quoting wardismvp:

---

 Punters ar a dime a dozen, we could find a sevicable punter

if we made an attempt. I have to go with what the one poster

said, I too don't think Sepulvda is a top ten punter.

---

People are ok with dime a dozen punters until they shank one in an important game.

I can't blame the team for drafting a punter to making an attempt to improve special teams. It is not like they drafted him in the 1st or 2nd round. How long do you believe 4th rounders last with teams that originally drafted them? I will say maybe 25% of the time.

Sepulvada is 10th in the league in net average at 40.2

quoting TheStallworthSwann:

---

quoting HinesWarden:

---

who now is regretting that trade to get Sepulveda? I'm sure everyone agrees it was a great trade after what we went thru last year.

---

Ever hear of a guy named deljzc? lol

I don't think a week's gone by since the 2007 draft that he hasn't worked in a complaint about that trade.  It's the centerpiece of his anti-Colbert campaign.

---

Anyone that has and anti-Colbert campaign against Colbert at this point is running into a brick wall.

beside what green bay drafted , were there any other good players we had missed ? i like sepulveda and i don't mind they drafted him since is still on the roster

There is no logical analysis of draft picks the way TSS is trying to do.

Draft picks are lottery tickets.  Because one fails does not decrease their worth.  The value of both the 4th round pick and the 6th round pick we used on Sepulveda can't be analyzed by saying every player around those selections failed.

The factors that go into a draft pick succeeding or failing is not black/white.  It has to do with depth chart in front of them, how they assimilate into the scheme, how they get along with coaches and sometimes just simple luck (injuries).

If Willie Parker was an UFA that went to Lions or Giants with a different depth chart in front of him, without the support of the coaches/front office, without the mentoring of Bettis - would he have become the Willie Parker of today?  Who knows?

The basis of my argument that the Sepulveda pick was wrong has nothing to do with the other options.  I have gone on record that I would have picked Doug Free or Josh Beakman (both offensive lineman) with the 4th round pick and Brandon Siler (ILB) or Ben Patrick (TE) with the 6th round selection.  I wrote those names down back in June of 2007 and all of them are still in the league.  I could find numerous players drafted after Sepulveda I would want instead if I looked.  Even a kicker like Mason Crosby who Green Bay drafted right around the 6th round pick they got from us could be argued as more valuable than Sepulveda to a team's chances of success/failure.

Rather, my point has long been that Punters are just never, ever worth spending two lottery tickets on.  That the difference between the 5th best punter and the 25th best punter in the NFL are insignificant towards winning/losing at this level as long as you don't ignore the back end of your roster and pay attention to coverage ability in the analysis of linebackers and defensive backs (which you should do regardless of your punter).

In my opinion Selpulveda is a top-10 punter, but if we had done due dilligence and scouting for a whole season on punters (of assigned someone just to do that) we could have found a top-20 punter off the street just as easily.

That has been my argument since day one.  And by difinition, when you can get a top-20 punter for nothing and you use a 4th and 6th round pick on a top-10 punter, that is called a ''frivilous'' use of limited resources.

This argument really comes down to how you value punters vs. how you value draft picks.  Obviously I value punters much lower than the average fan here and value draft choices much higher than the average fan here.  I have tried numerous times to show how little punters mean to wins/losses.  TSS is trying to argue the value of those draft choices is very low.  But it's all still the same argument.

There is a line somewhere when this discussion tilts in my favor.  If we had used a 3rd round pick on Sepulveda, what is everyone's opinion?  Or a 2nd round pick?  Eventually the value of the draft choice starts to outweigh Sepulveda/punter's value to the team (even if the other option the Steelers pick fails).

I'm just kind of shocked that for a franchise and fan base that so strongly believes in building throught the draft, would so easily accept the use of two draft choices for a punter.

I keep wondering if the youtube vidoe of him making a tackle didn't exist and Sepulveda was instead 5' - 11'' and 165 lvbs. (but punted just as well) if this discussion wouldn't be different.

Regardless.... don't lose sight of the argument/discussion here.  This is all about the value of punters vs. the value of draft picks.  I just strongly feel my opinion on that issue is crystal clear and 100% correct.

 

heck i get mad when we have to have him on the field anyway.   that just means we are giving the ball back. 

quoting deljzc:

---

In my opinion Selpulveda is a top-10 punter, but if we had done due dilligence and scouting for a whole season on punters (of assigned someone just to do that) we could have found a top-20 punter off the street just as easily.

---

    You're right, but sometimes you can get at top10 punter off the street.   Or at least at lower price than what the Steelers paid for Sepulveda.

    Here are the Pro Bowl Punters the last 3 yrs:

       Jeff Feagels, Brian Moorman and Mat McBriar were all undrafted.

        Andy Lee was taken in the 6th round.

        Shane Lechler was taken in the 5th round (he has 2 Pro Bowls). 

  If the deal to get Sepulveda was 'brillaint', it seems other teams are 'beyond brilliant' in obtaining their punters. 

     

There are basically two ways to attack my position about Sepulveda:

1.  Try to argue punters are worth more towards win/losses than I state or...

2.  Try to argue the draft picks that year were worth less than what I state

For the last 3 seasons I have proven again and again that punters are not as worth as much as some believe.  We can rehash all those arguments over and over but obviously it's not changing anyone's mind.

This post by TSS is designed to attack the argument by stating the draft picks that season were all worth less than ''normal''.  I don't buy that argument and neither should anyone here.

There are always gems in every draft.  Who knows what a certain prospect would have become had he come to the Steelers instead of another team.  The point is we don't know.  And we never will because this front office never took the chance on anyone.

All draft picks are are chances.  We choose a punter over two chances.  TSS is arguing he already knows what those chances would have yielded (bad players) and I say he's full of it and doesn't know for sure how any other prospect we had drafted would have turned out.

 

quoting deljzc:

---

For the last 3 seasons I have proven again and again that punters are not as worth as much as some believe. 

---

I don't see how anyone can ever argue that point again after last season. We had truly horrific problems at punter and won the SB.

quoting SixAintEnough:

---

quoting deljzc:

---

For the last 3 seasons I have proven again and again that punters are not as worth as much as some believe. 

---

I don't see how anyone can ever argue that point again after last season. We had truly horrific problems at punter and won the SB.

---

You gotta be kidding me, we had a horrif O-line and won the SB, what is your point, we can just draft any ol Olineman because, hey, we won the superbowl with sub-par linemen?  That don't work!

quoting Toughtown:

---

quoting SixAintEnough:

---

quoting deljzc:

---

For the last 3 seasons I have proven again and again that punters are not as worth as much as some believe. 

---

I don't see how anyone can ever argue that point again after last season. We had truly horrific problems at punter and won the SB.

---

You gotta be kidding me, we had a horrif O-line and won the SB, what is your point, we can just draft any ol Olineman because, hey, we won the superbowl with sub-par linemen?  That don't work!

---

Didn't we win a Superbowl with a QB rating that ranks as about the worst in history.......Maybe QBs aren't that important either........Ravens did the same and then the following season got rid of the guy. 

Cajun-