers, including Shedeur Sanders, Cam Ward, and Jaxson Dart...

www.the33rdteam.com

"In fact, when taking out screen passes and throwaways, only Joe Burrow's 2019 and Jayden Daniels' 2023 seasons were clearly better than what Sanders produced in 2024. Every passing metric from deep passing, play under pressure, play-action performance, and throws out of the pocket predicts Sanders will have no issues being a high-level NFL presence.

Much more like Burrow than Daniels because he's not an elite athlete and often compensates for having a good but not elite arm, Sanders has had to master the details of his game. There are still plenty of examples of Sanders not stepping into throws as he needs, and his motion is still elongated compared to where it needs to get. But he compensates incredibly well with timing and touch.

Sanders' improvement each collegiate season bodes even better for what's next for him. His next destination will benefit from his desire to work within a timing-based offense and also his efficiency while creating out of the pocket."

 

[pistolpete11]

Pretty much all QBs coming out are maybes. The only QBs I have seen in the past 30 years that were definites were Payton Manning, Andrew Luck and Trevor Lawrence. Where there was a pre-draft consensus that this player will be great, e.g. Can't Miss.

Burrow was more Can't Miss than Lawrence IMO.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Burrow was more Can't Miss than Lawrence IMO.

Equal, yeah. The difference was we had three years of buzz on Lawrence.

 

[xlm34]

For anyone with a subscription to the Athletic, Dane Brugler released “The Beast” draft guide. It alone makes subscribing worth it if you like the draft.

 

[Pens1566]

So once the draft is done, are you people going to switch from 47 pages about bitching who the Steelers should/shouldn't pick, to 47 pages of bitching about who they actually took vs should have taken?

Me personally, I'm gonna go back to making fun of KP.

 

[Empoleon8771]

If Sanders slides beyond the Saints, I think you have to consider trading up to get him. I think there are other teams that would be really interested in trading up as well (Browns and Giants stick out), but the Steelers having pick #21 compared to pick #33 and #34 for the Browns and Giants should be an advantage towards them.

I would bet that the Giants and Browns would have to offer something pretty close to their 2025 2nd, their 2026 2nd and one of their 2025 3rds to move up into the 12-15 range. Their 2026 2nd likely has the value of a late 2025 2nd (based on what I'm reading on how teams value future picks), so that would be something like #33, #62 and #67 (value of 1111) for pick #14 (value of 1100) to take Sanders. To me, that seems like a lot and I'm skeptical the Browns or Giants would do that with how many other holes they have.

Another way to put it, the Steelers seem like they can move up from #21 to #18 with just using their 2026 3rd. For either Cleveland or NYG to move up from #33/34 to #18, they'd likely need to include their 2026 2nd and probably a 2025 5th or a 2026 4th. Just from a cost perspective, I think the Steelers would/should be more willing to trade up a few spots to get Sanders than the Browns or Giants.

 

[Goalie_Bob]

Burrow was more Can't Miss than Lawrence IMO.

Burrow was not considered a Can't Miss because he was a one year wonder and his hand size. He was a high maybe.

Honestly, I wish someone had a rating system like Hockey Futures had in the past for prospects. Where they had a rating and then a letter for the chance of them hitting their potential. Crosby, was like a 8.0A, where the A meant Can't MIss or like a 95%+ chance of hitting on his potential. Where as a "B" was like 70% or summat.

 

[pistolpete11]

Equal, yeah. The difference was we had three years of buzz on Lawrence.

I've certainly been wrong about prospects many, many times, but being skeptical about Lawrence and all in on Burrow is one of the feathers in my cap. Was Lawrence a good prospect? 1st rounder? Even 1OV? Sure, but I was never convinced he was a Can't Miss guy. Burrow on the other hand, was a guarantee in my book.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Burrow was not considered a Can't Miss because he was a one year wonder and his hand size. He was a high maybe.

Honestly, I wish someone had a rating system like Hockey Futures had in the past for prospects. Where they had a rating and then a letter for the chance of them hitting their potential. Crosby, was like a 8.0A, where the A meant Can't MIss or like a 95%+ chance of hitting on his potential. Where as a "B" was like 70% or summat.

Crosby was a 10.0A and Ovechkin was a 9.5B when they had their prospect ratings IIRC.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

I've certainly been wrong about prospects many, many times, but being skeptical about Lawrence and all in on Burrow is one of the feathers in my cap. Was Lawrence a good prospect? 1st rounder? Even 1OV? Sure, but I was never convinced he was a Can't Miss guy. Burrow on the other hand, was a guarantee in my book.

I got no problem tipping my cap to you, but I was talking more general consensus. Lawrence was almost universally regarded as generational.

 

[Goalie_Bob]

Crosby was a 10.0A and Ovechkin was a 9.5B when they had their prospect ratings IIRC.

I couldn't remember if the highest was 10 or 8, lol. Still, it was a great way of rating prospects.

 

[xlm34]

Burrow was not considered a Can't Miss because he was a one year wonder and his hand size. He was a high maybe.

Honestly, I wish someone had a rating system like Hockey Futures had in the past for prospects. Where they had a rating and then a letter for the chance of them hitting their potential. Crosby, was like a 8.0A, where the A meant Can't MIss or like a 95%+ chance of hitting on his potential. Where as a "B" was like 70% or summat.

Zirlein kind of does although I don’t know if there’s year to year consistency. Lawrence was a 7.40 which was a perennial all pro. And Burrow was a 7.07 which was pro bowl talent.