Steelers Draft in Review: Round 5
It's easy to go over the top with optimism or pessimism about any draft, but it's rarely as good or as bad as we think it could be. I’m going to try to give a tempered analysis of the players we drafted, hopefully helping us understand why we made some picks and keeping our expectations at a rational level. Round Five: Dennis Dixon 6’4, 205 Strengths: Dixon is a dual threat athlete who led his team to an 8-1 record before being injured, after which the team went 1-3. He was having an outstanding senior season, with 2700 total yards, completing 67.7% of his passes, and having a 20-4 TD to INT ratio. He has good height for an NFL QB, although he may need to add a few pounds. He is quick and has a good second gear if he gets out in the open. He can escape pressure and throw well on the move, but he also has developed patience and can stay in the pocket to find the open receiver. He has good arm strength and when he uses proper technique, he can be very accurate. Weaknesses: Dixon does not have great footwork, and his delivery is inconsistent, which can affect his accuracy at times, although he improved some his senior year. Also, before his senior year he was antsy in the pocket and made a lot of bad decisions trying to make plays. He had ACL surgery in December, and it is unclear how that may affect his athleticism in the future. He is a minor league player for the Braves, so there is no guarantee that he will play in the NFL at all. Analysis: While Dixon could potentially play WR, as far as I can tell he was drafted as a QB to eventually replace Batch. If we keep him strictly at QB, he’ll have a better chance of developing into a solid backup or trading bait in a couple years. Honestly, Batch has to be the perfect backup so I’m surprised they bothered to draft Dixon, considering he’ll either not make the team or want to start in a few years. We have a surplus of WR’s now, so I can’t see him having much value there, but it’s possible he could see some action in trick play situations. For now, look for us to stash him on the PUP/IR for a year and let him compete for the #2 spot next year .
Passed on: OL’s Roy Schuening, Carl Nicks, FB Owen Schmitt, LB Jonathan Goff, DT’s Nick Hayden, Ahtyba Rubin This is the pick I simply don’t understand, based on our other options. There were good options for depth at DL and OL here, but they passed on them for a high risk #3 QB or #6 WR. Regardless of how good Dixon could be, we have an overabundance of skill position players right now and no depth or youth on the defensive line. I am struggling to understand how Dixon could be a significant asset to our offense at any point in his career, while Hayden or Rubin could both be half decent part-time run stuffers with the potential to start at DE or NT at some point in the future. There's no guarantee either DT would have made the team, but the more young bodies we bring in, the better chance we have of finding someone who can stick, and we just don't have that many young bodies right now.
0 recs |
15 comments
Comments
Disagree strongly
I’ll write a post about this over the weekend or next week when I get through finals, but Dennis Dixon is a player I’m thrilled to see in black and gold.
--PB--
by PB @ BON on
May 2, 2008 10:46 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Two points
One, the more I think of it, the less I believe that he will be a Slash. Randle El was so effective on trick plays because he was also part of the regular package. When Seneca Wallace comes in for the Seahawks, everyone gets alert to the trick play (although I’ve never seen them use one with him yet).
Second, though, it sounds like he could very well develop into a solid QB who would be worth a 2nd round pick to trade 2-4 years down the road. The Falcons got a 2nd rounder from Matt Shaub, and Dixon seems very capable of becoming that. That’s not a bad investment for a 5th round pick, which, I’m pretty sure I heard that 5th rounders succeed around 35% of the time in the NFL.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on
May 2, 2008 10:56 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Dixon
I was pretty torn when I heard Dixon’s name called. I enjoyed watching him at Oregon but I’m right there with you, I don’t understand their thought process.
If he was drafted to be a ‘slash’ player, I’d understand it and might even be excited about it. But everything (and I mean everything) we’ve heard from him and the coaching staff points to the fact that he was drafted to be a second string QB. I don’t understand drafting a guy who you hope never touches the field. I understand that it’s important to have a good backup and that Batch is getting old, but we didn’t draft Batch right? Will there never be another veteran QB willing to go finish his career as a backup with a successful franchise? He’s an electric player to watch but does anyone really hope Ben gets hurt so this kid can play? I’d much rather have drafted a player who at least has the potential to become a starter. I’d have rather drafted every single player you listed, especially Schmitt (who I wasn’t as high on as some) or Goff (who I really liked).
If you’re in favor of this pick, please try and talk me into it. Is the master plan to develop this kid and then trade him for picks down the road? We can’t play two QBs unless the NFL goes through some drastic change so it’s either that or you’re holding out hope that Dixon will be satisfied with being a backup QB for the next 10 years
by cgolden on
May 2, 2008 11:05 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I see two possibilities
One, and from what we’ve heard from the FO and staff, this seems most likely, is that he will be groomed to replace Batch. They probably recognize that Ben is not the Iron Man that Brett Favre is. He’s missed a game or three a couple times in his young career, so you want a solid backup when Batch retires. And, if he performs well, he could become trade bait, at which point you’re back to your thought about signing an aging veteran backup.
The other possibility is that Dixon does play some other positions to make himself more versatile. If he and the staff are willing to do that, he could be the number 3 WR in 3 years, and then possibly a very dangerous weapon in trick plays, etc. Of course, that goes against everything that we’ve heard up to now, but some guys would just like to play, and things change over time.
Other than that, I can’t say that I discern their thought process either. It may just be that they didn’t really like any of the other possibilities, for whatever reason. Those visits/interviews may have been a enough to make them avoid some of those players.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on
May 2, 2008 11:20 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If he makes a full recovery
Dixon could have been drafted elsewhere and be tough to play against in a few years.
It is also “only” a 5th, and I pointed out before, the Steelers have wasted all their 5th rounders in recent drafts and still seem to be doing decently. They have taken linemen late before and those guys are no longer on the team. I think Dixon could be one of the top qbs from this draft 10 years down the road.
To put it in perspective, the Patriots drafted a QB, Kevin O’Connell in the 3rd round, 94th overall. We would all be flipping out if we had made that selection. In comparison, Dixon two rounds later looks like a steal.
by vherub on
May 2, 2008 11:41 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Dixon
I figured this would be the controversial post. I’d be interested to hear what PB has to say. I know that our other picks in the later rounds haven’t amounted to much, but I don’t think Dixon is a significantly better prospect than Rubin and we have a huge need for young guys on the line. Sure, there’s a chance we could get a 2nd or 3rd a few years down the line, but our team needs more depth, which comes from solid late day picks. I just feel that Dixon is a high risk guy, and even if he shows flashes, he’s not going to get on the field with the skill position depth we have in front of him. I’d be higher on the pick if we hadn’t selected Sweed.
I’d also be higher on the pick if I didn’t feel that most of the best backup QB’s are older, experienced guys that have been around the league but just can’t quite make it as a starter anymore like Batch, Warner, Griese, Brad Johnson, Boller (is he still starting?), Volek, Pennington, etc. You draft QB’s when you’re not completely happy with yours, because sometimes late round guys can turn into great pros. You sign experienced QB’s when you just want a solid backup and a proven (albeit mediocre) commodity.
by BadMaafala on
May 2, 2008 12:29 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Dixon
before this pick I was literally yelling at the TV for them to pick Carl Nicks…i couldn’t believe he was still there in the 5th!!...I know he had some off-field stuff but i thought he was worth the risk…Hills in the 4th seems like a athletic LT who will develop and I thought Nicks- an absolute mauler- would be a great RT…given both a year to develop 2009 offensive line would look real good…
Kevin Colbert compares Dixon to Vince Young…I am not a V.Y. fan at all…they both remind me of Kordell…they are pleasant memories…
but we shall see…above all I do have faith in FO…
by SteelerMike on
May 2, 2008 1:29 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
correction above
they are NOT pleasant memories…
by SteelerMike on
May 2, 2008 1:31 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
I have no problem with Dixon or Humpal or Mundy
Or even Davis, who might be really good. The problem isn’t who they drafted. The problem is who they DIDN’T draft, which is any defensive linemen and only one offensive lineman. If you7 want to forego need in rounds one and two because the BPA is too much to resist, that’s fine, but then you better focus on need.
What happened to Tomlin’s most urgent assessment of the team immediately following the season? “We need to get younger and faster on both lines.” Now all the sudden we hane a different mantra.
Dixon might be great. And there might be a time when Ben is hurt and Dixon wins a few ballgames for us. I’ll remember my words following this draft. But right now I’d rather have Dre Moore or Red Bryant, and i would have traded up a bit to get them.
by maryrose on
May 2, 2008 1:55 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
scouting
I’d rather have a good 3-4 DE than Dixon, as well. The question is whether there was a good DE on the board – or whether there were just two DE’s.
Put it this way. On a scale of 1-10, a good DE is worth an 8 or so in the fifth round because he’s a need. A good backup QB is worth, eh, 6, since he’s not a need. But a crappy DE that ends up as a wasted pick because he was picked more for need than talent is a 4-5. So you’re better off. Sure, at some point you just need warm bodies at the position, but the need is for depth not starters, so it’s less pressing. McBean could still show us something, if he gets out of his cast…
I agree with RickVA’s fanpost, at this point in the year it’s better to be optimistic and hope that the scouting staff knows what they’re doing. Jim Wexell reported that they thought Dre Moore was lazy and that Red Bryant was a medical concern bc of a bum knee (and the fact that he was nixed and Hills etc went through tells you it was a true concern). As i’m no scout, i’m inclined to trust their judgment.
Who knows, maybe 2 years from now we would have ended up with a mediocre DE and reaching way too much for a cruddy backup QB (whereas Dixon has the chance to be great) because we didn’t follow our board.
by syrsteelerfan on
May 2, 2008 3:12 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sticking to the Big Board
I think this pick reflects above all that we stuck to our draft board no matter what position it was. That shows a lot of faith in our scouts, and I love the philosophy based on our first 4 rounds this year. Remember… the Steelers don’t draft for the current year, yet they draft for the next year. Examples: Polamalu, Big Ben, Santonio, Timmons/Woodley, Menhenhall, Sweed, etc.
Tony - Stillers Fan in Raleigh
by Tshaff on
May 2, 2008 2:12 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Isn't Batch like 100 years old?
I would think the Steelers would need to start grooming an eventual backup to Big Ben, considering he is very injury prone.
In Romo we Trust
by Terry on
May 2, 2008 3:43 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Why Not Woodson?
If we wanted a back up QB why not a 6-5, strong arm, uninjured Andre Woodson?
by 13thieves on
May 2, 2008 7:04 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
woodson
Curious that he slipped so far. He was highly regarded before te start of the season and even midway through it. Mechanics are a bit off and deliverys a bit slow but I cantbelieve he fell that far.
by Blitzburgh on
May 2, 2008 7:10 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Dixion vs. Woodson
Dixon is electric. The Steelers didn’t just draft Dixon to just be the new back up QB. I know they say they are not going to use him in the slash role, but he is just too athletic to hold a clipboard. They are going to design a group of offensive plays and gadget plays for him. I don’t think the spread offense can work in the NFL, but a play here or there could. Plus any weird plays another team has to waste time practicing for is a good deal. Though this does mean we may need a 3rd QB, because of the injury risk.
Then there is the big picture. Batch is old and pricey. A team can’t keep paying a back up 2 million a year to hold a clipboard, and now the scary part, every NFL player is 1 play away from the end of his career. You always have to be drafting for a possible future.
by SteelBuckeye on
May 3, 2008 4:07 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs











