Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Which Players Will Join The 3,000-Hit Club?

Evaluating the Pittsburgh Steelers 2007 Draft Class

Woodley_and_timmons_medium

(The Crown Jewels of the Steelers 2007 Draft Class)

So, with some unexpected free time over the last few days, I've been working my way through draft evaluations. Most note that what they're doing is really provisional; it's difficult to tell how a team has really done since, of course, nobody has actually played a down for their team. In fact, they'll note, it's really a bad idea to evaluate a draft right after...or a year after...or even two years after. Rather, they tell you that you really need three full seasons in order to evaluate a draft class. 

Star-divide

With that in mind I want to offer a brief analysis of the Steelers' famed 2007 draft. I say famed because almost all of the players - except for 5th round pick Ryan McBean and 7th round pick Dallas Baker - remain on the team and are headed into their 4th season. In contrast, it's looking like the 2008 draft will go down as one of the weakest in recent Steelers' history with only Rashard Mendenhall cracking the starting lineup heading into their 3rd season.

What I want to do below then is to offer a brief evaluation of each player as well as what players might have been taken instead. Finally, I'll offer a grade for each pick. Keep in mind that the grade of the pick will be weighted to the round in which they were drafted - the theory being that we should naturally expect less from someone who was taken later and just less pro-ready than players taken before. So, even though William Gay has man detractors - including me - he receives a good grade because he's been a very productive player for a very late 5th round selection.

Sit back. Read. And, as always, feel free to disagree. Especially in hilarious ways.

1)     Lawrence Timmons (1st Round: 15th overall)

Evaluation: Many folks remain ambivalent on the Steelers inside linebacker and first draft selection of the Mike Tomlin era. I'm not one of them. Timmons played on the outside at Florida State and was slowly transitioned into the inside in the Steelers' particular version of the 3-4. Timmons' spend his first year in the black and gold as a redshirt rookie who contributed, however meagerly, on special teams. In his second year he relieved Larry Foote on 3rd downs and was a force to be reckoned with: Timmons played in all 16 games recording 65 tackles (22 solo), 5 sacks, 3 passes defended, and an interception (which was half a yard short of being a pick-six). This is really incredible production from a guy that was, at the time at least, a situational linebacker. Keep in mind that Larry Foote recorded 63 tackles (34 solo), 1.5 sacks, and 3 passes defended (with no interceptions) as a starter.

Timmons became a starter in 2009 and despite missing two games (and being limited in a 3rd), he recorded 78 tackles (58 solo), 7 sacks, and 4 passes defended. As his sack total indicates, Timmons is a great blitzer who has the speed to fake a drop back and suddenly blow by a defender before he knows what's happened. In two seasons (only one of which he started), Timmons has recorded 12 sacks; since 2002 Larry Foote has recorded 16.5 and in 13 seasons James Farrior has recorded 27.5.  Baring injuries, Timmons should surpass Foote's sack total this season and Farrior's career total in the next two to three seasons. With so many defenses worried about Woodley and Harrison from the edge, LeBeau has taken advantage by effectively bringing Timmons from a variety of different directions. Timmons has become the dynamic playmaker in the middle of the field that the Steelers have lacked over the last few years with the graceful decline of team leader James Farrior.

There are, of course, criticisms. Some assert that Timmons suffers against the run. Obviously, given his build Timmons has struggled at times to stone runners at the line of scrimmage or, at least, has struggled more than Larry Foote. However, Timmons is not poor against the run - he just doesn't excel against the run as he does against the pass.

In my mind, Timmons is the prototype for future ILB's in the Tomlin era. Rather than drafting bigger, heavier ILB's who are great against the run but suffer against the pass (as Cowher preferred), Tomlin prefers lighter, quicker ILB's who give a little more against the run, but are much more dangerous on passing downs (and every down is quickly becoming a passing down in the NFL). Some think Timmons would be better suited as an OLB in the 3-4. I disagree; he's perfectly suited to be the kind of fast-twitch run-and-hit backer that will come to be identified with the Tomlin era. Timmons is also only 23 and has not hit his ceiling yet (Tomlin seems to have a preference for drafting younger underclassman he can mold over older players that may have developed some bad habits).

Despite the love I've shown Timmons here, question marks remain: He does need to develop better instincts against the run (reading his keys to determine where the runner is headed), he needs to prove that he can stay healthy for an entire season as a starter, and he needs to show a better mastery of the LeBeau's scheme (he looked lost at times over the season). However, I have confidence that Timmons will remain a stalwart of the Steelers defense for several more years.

GRADE: B

Still on the Board: Leon Hall, Michael Griffin, Jon Beason, Ben Grubbs, Joe Staley

2)     LaMarr Woodley (2nd Round: 46th overall)

Evaluation: What can I say about Woodley? He is a beast. While at Michigan students would wear shirts that read, "Guns don't kill people. LaMarr Woodley kills people." Over the last three years nothing much has changed.

He's wildly recognized to be the steal of the 2007 NFL Draft and he's the standard against which future 3-4 OLB converts are now judged against (If I had a dollar for every time I heard Brandon Graham described as a "LaMarr Woodley clone". In three seasons (not including playoff appearances) Woodley has posted 29 sacks...let me write that again, 29 sacks! Keep in mind that he did not start until his second season, yet posted 4 sacks as a backup to Clark Haggins in the 2007 season. The utter dominance of the 2008 version of the Steel Curtain was due, in part at least, to the emergence of Woodley as a pass rushing machine that allowed a rather suspect Steelers secondary to look Pro Bowl worthy (Note: Troy should not be included in the "suspect secondary". I move that he receive a separate designation).

Woodley is great against the run. He's a great pass rusher. He's a very good coverage OLB. The surprise isn't that Woodley went to the Pro Bowl in his third season (second as starter). The surprise is that Woodley didn't go to the Pro Bowl in his second season (first as starter). It's hoped that Woodley will join his draft cohort Lawrence Timmons as a part of an incredible Steelers LB corps for a long, long time. It's my opinion that if a 2007 redraft were to occur, Woodley would be a Top-10 pick. He's incredible value at 42nd overall.

GRADE: A+

Still on the Board: Doesn't Matter

3)     Matt Spaeth (3rd Round: 77th overall)

Evaluation: Matt Spaeth has received a lot of heat over the last two seasons and much of it has been deserved. Spaeth is a terrible goal line blocker who almost singlehandedly derailed the Steelers 2008 Super Bowl run by consistently blowing assignments and allow his RB's to be tackled behind the line of scrimmage. On the other hand, Spaeth has filled in admirably for Heath Miller when he has been sidelined due to injury. While Spaeth lacks the after the catch ability of Miller, he has good hands and manages to use his superior size to create mismatches in coverage.

That being said, even if looked at as a receiving TE, Spaeth has under produced. In three seasons Spaeth has managed a grand total of 27 receptions for 195 yards and 4 touchdowns. Since three of those touchdowns occurred during his first season, Spaeth has only managed 1 touchdown reception in the last two years. This is simply inexcusable for a guy who's 6'7" and 270 pounds. As a blocking Spaeth is simply a failure; as a pass catching TE Spaeth is either criminally underused or simply incapable of being much of a factor in the NFL.

I tend to think the case is that he's criminally underused (or simply misused). He's miscast as a blocking TE and in Arians' two-TE offense is basically invisible on passing downs. I don't know whether he simply cannot beat coverage or for whatever reason Ben never looks his way. Regardless, he's certainly been a disappointment. While Spaeth remains a valuable backup to Heath Miller - his most productive season was 2008 when Miller was out for injury for a few games - he has simply not lived up to the standard a 3rd round pick should. That is, he has not become a starter or challenged for a starting spot in the offense.

I will be very surprised if Spaeth receives a long-term contract from the Steelers. The saving grace is that teams haven't gotten a whole of production from 3rd round players below Spaeth. In general, he's failed to produce, but that's no different than many members of his 3rd round draft class.

GRADE: C-

Still on the Board: Mike Sims-Walker, Mario Henderson, Aaron Rouse

4)     Daniel Sepulveda (4th Round: 112th overall)

Evaluation: It's always difficult to evaluate special teams players taken in the middle rounds of the draft. This is especially true with punters. If you draft a kicker in the middle rounds at least you can judge them by field goal percentage, the length of kickoff's, how well they kick under pressure, etc. With punters, however, there's no such measurement. Even if we consider Sepulveda's average punt (42.5 yards per punt) or net punting average (37.4 per punt) we can't get a clear picture since oftentimes you don't want a punter to boom it, but rather to place in nicely inside the twenty. To this end, Sepulveda has knocked 57 within the 20-yard line. However, even this stat is incomplete; how many times did Sepulveda fail to place it there when he really should have?

Obviously, the Steelers got a three-year starter with a 4th round pick and this is great value. However, that player was a punter...a punter they traded up for. So, again wouldn't it be a huge upset or failure if Sepulveda wasn't the starter from day one?

Now, you might argue that Sepulveda was well worth his draft status given how badly the punting game suffered in 2008 when he was injured. But did it? The immortal Mitch Berger averaged 42.3 yards per punt with a 36.4 net punt average for the Steelers in 2008. He also landed 19 punts inside the twenty. That means, that Sepulveda averaged about .2 yards more per punt, 1 yard more net average, and (taking Sepulveda's 2009 number of 29) 10 more punts within the 20. Is that worth a 4th round pick? Obviously Sepulveda exhibits more talent in placing the ball inside the 20 (which is vital to field position), but is this worth what it cost to get him? Sepulveda is an active tackler on special teams and this has led the Steelers' punt coverage to, in general, be more reliable than the kickoff coverage.

Even after all of this I'm not sure whether Sepulveda was really worth the pick (and the picks that the Steelers used to trade up and land him). I think he's a better than average NFL punter, but by no means elite. In the end, I'll split the difference.

GRADE: C+

Still on the Board: Le'Ron McClain, Jermon Bushrod, Doug Free

5)     Ryan McBean (5th Round: 132nd overall)

Evaluation: I can still remember being excited when the Steelers drafted McBean. John Mitchell - world class DL developmental wizard - had managed to make mid-and and late- round talents into starters as well as making a perennial Pro Bowler out of Casey Hampton. Even in 2007 everyone was well aware that the Steelers' defensive line was getting old and had little in the way of promising young talent. Many of us thought McBean signaled the beginning of a whole new generation of Steelers' DE's. Of course, we were wrong - Ziggy Hood and Sunny Harris are much more likely to be part of the new wave of Steelers' DL.

McBean never really stuck. He hung around during the 2007 season as part of a rotation that attempted to fill the void upfront after Aaron Smith went down due to injury, but had obviously lost the confidence of the coaching staff. Eventually he would emerge as a starter for the Broncos in 2008, although it's unclear whether or not he'll continue that role in 2009. From what I've heard the issues with McBean were mental - he never knew what he was doing on any given play. Schematically Denver's defense is much less complex than the Steelers, a fact that may  go a long way in explaining McBean's success there.

In general, McBean exemplifies the type of pick that has hurt Colbert's drafts in the middle rounds: A boom or bust, high-upside guy who ultimately didn't show the coaching staff enough to warrant a long-term investment. Getting only a partial season from a 4th round draft pick has to be seen as something of a failure. A player drafted in the 4th round ought to warrant at least two years on the roster and push for a role in special teams if not an outright job as a primary backup. In the end, the Steelers got virtually nothing from McBean.

This pick remains perhaps a little infamous because the Baltimore Ravens drafted Pro Bowl RB/FB Le'Ron McClain four spots after the Steelers drafted McBean.

GRADE: D+

Still on the Board: Le'Ron McClain, Steve Breaston, Kolby Smith

6)     William Gay (5th Round: 170th overall)

Evaluation: Before you flame me for giving the William Gay pick a good grade understand this: To get a good nickel-corner in the 5th round with a comp pick is simply great value.

William Gay is not a starting corner in the NFL. If he were this would go down as one of the great picks in Kevin Colbert's tenure. However, even as a good nickel corner who provides good depth and can be decent in rotation (as he was in 2008), spending a 5th round comp pick on William Gay is only one of the better decisions of the Colbert era. If you add in his contributions on kicker coverage units, I think you can begin to see why he was well worth this pick.

Gay is slow and small. However, he possesses decent ball skills, is willing in run support, and can be effective when taken out of man coverage and asked to play back in deep zone coverage (where his lack of speed is not such a liability). I would be amiss if I didn't mention William Gay's toughness. He's taken a lot of heat for getting trampled by Adrian Peterson in 2009 - some have said (probably correctly) that Gay getting trucked by Peterson will go on AD's  Hall of Fame highlight reel. However, what many fail to mention is that there aren't many corners out there that would ever try to do anything but ankle tackle Peterson. The very fact that Gay attempted to actually tackle Peterson head on is a testement to his toughness he brings to the corner position. Of course, in retrospect he should have gone for the ankle tackle, but you get the idea. To get that kind of production from a 5th round comp pick is really good value.

Also, there wasn't a whole lot left on the board at this point. Thus it seems like Colbert managed to get the best player remaining. The fact that William Gay is not a starter, but only a valuable piece of the corner rotation doesn't detract from the grade of this pick.

GRADE: B+

Still on the Board: Nick Folk, Kasey Studdard, Ben Patrick, Tyler Thigpen

7)     Dallas Baker (7th Round: 227th overall)

Evaluation: You can't expect much from a 7th round pick. Outside of a special teams player (punter or kicker) it's very difficult for a 7th rounder to even make the practice squad, much less make a contribution to the 53-man roster. The fact that Dallas Baker made the 53-man roster his 2nd year and actually made a contribution to the team (a single six yard reception) is actually a bit surprising.

Of course, in retrospect there's one player - another WR - that makes the selection of Baker in the 7th look a bit worse in retrospect: The Steelers could have selected Chansi Stuckey who has gone on to record 62 NFL receptions for 677 yards and 5 touchdowns with the Jets and Browns. Of course, this is really exceptional production for a late 7th round pick (especially a skill position player), but you have to wonder if Stuckey wouldn't have developed into a great 3rd or 4th receiver for the Steelers by this point had he been selected.

Still, Dallas Baker is pretty much par for the course here. So, Colbert gets a pretty average score.

GRADE: C

Still on the Board: Chansi Stuckey, Jason Snelling, Ahmad Bradshaw, Chinedum Ndukewe

Overall: This has to go down as one of the better drafts of the Colbert era. Of the  seven total selections five remain on the team and six remain in the NFL (Dallas Baker never had much of a chance, anyway). Of the five still on the team, three are technically starters (Timmons, Woodley, and Sepulveda) while two others have spent time as starters (in Spaeth's case because of an injury to Heath Miller; Gay was the started for 14 games in 2009 and in the starter rotation in 2008) and have proven to be good backups and spot players (Gay has also shown himself to be a pretty decent gunner in special teams).

As the first draft of the Mike Tomlin era, it certainly showcased Tomlin's schematic preferences from the beginning: Timmons is an athletic, quick-twitch MLB who would never really have fit in on a Cowher team (since Cowher preferred heavier, run stuffing MLB"s like Foote), but he is probably the wave of the future at the position, as the drafting of Stevenson Sylvester further underscores. I tend to think that Tomlin never intended to play Timmons as a 3-4 OLB; he always meant him as a replacement for either James Farrior or Larry Foote.

Woodley, of course, was the steal of the draft. The Steelers have gotten incredible production from him in three seasons for relatively little cash. But fear not Steeler faithful, LaMarr is about to get himself paid. Some have wondered if the Steelers will be able to resign Woodley, but I have to think that they'll figure out some way in which to keep him around until he's 30. Simply put, Woodley is too valuable a piece of Tomlin's defense to let walk in his prime.

Overall, I'm quite pleased with the Steelers 2007 haul. Two starters (one  a Pro Bowler) and three valuable backups is pretty much the standard for having a really great draft in the NFL these days. As such, my final grade for the 2007 draft is:

A-

Good: Timmons a good starter; Woodley an absolute steal; three other contributors remain on the team more than three years later

Bad: Spaeth perhaps a reach in the 3rd round; Overpaid for Sepulveda; Missed either in drafting or developing Ryan McBean

Comment 77 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Overgrade on Gay

If he was a B then why did he look so bad last year. C- at best.
Dallas Baker did not contribute anything, how can you justify a C? But McBean actually has played in the NFL and gets a D+
If Sepulveda stays healthy, I would suggest that the grade goes up to a B.
I may think that Spaeth is worthless as a blocker, but he has contributed so I will agree with a C-

1 star (Woodley) 2 starters (Timmons, and Sepulveda) and 2 role players (Spaeth and Gay)

Overall I would grade the draft as a B+. If Timmons becomes a dominant ILB, the an A.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 3, 2010 12:59 PM EDT reply actions  

Baker is a C because that’s par for the course with 7th round picks (who are not special teamers) – most never end up being camp bodies and taxi squad regulars for a couple of years before they move on. Had he done anything else – like become a regular contributor on offense – I would have upped that grade actually. Had he never seen the field for a regular season game, I would have lowered it.

If Gay had been a 2nd round pick he would have gotten an D or D-. As a comp pick in the 5th round – almost a 6th rounder – he’s really been great value. To get a pretty decent nickel corner who contributes regularly on special teams, and has started games for you (however overmatched he might have been), is great value for a late-5th rounder.

And I’m just not convinced Robopunter was worth trading up for in the 4th round. He’s been a solid NFL punter, but nothing special. If he comes and shows me something this season I would seriously think about upping that grade as well.

by BluegrassSteeler on May 3, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

I understand your ratings, just disagree

Rating somebody who is just a warm body on the practice squad and on the roster for a week or two a C is way too high. I would have rated him lower no matter where they were drafted.

If you are drafted in the 6th or 7th round you do not get an advantage on the field or extra points for the pro-bowl voting.

I think A- is too high as the overall rating.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 3, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Fair enough. We may just disagree about this.

However, if you want to use the same scale for success and failure in the 1st round as in the 7th round, then you’re either going to have to radically raise your expectations at the bottom of the draft or radically lower them at the top.

For me, I think you ought to adjust your expectations for a player to what round they’re drafted. There’s a lot of talent in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd with less talent as you head toward the 7th. Even a very deep draft is going to produce mostly practice squad/special teams players in the last couple of rounds.

by BluegrassSteeler on May 3, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thank god you guys passed on Beason and Grubbs. Beason would have dominated in your defense next to Farrior and is light years past Timmons already. Grubbs is on his way to a pro-bowl with us and would have helped you out alot. Le’Ron McClain, well, don’t you guys still complain 3 years later about not having a FB?

You have to hate losing more than you love winning.

by Mr MaLoR on May 3, 2010 1:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Beason plays in a 4-3

Very different position of MLB vs ILB. MLBs get lots of tackles whereas ILBs in Timmons position get after the QB and cover WRs. Beason may be better off in the 4-3, than our 3-4, and could have just as much struggles playing beside Farrior as Timmons has had.

However, if Timmons does take over Farriors role, he could be a stud. He’s perfect for the mack, and could have a huge year if he gets that role.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 3, 2010 2:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed

hard to root against farrior – but I think that Timmons could upgrade the D if he took over and allowed Foote back in his old spot….

Maybe we’ll just see much more rotation of the LBs during the game – sort of like the Giants rotated DEs during their superbowl run. It would be nice for an opposing offense to have to deal with a fresh set of legs every single down.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

That wouldn't be bad

But I am just afraid that if Farrior is past his expiration date, that Tomlin and the coaches will be a little too lenient in pushing him to the bench. That worries me.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 3, 2010 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed

Farrior may have reached the end of his time as a starter. I do think Timmons is an upgrade because of athleticism – and with time the experience will catch up. There is no question that if Timmons was playing Farrior’s spot last year – at least the end of games – we would have two more W’s than we did. It was obvious that Potsie was just no match at the end of the game for young dudes in open space.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Arg

Ray Rice making him silly constantly flashes in my head and makes me sick.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 3, 2010 2:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yea, no denying that Timmons is a freak athlete.

You have to hate losing more than you love winning.

by Mr MaLoR on May 3, 2010 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

You must be describing me as well

Players who should be in the Hall of Fame: Pat TIllman, Dwight White, Donnie Shell, L.C. Greenwood, Ray Guy, Steve Tasker, Greg Llyod, Andy Russel, Cris Carter, Kevin Greene and Jerry Kramer
"It's a great day to be a mountaineer, where ever you may be" Tony Caridi
Canal Street Chronicles resident Steelers Fan

by WVPiratesfan on May 4, 2010 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

Beason

Nonsense, he collects tackles, show me his sacks, passes defended. Having a bunch of tackles doesnt make u a great player. Timmons is in top 10 ILB’s against the run, is in top 2 v the pass, that is from football outsider rankings btw. Grubbs? Please the guy has been hot and cold, especially last season, he is good in run game but shaky to say the least in pass game. Given a choice of Woodley/Timmons v Beason/Grubbs? I’ll take the pair that played a huge role in securing a SB, instead of an solid ILB with tackle stats and an OG with obvious limitations in year 3. In fact I’d prefer just Woodley alone. If Suggs was half the player maybe you lot would have sniffed a SB.

by Steelclan on May 3, 2010 1:32 PM EDT reply actions  

He could be if they put him in the right spot.

He is not a plugger, so he shouldn’t be playing the Buck. He is a Mack. I think we are going to see Foote starting at Buck and Timmons at Mack this year.

Speculation, yes. But, it seems pretty obvious to me.

by JHolmes on May 3, 2010 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

I really hope so

I think Farrior should be coming off the bench, but I have a bad feeling the coaching staff is going to start him because he is the D captain.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 3, 2010 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I just want to see Farrior get rest time. He was great early in games, but would give up big plays late in them. People remember his gaffe’s at the end of games, but he played great earlier I think he’s too old not to spell him, and we couldn’t do that last year.

I think Tomlin hoped Timmons could play the Buck. That much speed at the Buck would make this defense ridiculous. It just doesn’t work, hence Foote’s return. I think Farrior Foote and Timmons could do great as a three man rotation at ILB, Foote on run downs, Timmons and Farrior in longer yardage. Fox is good, I know people are huge fans, but he isn’t as good as Foote. He just isn’t. He isn’t really young either. He’s a good guy and a valuable reserve, but I don’t want him starting.

I think Farrior still starts, unless he declines a good amount from last season. As a Captain and play caller he’s going to be hard to replace.

by Phantaskippy on May 4, 2010 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed

Steelers D was dominant through 3 quarters of just about every game last year. It was the like a completely different team in the 4th quarter, though. I think age and style of offensive play contributed to that. Much was made about the fact that the Steelers had a higher time of possession in 2009 than 2008, but if you look, they had a lower 3rd down percentage, which indicates more short drives (i.e. less rest time in between drives for the defense).

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on May 4, 2010 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Another thought

Beason and Willis – the other two LBs taken in the first of 2007 are both a year and half older than Timmons.

I still think Timmons development is right on pace. Should he be healthy this year I think he records double digit sacks, and really becomes a force in the inside.

I think we have not seen the best of Timmons yet.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think you’re right about this. Tomlin loves drafting underclassmen to further develop in the Steelers system. Timmons, Mendenahall, and Pouncey were all underclassmen when coming out.

Keep in mind that Pouncey won’t turn 21 until July. Alex Mack is already 24 and will turn 25 later this year. Ten years from now – baring injury – who’s going to still have something left in the tank?

by BluegrassSteeler on May 3, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

yup

Tomlin, like Ben, likes em young.

sorry, couldn’t resist.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ugh...FLAG!

j/k. But you are going to hell for that joke…LOL

"Hey baby, want some Adam West penis?"
- Adam West

by Steel Spike on May 3, 2010 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's idiotic

Saying Woodley is that much better than Suggs is just dumb, and using the SB as a reason why is even dumber. Where was he in the 4th quarter? Did he drive us down the field on our last possesion of the game?

And Beason is better than Timmons right now.

"Don't Call It A Comeback"

by StoneColdSteel on May 3, 2010 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't know

Not knocking Suggs – he’s a serious baller, but Woodley is kind of a beast. Especially in the playoffs.

Suggs 7 career playoff games 5 sacks. Very good
Woodley 4 career playoff games 8 sacks. Absurd

Woodley has never had a playoff game where he didn’t record two sacks. That is nothing short of insane.

As for the fourth quarter of the SB you may remember the game ended when Wood strip sacked Warner.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 6:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

I understand that

But the guy above is basically saying that Suggs sucks compared to Woodley, and that ain’t true.

Woodley is definitely an animal, but saying Woodley is like 10x better than Suggs isn’t smart. The guy was playing with one arm in the 2008 AFC championship game and still got a sack. That’s tough.

"Don't Call It A Comeback"

by StoneColdSteel on May 3, 2010 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Woodley made big plays in every playoff game he’s been in. Suggs has not had that impact. I agree it’s not a huge gap, but Woodley is significantly better.

I don’t think Suggs is as good as any of our last three great OLB’s. I’d take Woodley Porter or Harrison for their main years over Suggs. I will say Suggs is a great OLB, we’ve just had incredible ones recently.

by Phantaskippy on May 4, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

If...if....iff

I agree he is in the wrong position. I have said that many times. He sould play the Mack and not the Buck. But last year he was the Buck and he was not a top ILB. If he moves over and demonstrates that the Mack is a better fit, fine.

The jury is still out. He is a solid starter, just not a star, YET.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 3, 2010 1:55 PM EDT reply actions  

Agree 100%, he's not a star or elite by any standard, YET.

As others have pointed out, he’s still young and hasn’t reached his potential yet (I think). My fear is that he won’t reach his full potential until he’s priced himself out of Pittsburgh, but that’s another discussion entirely.

I would rather he be a stud at any position you put him in, but that’s not reality.

by JHolmes on May 4, 2010 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

Timmons is on the verge of stardom

He’s obviously going to be fantastic this year at the Mack. His buck weaknesses v. the run will be strengths at the mack. All-pro season, guaranteed.

by steelerwheeler on May 5, 2010 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions  

Excellent Analysis

I’d still reserve the grade on Sepulveda—he had a injury coming in and then another—but has the potential to be a great punter for 10+ years, and if so then moving up to the 4th round was a good deal.

I’d lower the grade for Speath if the Steelers continue to use him as they have—if fact he needs to be replaced. But there is some potential upside to the grade if they actually throw to him occassionally. He was a pretty good receiver at Purdue, and was supposed to be a red zone threat.

by phineasfog on May 3, 2010 2:55 PM EDT reply actions  

Nicely done

Good analysis, well written, and it was easy to dance to. I give it a B+.

by worldtrip on May 3, 2010 3:10 PM EDT reply actions  

Rec'd

Nice one. :)

For ideas on statistical analyses, email me at wolfpacksteelersfan@gmail.com.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on May 4, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just to flesh it out - Re; Timmons age

From 2007-2009 (not counting this year) there have been 10 linebackers taken in the 1st round.

Of those only 2 are younger then Timmons –
Brian Orakapo – taken in 09 is two months younger
Brian Cushing – also taken in 09 is 6 months younger

While Timmons hasn’t roared on to the scene like many of those other guys, I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that if he plays in a more natural postion this year, that he will put up monster numbers and make a pro-bowl.

by SteelerBuddha on May 3, 2010 3:34 PM EDT reply actions  

I think Timmons is an A

he took a little longer to start but has become a strong part of the D

by Rickfansince76 on May 3, 2010 3:49 PM EDT reply actions  

If Gay's performance

is a B+ and is representative of a 5th round db, then we better not ever draft a db later than 2nd round.

by qwikdoc on May 3, 2010 3:53 PM EDT reply actions  

We all agree that Gay faltered last year

but arent you much happier having him in the nickel compared to Townsend?

I miss Kreider

by Sixburgh Reigns on May 3, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Towsend 2 years ago was solid

Now he is old, but he was always a smart CB. He relied on his knowledge of the game to compensate for his lack of height and speed. But there comes a time where age catches up.

Towsend started at times and was ok. Not good and not really bad. But Towsend never looked as bad as Gay did last year when he started. I do not remember any one saying Towsend sucks.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 3, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

and two years ago Gay was statistically a top 20 corner (rated by Football Outsiders)

Adjusted for percentage of plays he was in he was even better. That’s the reason we thought he could do it. This past season, without McFadden to cover his weaknesses, he was rated the 79th best corner against the pass. However, despite getting run over by Peterson he is rated 22nd against the run out of all corners. He had a lot of good tackles on the outside, he blew some big ones though.

With McFadden back, and his ego knocked down to size, he should be a very solid #3 corner this year. Seriously, finding a solid #3, esp. one who played so well in a Super Bowl run in the fifth round is a very good pick. If you expect a great draft every year (2 starters and two reserves) then the fifth round should produce a reserve, nickel back is no longer a reserve position, and finding a good one in the fifth is above average to say the least.

by Phantaskippy on May 4, 2010 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not at this point but I'm hopeful

I have been tough on Gay. It was so painful to watch him allow receivers to catch the ball for 1st downs in front of him and miss tackles. He is still a Steeler however so I want him to succeed and will hold my negative comments for now.

by qwikdoc on May 3, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

"The grass may be greener on the other side, but it still has to be mowed"
-PsycoSalameh43

by PsycoSalameh on May 3, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

very nice read

"The grass may be greener on the other side, but it still has to be mowed"
-PsycoSalameh43

by PsycoSalameh on May 3, 2010 6:00 PM EDT reply actions  

A- too high foir this draft.

I understand where you are coming from here, but the way I have it:

1 Timmons B
2. Woodley A+
3. Spaeth C-
4. Sepulveda C
5. McBean D+
6. Gay C
7. Baker C-

Timmons and Woodley are your impact players. Sepulveda has mildly disappointed, Spaeth has contributed little. Gay was a starter last year, but the worst on the field. They had to trade away a pick to replace him. I would give this draft a solid B grade, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to go higher.

" Just go and lay your hand on a Pittsburgh Steeler fan, and then I think you'll finally understand"

" In America" Charlie Daniels Band

by idiscgolftexas on May 3, 2010 7:01 PM EDT reply actions  

3 out of 7 starters

Is going to get you a very high grade in pretty much any draft grade. Then add in two players contribute a good bit, you have to have an A- at least.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 3, 2010 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

If you are in the A- category

You must have a late round steal, William Gay does not qualify. He played like a guy who was in way over his head last year. Really, only Woodley and Timmons have had much af an impact. Sepulveda has yet to live up to his draft status, and Spaeth is well…. Spaeth.

This is a B level draft all the way. A decent draft, but by no means a great one.

" Just go and lay your hand on a Pittsburgh Steeler fan, and then I think you'll finally understand"

" In America" Charlie Daniels Band

by idiscgolftexas on May 4, 2010 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions  

“You have to have a late round steal” under what guidelines? In the years I have been reading draft grades I have never heard that.

Gay actually had a very big impact in the nickel and alternating with McFadden when we want #6. Sepulveda has been good, not great. You act like he is Mitch Berger or something.

Definitely an A- draft.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 4, 2010 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions  

To say that the 2007 draft was an A- when compared to really good drafts

is an overstatement. 3 starters is not even close to the really great drafts. If..if…if.. Timmons becomes are great player and Sepuveda has a long punting career, then maybe. But right now I do not see the 2007 draft being anywhere near the top 10 or even top 25 drafts of all time. Those drafts are A, A+. This one is solid, but not even close IMO.

Just another way of looking at it.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 4, 2010 10:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

Since when is an A- really great? An A+ is really great. And 1974 is probably like an A+++. There were 5 HoFers in that draft, and 4 happened to be selected by the Steelers. Comparing that draft to anything is like comparing God to Joe Schmoe.

I look at several things when I consider draft grades:
1) How many players start? 0 is bad, 1 is okay, 2 is good, 3+ is great
2) How many contribute? Ideally, you’d like 50+% to play at some point
3) How many busts (past 4th round can’t be a bust)? Less than 25%
4) Any great steals? Not necessary, but it can help
5) Did anyone slip by who would have been a better pick? Like passing on Marino
6) How many ‘successful’ picks vs. total picks? You want more players to contribute than fail

Then further down the line, look at:
Pro Bowls?
HoFs?

1) So we have 3 starters, very good.
2) 5 contribute out of 7 (71%) very good
3) Possibly Spaeth, still a contributor, just can’t block. Good
4) None, although Woodley in the 2nd can definitely be considered
5) You could argue Leon Hall over Timmons, but I think after this year this argument will be null and void. There really was not anyone that great worth drafting behind Spaeth or Sepulveda. After the 4th its kind of irrelevant. Very good.
6) Timmons, Woodley, Sepulveda, Gay (good for a sixth) vs 2 bad picks and a ‘reach’ on Spaeth. Good.

That is why I give this draft an A-. You cannot compare drafts (especially between 1974 and 2007). You have to look at the draft and grade it by itself.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 4, 2010 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you only get 2 starters out of every draft it will take 11 years to replace

your starting team not counting kickers. Remember the average career is 3 years. By your assessment we will be a team full of 40+ year olds.

Average does not work for the Steelers. Average is ok for the Browns or Lions. Not for the Black and Gold. Just my opinion.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 4, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

We got 3 starters out of this draft (arguably 4 with Gay). And the average NFL career really means nothing because it includes busts and UDFAs that play 0 games. That is a really bad argument. Just look at our roster, look how many guys who have played well past 3 year careers. However, that avg is brought down by the McBeans, Bakers, and other UDFAs from that year we didn’t keep.

The difference between the Steelers and the Browns/Lions is that we never miss in the 1st and rarely miss in the second, while those two teams miss often (just look at all those Lions picks wasted on 1st round WRs). They might come away with 0 or 1 starters from a draft, when we rarely come away with less than 2 or 3.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 4, 2010 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

We rarely miss in the 2nd round?

Ok, but if a team replaces only 2 starters from a draft that is not good, that is falling behind. If you want to count Gay as a starter, I am sure you will get some folks arguing with you.

You did make a good point about the average career, but even among starters it is not any where near 11 years. That is my point.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 4, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Show me a team that consistently gets 2 starters or more from every draft. We alternate between 2 starters or more every year, and we never have a year that doesn’t produce 2. That is not falling behind, that is well above average.

You can argue with Gay if you want, but you are wrong if you think he cannot play well in the nickle. And as said below, playing in the nickle in today’s NFL is basically starting.

With about 7 or 8 starters every 3 years, you can refill your roster every 8 years and that does not include FAs or trades acquisitions.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 4, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wait. . .

So if C is average, you expect the average bottom of the fifth, top of the sixth round pick to play nickel in today’s NFL good enough that the team hands him a starting spot?

I’m sorry, but a 5th round compensatory pick should rarely see the field. Gay played great in our 2008 run, and was exposed last year as a kis who plays well but just isn’t good enough to start. He’s a very good nickel back, and just like a very good slot receiver, that doesn’t translate well to being a top 2 very often.

by Phantaskippy on May 4, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nice writeup.

The Spaeth section particularly is very well written.

Totally agree that the grade should depend on the slot. To that end a 5th rounder that starts on another team is probably a better player than a D+ would indicate IMO.

by Steely McSmash on May 3, 2010 8:54 PM EDT reply actions  

I don’t agree with grading the draft based on how the player does in the nfl. It should be based solely on what he did for your team. You draft for your own team. John Unitas gets an F as a Steelers draft pick.

by worldtrip on May 3, 2010 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Spaeth C- ????

Generous. A 3rd round rec TE who’s been asked to block for our “power” running game? Steelers desperately needed a “bus-like” compliment to FWP, and Michael Bush was available with that pick. Note: Steelers are still looking for that bus-like piece to the puzzle and Spaeth is still listed as our #2/blocking TE. F-

by steelerwheeler on May 5, 2010 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

Woodley is yet another reminder

to me of why I do what I do for a living and the Steelers’ football people do what they do. I watch a lot of Big Ten football and, while Woodley’s talent was obvious, I never projected him to be an OLB, much less the force he has become.

"Never mistake motion for action." - Ernest Hemingway

by SubLime on May 3, 2010 9:16 PM EDT reply actions  

+1

If we only could all remember that perspective when we think we have all the answers to some “obvious” football issue that the entire Steelers coaching staff and FO have somehow completely missed.

by SteelerBuddha on May 4, 2010 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions  

well

except for you of course

I was speaking of the others

by SteelerBuddha on May 4, 2010 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you REALLY want to grade a draft....

you have to not only look at what your team came away with, but also at what other teams got. So what the Steelers ended up with has to be considered in relation to what the rest of the league got as well.

If 16/32 teams got a similar haul, then it is a C draft. If only 6-7 teams drafted better, then it’s a B+/A-. If nobody did better, it’s an A+.

by JHolmes on May 4, 2010 11:14 AM EDT reply actions  

That sounds like Raider logic

A draft grade needs to be an assessment on how the team is improved by those draft picks, not whether player X is doing better on another team. Every team COULD get and A or fail.

It also seems that having a punter who used to be a linebacker (in HS i think) adds another body on the coverage teams, not a very visually stunning on field product most of the time but Dan S-word has definatly laid a few guys out over the last few years, much better than ‘two hand touch’ Reed.

Being a Steelers fan is more than just liking a team, it's about accepting your challenge and doing it right.

by StVincentKid on May 4, 2010 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

OK, Theisman.

How would you take the relative skill level of the overall draft into consideration when grading how your team performed?

So if a draft is weak overall as a class, every team fails?

by JHolmes on May 4, 2010 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Theisman?

It is more than the skill level of the player that makes a draft pick, taken into consideration the specific skills required in each system along with the teams needs at the time can alter the draft grade of an individual player rather than just looking at how they could perform on another team.

This years draft was considered to be deep but there will still be teams that did not address issues or took players that dont match up to the type of system they run.

You are assuming that the same players could be moved and equally productive on another team.

Being a Steelers fan is more than just liking a team, it's about accepting your challenge and doing it right.

by StVincentKid on May 4, 2010 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think so much of it hinges on Timmons

If timmons turns pro-bowler – which I firmly believe that he will – this goes down as a pretty darn good draft. If he stays solid starter than not so much.

Just to remind once again, age wise, Timmons fits in much more with the 2009 draft class – where Ziggy is the only one younger than him by more than a couple weeks (about 6 months), as opposed to the 2007 class, where everyone including Wood is 2-3 years older than him.

Also – checked some of last years playoff teams (indy, pats, cinci, bal, sdg, min, no) and I would say that our 07 draft looks near the top of that small group….

by SteelerBuddha on May 4, 2010 11:52 AM EDT reply actions  

Perspective

It seems as though Woodley’s success is making Timmons looks worse. Timmons has already contributed on the field and appears to put in the hard work to learn the complexities of LeBeau’s system. You cannot teach the speed and desire he shows on blitzes, if he is not going to get a clean shot on the QB, Timmon’s makes sure that the RB pays for trying to block him.
If it wasnt for Woodley doing such a good job opposite the Monster SN would be more willing to praise Timmons.

Still not a huge fan of Speath, but he could probably be a starter elsewhere, just had the bad luck to get drafted behind the excellence that is Miller. Who in turn gets shafted by BA’s refusal to pass to TEs. He was a excellent draft pick as a filler who can start in a pinch and contributes without complaint.

Being a Steelers fan is more than just liking a team, it's about accepting your challenge and doing it right.

by StVincentKid on May 4, 2010 12:50 PM EDT reply actions  

Timmons was far from great last year.

He did not look great against the run and at times looked lost in pass coverage. I know he is young and is playing out of position. But he is not a star. Woodley’s performance is not making him look bad. His mistakes made him look bad.

Don’t get me wrong, I think he is good, just not a star, YET.

by Steeler Nation VA on May 4, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Timmons definitely did not look "bad" last year

He just didn’t look great like we all expected he would.

The future is not what it used to be.
What the media did not tell you.

by John Stephens on May 4, 2010 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

He also

played hurt for a good chunk of the year…..

Agreed, though – he looked good – but not yet the beast we all know he can become

by SteelerBuddha on May 4, 2010 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

No, not great

He as no where near polished, but those times he made the right read it was scary.

Being a Steelers fan is more than just liking a team, it's about accepting your challenge and doing it right.

by StVincentKid on May 4, 2010 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Thank you

For intelligent evaluation of William Gay.

As a starter last year he gets a D. He was well under par for a #2 corner and while he generally was solid against the run, had some big plays go against him.

As a near 6th round pick though? That’s very good value. Most people seem to forget how good of a nickel back he was two years ago, and that nickel corner is practically a starter in today’s league.

MAny 5th round picks don’t make teams, they sit on the practice squad and get cut. Gay played so well his second year that they gave him the starting spot. That should say something. Either Gay played great in 2008 or our Defensive coaching staff is retarded. Take your pick.

by Phantaskippy on May 4, 2010 1:10 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to BTSC, a blog dedicated to the SIX-time world champion Steelers.

"Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history."

Art Rooney Jr.

"Level-headed thinking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Terrible Towel Talk

Listen to internet radio with Michael Bean on Blog Talk Radio


Site Founder & Editor

Imag0299_small Michael Bean

Steelers Historian

Steeler_small maryrose

Bison_small Neal Coolong

Contributing Authors

Small Ivan Cole (RickVa)

Franco72_small 5020

Btsc_head_shot_small Rebecca Rollett

Small big_jay71

284942_small John Stephens

178896_499126548441_596563441_5939410_7960015_n_small Anthony Defeo