Branden Albert Interview

[Smidrow]

Steelers Draft Prospect Interview: G Branden Albert
Friday, March 21, 2007
By Paul Eide
Steelers Fever Columnist

As evidenced by the signing of free agent center Justin Hartwig and the re-signings of guard Chris Kemoeatu and tackle Trai Essex the Steelers are doing what they can to add some stability to what appears to be a shaky offensive line situation. The prevailing thought is that Hartwig's signing means that starting center Sean Mahan will move to offensive guard in 2008 and though it appears to be a solid enough move for the short term, even before the departure of Alan Faneca adding another guard for the long haul was an area of significant need if for no other reason than the current backups have proved nothing.

Enter University of Virginia's All-ACC guard Branden Albert. Currently forecasted as the #1 guard in the upcoming NFL Draft, Albert played left tackle in high school and was transitioned to the guard slot because of the presence of #4 overall pick in the 2006 NFL Draft, D'Brickashaw Ferguson. Because of this many NFL scouts envision the 6'6", 315 pound as a left tackle at the next level, with the versatility to play guard as well. Depending on the mock draft, Albert is forecasted to go anywhere from the latter half of the first round to the beginning of the second, which means the Steelers could have possibly two shots at selecting him.

Steelers Fever - You started every game over your three year career at Virginia. Was there a key to staying healthy?

Branden Albert - I was fortunate to avoid significant injuries more than any kind of preparation or anything like that. It just worked out.

SF - As a high school basketball player, what made you change your focus to football?

BA - The fact that I had the potential to make it to the pro level, even if just by numbers alone. the roster size is so much bigger in the NFL compared to the NBA its more realistic.

SF - As a basketball player were you a lean 6'6", or were you always a big guy?

BA - I was actually always big. My junior year I was 340 and senior year I dropped down to 310. I never head to work to put on the mass like some guys.

SF - Considering you have perfect size for left tackle, is there a reason why you played guard rather than playing tackle from the beginning?

BA - We had two good senior tackles and they were looking for a way to get me in the lineup so guard was a natural progression. I did well my first year and they just kept me there.

SF - Is the fact that you aren't a tackle working to your advantage at this point in the Draft?

BA - Yes that is working to my advantage a lot. There are a lot of pro teams considering me at tackle right now, but at the same time I am the consensus #1 guard in the draft so I'm in my own class in a sense.

SF - How does it feel to see your name listed as the #1 guard when you watch the NFL Network or ESPN?

BA - It makes me feel good and makes me feel like I made the right decision. People are recognizing my talent and I'm just happy to be in the situation I am.

SF - Last year you started two games at LT. Was it difficult to make the transition?

BA - I made the transition pretty easily. I felt real good out there because I played tackle in high school so it wasn't totally new. So it felt really easy to me.

SF - Have the NFL scouts taken notice of your ability to play tackle or guard? Have any of them mentioned playing tackle exclusively?

BA - Yes because if you have versatility you double your chances of playing at the next level. I feel like a lot of teams that's the main thing they are trying to see right away; if I can play tackle right away. And I feel like I can because I'm an athletic guy. Its probably different from playing tackle in college, but I feel I can do it over time in the NFL.

SF - Were there any players or coaches or GM's you talked to at the Combine that made you say to yourself, Wow that's _____.?

BA - Everybody man! Jack Del Rio, Herm Edwards, Ozzie Newsome, Mike Tomlin, John Harbaugh, Marvin Lewis, all the head coaches really. All the GMs I'd seen on TV were talking to me and I was like, damn all these guys are showing interest in me! It was a reality check to see the interest I was getting. It made me feel like I was playing with the big boys now.

SF - Is there a current or former NFL player that you are similar to?

BA - I would definitely say Walter Jones.

SF - How did going up against Chris Long everyday help you develop your quickness and versatility?

BA - Me and him wanted to constantly beat each other in practice. He always told me, Man, you're a tackle. When I moved to tackle for those first two games I was somewhat tentative and he really reassured me a lot. Working against him was great for me because I could see where I was at against the best defender in college and I knew if I could hang with him, I could do it for real.

SF - How big of an advantage is that for you?

BA - I think its a huge advantage. I mean that is what really helped me develop as much as anything and no one else has that in their back pocket.

SF - You didn't play football until your junior year of HS. Do the scouts touch on that as a strength?

BA - Yes because they know I have no serious injuries and have a lot of room to improve. No matter how good they say I am, I can always improve

SF - What was your defining moment in college?

BA - Against NC State in my second year. I made a big block on the goalline after I pulled and I was just kind of associated with that style from then on.

SF - Can you describe the feeling you get when you pull and you see a DB in your way?

BA - It's a great feeling. You know those guys are going to either try and cut you, or take you head on. And you know which one I'm gonna win. when I come around the corner and a guy isn't going to cut me, and I got you on the ropes, than I'm gonna get you. A lot of guys think they can duck and dodge me because I'm so much bigger, but that's when I show them my athletic ability.

SF - Is there an NFL team that runs an offensive system that you would like to play in?

BA - It depends on how they see me, at what position. If I'm a guard, the Pittsburgh Steelers or the San Francisco 49ers or a place like that where they pull their guards a lot. But if I'm seen as a tackle, Ill play for anyone in the league.

SF - With Alan Faneca leaving, did the Steelers pay any special interest to you at the combine?

BA - I met with them and spent a whole night with them at the Combine, met coach Tomlin, so yeah I would say their was some. I don't know if it was any special interest but it was a good group of guys and you just never know. I want to play for anyone who wants to draft me.

[smithessmokin]

and this is exactly why he is the perfect choice at 1.23. if we could trade down and still get him, that would be great. for some reason, i think the 49ers and others will pass on him. we could trade with atlanta or somebody high and still get another pick. this kid is perfect for us.

[smithessmokin]

branden albert could be the last component our OL needs in order to perform well this season. the signing of hartwig showed that the steelers feel that the center position is fucked up. he is mere stop gap until they find their center of the future.

marvel smith should be back to 100% by training camp, the pittsburgh tribune review said earlier this month. he will no doubtedly get the starting LT position. starks will either work his way into the starting RT position or fight marvel for the LT spot. colon will either change to guard or compete for the RT spot. mahan, stapleton, and hartwig will fight for the cneter position, my guess is hartwig wins. colon, mahan, simmons, and kemoeatu will fight for whatever guard position they prefer. now, insert branden albert. imagine having the rookie of the year in our OL. this will undoubtedly happen if we draft him. when you throw branden albert into this OL, it already looks a hell of a lot better. this is why we need to draft him.

[Super Dave]

Good point about D'Brickashaw Ferguson,

[TMC]

A guard as ROY? Not hardly. Maybe Steelers rookie of the year, but we had a punter win that, so it is not a crowning achievement.

Here is the funny part, you stated: "colon, mahan, simmons, and kemoeatu will fight for whatever guard position they prefer.", yet, when you discuss the tackle position, you only mention Smith, Starks, and Colon...if he does not move inside.

If Colon gets beaten out and starts at LG, that means we have Smith (LT), Starks (RT), and Essex backing up both positions.....and you want to draft a guard.

The funny thing, when Ferguson graduated, the Cavaliers did not move Albert to tackle. He explains that away rather easily, but colleges are not like the pros. They do not stick at guy at guard if he will be a better tackle. Doubt it? We have college tackles moving inside all the time.....every draft....because they were the best lineman and were moved outside to play tackle. It is pretty rare that they go the other way.

And, in 2006, the Cavs had two guys starting at LT. Monroe started there for 6 games and Zak Stair started the other 6 after they benched Monroe, who they later moved inside to RG. In 2007, they moved Monroe back to LT for all 12 games. In 2006, they also started a freshman at RT.

Bullshit he can play tackle in the pros. I am willing to bet if he gets put outside in the pros, we will see a hitch in his giddyup.....a major flaw. I would be willing to bet he is slow off the snap and by the time he recovers, he is beaten on the edge.

[TMC]

Notes from the combine on Brandon Albert:

Brandon Albert/Virginia: Albert showed terrific punch and hand technique throughout the drill session. Displaying above average lateral blocking range, he showed the ability to slide and shuffle his feet. He lumbered about the field and not display great quickness. If Albert was hoping to prove to scouts he has the ability to be an early first round choice and play left tackle at the next level, this work out did not do it for him.

[Sabin]

Maybe Steelers rookie of the year, but we had a punter win that, so it is not a crowning achievement.



The Punter's League of America, backed by the National Association of the Divine Leg, just called and told you to get fucked.

[TMC]

They won't be the first to tell me that, won't be the last either.

[Superman]

I'd like to take this opportunity to reiterate what TMC said by reminding everyone swinging from Prince Albert's pierced schlong that one Kendall Simmons played LT at Auburn.

[bfox20]

I would get him at 23 and then I would look at some other areas that need taken care of like Center, WR, FS, CB and RB.

[kurtistb]

I get so sick of hearing how Brandon Albert could possibly play tackle from media outlets. If I ever here it from someone with credibility it may be one thing but until I do he's not even in my fav 5. Now if I were looking for a guard it may be different but thats not what I want. Assuming the top tackles are gone I'm holding out hope for Merling or Cason/Jenkins since I believe that other than a tackle they have the best chance to contribute sooner rather than later.

[deljzc]

I get so sick of hearing how Brandon Albert could possibly play tackle from media outlets. If I ever here it from someone with credibility it may be one thing but until I do he's not even in my fav 5. Now if I were looking for a guard it may be different but thats not what I want. Assuming the top tackles are gone I'm holding out hope for Merling or Cason/Jenkins since I believe that other than a tackle they have the best chance to contribute sooner rather than later.

I assume by "sooner" you want to see some kind of production for 2008.

Let's face reality. We aren't going anywhere in 2008. Not with the schedule we have. Last year we were favored in 16 out of 17 games and won 10. This year, I bet we're underdogs in at least 6-7 games. In no way do I see that big of improvement in our team.

Albert should be the pick BECAUSE he'll be an anchor on our line for the next 10 seasons. I am 100% convinced he can play left tackle at the next level (maybe not year one, but year two or three) and Walter Jones is a good comparison for what he could become.

All this cornerback talk doesn't make sense to me. We have four good guys under contract and if we sign McFadden (which I think we will) then all of them will be under contract through 2009 (the next two seasons).

The secondary is NOT what's letting this team down. It's been consistent QB pressure (as evidence by the fact we've gone down each year in sacks since our Super Bowl season). Last year picking Timmons and Woodley was supposed to improve sacks, but the depth chart gave them little opportunities. This year, if they're as advertised, the sacks should go up and the secondary play improve.

If we pick a CB all that tells me is Tomlin is wasting resources looking for "his" type guys rather that "better" football players, because to me Taylor, McFadden, Townsend and Gay have enough talent to get the job done if coached correctly. Picking a CB just shows me Tomlin can't coach up anyone except his style of guy (and we're talking the position of his "expertise"). If that's the case, we'll be chasing our tails and using draft picks just to replace equally talented guys to fit Tomlin's defenisve system all over the field. There is no way we improve as a team vs. the rest of the NFL that way.

The offensive line hasn't just been bad at pass blocking. The running game hasn't been the same since 2005 either. The unit needs a MAJOR overhaul. The guys we have can't pass block OR run block like we need and they aren't worth investing money into their second contracts (I'm talking to you Starks, Kemo and Essex). The band aid from 2007 (Mahan) turned out to disappoint. The band aid for 2008 (Hartwig) should be better, but that's a 1-year stop gap measure. The one young guy on the roster with some promise (Colon), looks out of position.

We don't just need more average guys on the offensive line. We need a stud. A potential pro-bowler (we don't have any on the roster right now). As deep as this draft class is, to pass on a stud and say the 3rd and 4th rounders will be good enough is a terrible mistake in my opinion.

[kurtistb]

gonna try to keep this as concise as possible

* I think people are so in love with Faneca that we are looking for the next Faneca kind of like getting a rebound girlfriend. Its not healthy in real life and its not healthy for a football team. He's gone we all need to accept that.

*We have Ike at CB McFadden will be a free agent and has already stated that he wants to get paid and Townsend is old as dirt and although he is a brilliant technician that can only take you so far at his position he (much like Farrior) will get the old stink eye from father time. Guess we are starting Ike and Gay in 09 with a 35 year old DeShea backing them up.

* I could be in the minority but if I am going to overhaul the Oline I start with the tackles where I have Smith who is on his last legs, Starks who isn't even under contract and Essex who just sucks rather than finding a fifth wheel at guard where I have Simmons, Mahan, Kemo, and most likely Colon. As of now we have no tackles under contract for 09.

I'm not saying we should draft a corner but I am saying that if we go Oline in the first round it better be a guy that can play tackle if not than give me something on defense whether it is a lineman or corner especially if that corner is someone who is as NFL ready as Cason or has the ball skills of DRC.

Also I'm not buying into that the season is over before it starts BS since its been proven time and time again especially recently that "on any given sunday...". All we have to do is win the division and let the rest play out. Even with all the spending the Browns did I have no reason to believe that we aren't the best team in the division, do you?

some info may be wrong because I am drunk on all that good Easter wine but you get the gist

[deljzc]

gonna try to keep this as concise as possible

* I think people are so in love with Faneca that we are looking for the next Faneca kind of like getting a rebound girlfriend. Its not healthy in real life and its not healthy for a football team. He's gone we all need to accept that.

*We have Ike at CB McFadden will be a free agent and has already stated that he wants to get paid and Townsend is old as dirt and although he is a brilliant technician that can only take you so far at his position he (much like Farrior) will get the old stink eye from father time. Guess we are starting Ike and Gay in 09 with a 35 year old DeShea backing them up.

* I could be in the minority but if I am going to overhaul the Oline I start with the tackles where I have Smith who is on his last legs, Starks who isn't even under contract and Essex who just sucks rather than finding a fifth wheel at guard where I have Simmons, Mahan, Kemo, and most likely Colon. As of next we have no tackles under contract for 09.

I'm not saying we should draft a corner but I am saying that if we go Oline in the first round it better be a guy that can play tackle if not than give me something on defense whether it is a lineman or corner especially if that corner is someone who is as NFL ready as Cason or has the ball skills of DRC.

Also I'm not buying into that the season is over before it starts BS since its been proven time and time again especially recently that "on any given sunday...". All we have to do is win the division and let the rest play out. Even with all the spending the Browns did I have no reason to believe that we aren't the best team in the division, do you?

some info may be wrong because I am drunk on all that good Easter wine but you get the gist

I don't see anything in Albert like I see in Faneca. Two really different players in my mind.

I like Albert because I truly believe we're going to end up getting a MUCH BETTER left tackle on the cheap as compared to the so-called "other" tackles in this draft. I think Otah, Long, Nicks and Cherilus are RT's. I think Williams is a little weak and Baker has maxed out and would be a better fit in a zone-blocking scheme. Clady's the only other guy I really like at left tackle and I see a lot of comparisons in footwork between him and Albert, but I think Albert is a little nastier.

The fact Albert has a backup position if I'm wrong (and let's face it there are no guarantees, even with the CB's or WR's) is just icing on the cake.

I don't think we can be frivulous with our 1st round draft pick. We need a good guy for the line and I think Albert has the most upside and the most guarantee to help no matter what. By passing on an O-line, you're just backing yourself into a corner in later rounds HAVING to pick an O-linemen when other value or steals might present themselves (and there are a lot of interesting CB's and WR's that could fall to our 2nd or 3rd round picks).

[SteelerFan448]

*We have Ike at CB McFadden will be a free agent and has already stated that he wants to get paid and Townsend is old as dirt and although he is a brilliant technician that can only take you so far at his position he (much like Farrior) will get the old stink eye from father time. Guess we are starting Ike and Gay in 09 with a 35 year old DeShea backing them up.


McFadden has his new agent now, but he didn't exactly say that he wanted to get paid. I wouldn't exactly say he has gone out there and earned a big contract.

[Vader]

I don't think we can be frivulous with our 1st round draft pick. We need a good guy for the line and I think Albert has the most upside and the most guarantee to help no matter what. By passing on an O-line, you're just backing yourself into a corner in later rounds HAVING to pick an O-linemen when other value or steals might present themselves (and there are a lot of interesting CB's and WR's that could fall to our 2nd or 3rd round picks).

Totally disagree. Your backing yourself into a corner before you even draft by saying your taking an OL. Take the best player at a position of need. We need OL, DL, CB, WR. Why reach for a OL in the first when you can get better value at another spot? This draft is deep at OL and all the top notch tackles are gone (I don't believe Alberts can play OT in the NFL) I draft a top CB, WR, or DL so that I don't reach for a player now.

You don't pass up talent when you have many needs.

[kurtistb]

Totally disagree. Your backing yourself into a corner before you even draft by saying your taking an OL. Take the best player at a position of need. We need OL, DL, CB, WR. Why reach for a OL in the first when you can get better value at another spot? This draft is deep at OL and all the top notch tackles are gone (I don't believe Alberts can play OT in the NFL) I draft a top CB, WR, or DL so that I don't reach for a player now.

You don't pass up talent when you have many needs.

Thank you, thats what I was trying to say

[BLITZ 43]

Totally disagree. Your backing yourself into a corner before you even draft by saying your taking an OL. Take the best player at a position of need. We need OL, DL, CB, WR. Why reach for a OL in the first when you can get better value at another spot? This draft is deep at OL and all the top notch tackles are gone (I don't believe Alberts can play OT in the NFL) I draft a top CB, WR, or DL so that I don't reach for a player now.

You don't pass up talent when you have many needs.


Good point Vader you and I have agreed on this from day one. People keep bringing up that he is the #1 guard then want to move him to tackle and they don't understand that we just used our 1st round pick on a guy who was #1 at his position and isn't going to be playing there for us! That brings me to another point where does he rank on the list of tackles? As far as Williams being a little weak he looked pretty good against the top dlineman at the senior bowl. On the cb position I will say this if anyone thinks we are fine there they are high. Other then Ike, who has played well? There is mixed opinion about Townsend on this board and I for one am not a Townsend fan and think we could use an upgrade there, not to mention age and FA will make us thin after this year. We need to go BPA and with so many needs OT, WR, DL, RB, and CB I don't like us taking the #1 guard with the intent to move him to tackle making him not the BPA!

[TMC]

Totally disagree. Your backing yourself into a corner before you even draft by saying your taking an OL. Take the best player at a position of need. We need OL, DL, CB, WR. Why reach for a OL in the first when you can get better value at another spot? This draft is deep at OL and all the top notch tackles are gone (I don't believe Alberts can play OT in the NFL) I draft a top CB, WR, or DL so that I don't reach for a player now.

You don't pass up talent when you have many needs.

I agree with this for the most part. I truly believe you should take the best player available and that will increase your talent level over the long haul.....but, there are some things I always tend to factor in when I look at who I select....
1-that BPA has to be at a position where I do not have better talent under contract for a long time. Since we signed Ben, if another QB rolled down the pipe, I would not take him because I seriously doubt we can get better then Ben.
2-I lean more towards positions I desire to upgrade. It does not have to be a need for me. If I have the choice between a guy like Patrick Willis at LB or a guy like Willie Colon on the line, I am fucking taking Willis. Do I need that with Farrior, Foote, and Timmons? No, but Willis makes me a much better team than adding Colon would.
3-What will I need next year....or two years down the road. IMO, it is more important to get guys that fill future holes than it is to fill immediate holes. I expect very little from rookies, so any contribution is great. But, with Townsend at his age and McFadden hitting the final year of his deal, corner is a position we have to address. The thing is, you can address that in the 3rd/4th because you have time to develop a guy....like we did with Ike.

And, there is no way I want Branden Albert in the first. I doubt he plays LT in the NFL. He played on a team that struggled in 2006 with its tackle play and they did not think enough of him to give him a run at the position. Instead, they platooned two guys at one side and started a freshman on the other. We moved Faneca out when we needed help, yet they would not move Albert out....why? His agent has talked all this hype up about him playing tackle in the NFL so teams would get interested....and some probably will. I just hope it is not us. I would take Gosder Cherilus at LT over Albert. Sam Baker too. Carl Nicks. There are a host of guys that played LT in college and did well that people are passing up because Albert has become some poster boy for the best OG in the draft. Shit, I do not think he is as good inside as Mike Pollack.

I pray we do not spend our first round pick on this guy.

[dobre shunka]

Albert has a better chance of playing tackle in the pros than Zuttah. Zuttah looks made for the interior, while the opposite is true for Albert. Unless he goes to some team like Denver, I just don't see Zuttah playing tackle in the NFL.

A friend of mine pointed out that Albert isn't as good a prospect at guard as Grubbs, Blalock, Sears last year. In that context, and as such, would be a need/reach type pick at 1.23 this year. He also pointed out that Albert has the frame, awareness, and balance of an OT, but doesn't play with the kind of strength or leverage needed for phoneboot combat inside at guard. But as an OT project, doesn't really represent value at 1.23 either. He's a junior, but he's still older than a lot of the seniors.

As a guard, he probably would've went 4th last year. Mid R2. About where he was projected to go this year before Mayock sent him up everyone's boards (Rang, Wright, cough, Wexell). And this was before everyone started looking at the 2nd tier underclassmen. With everything going on, everyone's attention is always on the seniors and elite juniors before the combine. But Mayock jumped it with Albert and the lemmings followed. Same thing with Brandon Flowers, only he underwhelmed at the combine and fell back to where he was, mid R2 instead of #7 overall. Good thing Wexell didn't chose him to lock onto instead of Albert. Still, I wonder if all this noise filters into some teams warrooms. Where they like a guy and start hearing he might go higher than he is on their board, so they bump him up a round.

As a tackle Albert had two starts, and was said to look better at tackle then he ever did at guard. But he's a project there, and not a young one as his underclassmen status belies. He's not value at guard or tackle at 1.23. But does his combined value and versatility/potential raise him to that level? I don't really know. It does raise his value, IMO, but not to 1.23. Colbert says he has a board of 5 players he thinks will be there for each round, and that they prioritize them. If I were to do the same, I'd have him outside of my board of 5 for 1.23.

[deljzc]

Totally disagree. Your backing yourself into a corner before you even draft by saying your taking an OL. Take the best player at a position of need. We need OL, DL, CB, WR. Why reach for a OL in the first when you can get better value at another spot? This draft is deep at OL and all the top notch tackles are gone (I don't believe Alberts can play OT in the NFL) I draft a top CB, WR, or DL so that I don't reach for a player now.

You don't pass up talent when you have many needs.

This is where I disagree with the best player available idea (not that I don't see where you're coming from).

To me there is no draft board so perfect that the guy ranked #20 is so much better than the guy ranked #23. I just don't believe that. In the first round we're talking maybe taking a guy two or three slots out of order based on need.

As you go further into the draft, more and more value presents itself because when we pick in round 2, there will be guys 10 spots different. And by round 3 and 4, it could be 20-30 (a whole round) different on our draft board vs. where we are picking them.

To me, THAT'S value drafting. Not picking the #20 guy on your board over the #23 guy on your board in round 1 and putting yourself in "must draft position" later on.

Now if you believe Albert isn't even a 1st round talent, I'm never going to convince you he should be our pick, but then I could just as easily argue for Cherilus or Baker and the logic still applies.

To me, I don't see Cason, Talib, the defensive linemen or the wide receivers having THAT much higher a 1st round grade than Albert. That's my opinion. To me that's a reach over need that doesn't justify the difference in talent. I would save those sorts of decisions for later on in the draft.

[Vader]

This is where I disagree with the best player available idea (not that I don't see where you're coming from).

To me there is no draft board so perfect that the guy ranked #20 is so much better than the guy ranked #23. I just don't believe that. In the first round we're talking maybe taking a guy two or three slots out of order based on need.

As you go further into the draft, more and more value presents itself because when we pick in round 2, there will be guys 10 spots different. And by round 3 and 4, it could be 20-30 (a whole round) different on our draft board vs. where we are picking them.

To me, THAT'S value drafting. Not picking the #20 guy on your board over the #23 guy on your board in round 1 and putting yourself in "must draft position" later on.

Now if you believe Albert isn't even a 1st round talent, I'm never going to convince you he should be our pick, but then I could just as easily argue for Cherilus or Baker and the logic still applies.

To me, I don't see Cason, Talib, the defensive linemen or the wide receivers having THAT much higher a 1st round grade than Albert. That's my opinion. To me that's a reach over need that doesn't justify the difference in talent. I would save those sorts of decisions for later on in the draft.

But you don't realize that what you are doing is putting the team in a huge box. The question isn't between #20 and #23 but rather who makes our team better and at what position. Is Alberts value that much better than the #2 OG in the draft? Will he be any better than anybody else we can take at #23?

I'd rather draft a stud @ #23 and have the #2 best OG than the best OG (that nobody knows where he is going to play) and then have to find a stud in the later rounds. Quality is what I'm looking for not just picking a guy because we need OL, especially since we really need OT not OG.

[Hines57]

If one of these Tackles or Albert is still on the board, we need to grab em' at pick 23. We need to shore up our O-line and then turn our attention to the defense.

[deljzc]

But you don't realize that what you are doing is putting the team in a huge box. The question isn't between #20 and #23 but rather who makes our team better and at what position. Is Alberts value that much better than the #2 OG in the draft? Will he be any better than anybody else we can take at #23?

I'd rather draft a stud @ #23 and have the #2 best OG than the best OG (that nobody knows where he is going to play) and then have to find a stud in the later rounds. Quality is what I'm looking for not just picking a guy because we need OL, especially since we really need OT not OG.

Well, in my opinion, Albert is equivalent to those guys you're referencing because I think he can play LT. It does come down to whether or not you like Albert or not in this discussion. Like I said before, if you think Albert is a good guard only, than you probably don't have him as a first round grade. I do.

As far as looking as depth at position in the draft, I think that actually supports the case to take one of the "Big Eight" offensive linemen in round 1. That's Long, Clady, Otah, Williams, Albert, Baker, Cherlius and Nicks (and I'm assuming we won't get #8 with pick #23).

I'm not 100% sure any of those players slips to our 2nd round pick. And after that, I think the left tackle prospects have a drop off. We'd be looking at Collins and Brown and I think they're as much of a reach as taking a guy in round 1. Waiting until round 3 puts you in "a project" range and I am 100% against picking more offensive line projects and hoping they work out.

I am looking at the "big picture" of this draft when I am promoting offensive linemen (and Albert's the guy I like best right now and will think he's available). I think we could get a CB or WR to fall to our 2nd round pick better than a OT.

Again... it's just my opinon.

[BLITZ 43]

Well, in my opinion, Albert is equivalent to those guys you're referencing because I think he can play LT. It does come down to whether or not you like Albert or not in this discussion. Like I said before, if you think Albert is a good guard only, than you probably don't have him as a first round grade. I do.

As far as looking as depth at position in the draft, I think that actually supports the case to take one of the "Big Eight" offensive linemen in round 1. That's Long, Clady, Otah, Williams, Albert, Baker, Cherlius and Nicks (and I'm assuming we won't get #8 with pick #23).

I'm not 100% sure any of those players slips to our 2nd round pick. And after that, I think the left tackle prospects have a drop off. We'd be looking at Collins and Brown and I think they're as much of a reach as taking a guy in round 1. Waiting until round 3 puts you in "a project" range and I am 100% against picking more offensive line projects and hoping they work out.

I am looking at the "big picture" of this draft when I am promoting offensive linemen (and Albert's the guy I like best right now and will think he's available). I think we could get a CB or WR to fall to our 2nd round pick better than a OT.

Again... it's just my opinon.


Deljzc, Good post and way to explain yourself but the question I have for ya is this. Where do you get your info on Albert being a NFL LT? I also think there will be good talent at ot in the 2nd. Hell I think the talent is very deep for cb,wr,rb, and oline for the first 3 rounds.

[Sluzilla]

Well, in my opinion, Albert is equivalent to those guys you're referencing because I think he can play LT. It does come down to whether or not you like Albert or not in this discussion. Like I said before, if you think Albert is a good guard only, than you probably don't have him as a first round grade. I do.

As far as looking as depth at position in the draft, I think that actually supports the case to take one of the "Big Eight" offensive linemen in round 1. That's Long, Clady, Otah, Williams, Albert, Baker, Cherlius and Nicks (and I'm assuming we won't get #8 with pick #23).

if anything...i see Albert as a RT if he were to move...not even close to a LT...IMO...

[kurtistb]

Well, in my opinion, Albert is equivalent to those guys you're referencing because I think he can play LT. It does come down to whether or not you like Albert or not in this discussion. Like I said before, if you think Albert is a good guard only, than you probably don't have him as a first round grade. I do.


if you take LT out of the equation do you still rate him as a first? Hypothetically speaking , what if numerous NFL scouts said there is no way Albert can play tackle in the NFL where do you evaluate him based solely on the position that we know he can play? Is he that much better than Rachal, Schuenig, Young and Co. that he is still a must have at pick 23. The reason I ask is because since he has only played 2 games at LT I am not sure we as fans have seen enough of him to make that call and I have yet to see anyone definitively say he is a NFL LT. So any evaluation or grade that I give him is based solely as a OG.

[leftcoaststeelerfan]

Whether he can play tackle or not really does not matter. I will settle for stud at LG. And that alone makes me grade him as a 1st rd talent.

[deljzc]

Deljzc, Good post and way to explain yourself but the question I have for ya is this. Where do you get your info on Albert being a NFL LT? I also think there will be good talent at ot in the 2nd. Hell I think the talent is very deep for cb,wr,rb, and oline for the first 3 rounds.

Mayock at NFL Network was the first to really start pushing Albert hard. He's also one of the first to break down tape on these guys (most of the other "draft experts" don't start looking at Juniors tapes until later).

The first thing that got my attention was the consensus he's the best pulling guard in this draft. By far. Mayock says he's the best pulling guard he's ever seen at this level. There is no doubt in my mind the Steelers run blocking system LOVE left guards that can pull. I also think since Simmons is entrenched at RG and Miller is such a good blocking tight end, we are a "right handed", strong side running team.

I know some here say we're okay at left guard because of Kemo and Mahan. I don't agree with that assessment. First, I think Kemo can't play there at all. He's a road grader, right side player. I don't even understand why the coaches keep saying he's a left sided player. Second, while picking up Hartwig and moving Mahan back to guard might be okay, I still don't like Mahan at all as a starter. Guard, center, wherever.

So in my mind, I think Albert will come in and flat out win the left guard spot year one.

Now as far as where he projects in year 2 and 3, I think he has the potential to move out to left tackle, but if not, I think I get a perfect fit for our system and potential all-pro guard.

Look at the other options. My second favorite choice is Cherilus. I think he could start at RT right away, push Colon maybe over to left guard (I don't know about that either) and could be a pro-bowl RT. I like Albert only slightly better because I think right tackles are actually easier to find than LG's we like. And I put Albert's ability to play left guard slightly ahead of Cherilus (mainly based on footwork).

I don't think Nicks ends up at left tackle ever. He's a LG vs. RT prospect to me (I like him, I just think that's where he's best).

I think Baker is just better in a zone blocking scheme and is too small for the Steelers, the AFC North and the type of teams we compete with in the AFC. The same concerns worry we about Williams because I don't see enough nastiness or strength.

To me if we wait until round 2, I think they are all gone. I'd rather be the first to start the rush for OT's rather than get the straggler at the end of the run in round 2.

Again, I'm okay with the pick getting one of the best pulling LG's ever to come out of college. And for our system at LG I do put Albert ahead of Grubbs, Blaylock and Sears.

That's just how I see it. I don't think these guys "fall" as much as people are saying either to trade too far down. I think you could see Seattle (Albert), San Diego (Cherilus), Miami (Nicks), Green Bay (Baker) and Atlanta, Oakland and St. Louis all in the mix for offensive line talent during picks #24 - #36 (and it depends how the early part of the round works out too).

I'd just rather our front office pick the guy they like the best out of the tier-1 offensive line talent group rather than either getting stuck in round 2 picking the crumb that was left or waiting until round 3 to take a project. I like Albert, but maybe the Steelers like someone else.

[Hines57]

I've got to think we tagged Starks at the dollar amount with the full intention of him coming back to play Left Tackle. Same as we did with Marvel, we took our RT and put him on the other side. Marvel may very well get cut post July 1. This opens up competition at RT. Kemo and Simmons will most likely be our interior lineman unless Mahan can show up Kemo. If thats the case, I'd draft a RT and get Colon off our line.

[dobre shunka]

This is where I disagree with the best player available idea (not that I don't see where you're coming from).

To me there is no draft board so perfect that the guy ranked #20 is so much better than the guy ranked #23. I just don't believe that. In the first round we're talking maybe taking a guy two or three slots out of order based on need.

As you go further into the draft, more and more value presents itself because when we pick in round 2, there will be guys 10 spots different. And by round 3 and 4, it could be 20-30 (a whole round) different on our draft board vs. where we are picking them.

To me, THAT'S value drafting. Not picking the #20 guy on your board over the #23 guy on your board in round 1 and putting yourself in "must draft position" later on.

Now if you believe Albert isn't even a 1st round talent, I'm never going to convince you he should be our pick, but then I could just as easily argue for Cherilus or Baker and the logic still applies.

To me, I don't see Cason, Talib, the defensive linemen or the wide receivers having THAT much higher a 1st round grade than Albert. That's my opinion. To me that's a reach over need that doesn't justify the difference in talent. I would save those sorts of decisions for later on in the draft.

The Steelers did just that last year, and as far as I know every year since Colbert has been here. They look at each round and say which 5 guys do we want who should be available at our slot. Then they prioritize based on need. Pass rush was #1 priority. Timmons was their #1 choice. And looking at their draft visitors list you can somewhat slot these guys and see how their board breaks per round. Last year I think their board ran hot and a number of the guys they were targeting for the 3rd cleared off before their pick, particularly tall WRs. Can't prove it, but I'd bet money Spaeth came from their R4 pool.

It's not a bad idea, tho it's somewhat inflexible. And it creates some tunnelvision if you don't take a step back. Plus, you can really miss out on some great values if you're looking just at your board and have eliminated a number of players you would've included if you thought they'd fall. You have to have a good sense of slotting where a player's value is. Otherwise, it can force you move up or overdraft players if don't slot right and your board runs hot. It's easier at the top. You can see that every year with mock drafts and rankings pre-senior bowl. Anyone can guess who 20-25 of the 1st round picks will end up being as early as January. It gets harder the deeper you get. Tho, Zo was high on their R1 board. Same with Marcus Johnson. Essex had a R1 grade, ect. He has said a couple of times they do many mocks leading up to the draft, but always stop after R2. I don't know if that makes it tougher for them to valueslot players, or maybe it indirectly puts a majority of their focus on the first 2 rounds. But I don't think it's a coincidence his drafts tend to fall apart after R2.

[deljzc]

The Steelers did just that last year, and as far as I know every year since Colbert has been here. They look at each round and say which 5 guys do we want who should be available at our slot. Then they prioritize based on need. Pass rush was #1 priority. Timmons was their #1 choice. And looking at their draft visitors list you can somewhat slot these guys and see how their board breaks per round. Last year I think their board ran hot and a number of the guys they were targeting for the 3rd cleared off before their pick, particularly tall WRs. Can't prove it, but I'd bet money Spaeth came from their R4 pool.

It's not a bad idea, tho it's somewhat inflexible. And it creates some tunnelvision if you don't take a step back. Plus, you can really miss out on some great values if you're looking just at your board and have eliminated a number of players you would've included if you thought they'd fall. You have to have a good sense of slotting where a player's value is. Otherwise, it can force you move up or overdraft players if don't slot right and your board runs hot. It's easier at the top. You can see that every year with mock drafts and rankings pre-senior bowl. Anyone can guess who 20-25 of the 1st round picks will end up being as early as January. It gets harder the deeper you get. Tho, Zo was high on their R1 board. Same with Marcus Johnson. Essex had a R1 grade, ect. He has said a couple of times they do many mocks leading up to the draft, but always stop after R2. I don't know if that makes it tougher for them to valueslot players, or maybe it indirectly puts a majority of their focus on the first 2 rounds. But I don't think it's a coincidence his drafts tend to fall apart after R2.

I do agree after round 1 my system (whatever system you want to call it) should be used less and less and BPA govern. How this doesn't get easier because you should be taking care of your big need early doesn't make any sense to me.

My problems with Colbert late in drafts has been his sometimes he gets too cute. I think picking a QB like Jacobs was a waste. And I am 100% against the Sepulveda pick (that seems to be a touchy subject for some). I thought Willie Reid was a bad pick at the time and have no idea how he gets to be a 3rd round talent on ANY board especially when I thought Holmes should have been looked at as our punt returner his first couple of seasons when he was drafted in round 1.

I don't know... it's easy to second guess day-2 picks now. I see some frivulous decisions in hindsight, but that's my opinion.

[TMC]

This is where I disagree with the best player available idea (not that I don't see where you're coming from).

To me there is no draft board so perfect that the guy ranked #20 is so much better than the guy ranked #23. I just don't believe that. In the first round we're talking maybe taking a guy two or three slots out of order based on need.

I would completely disagree with that statement. It was evident that Javon Kearse was vastly superior to Troy Edwards. John Tait was as well. Instead of drafting the BPA, they took the position of need. Then, the following year, we re-drafted the position again trying to fix the fuckup.

If we are sitting at #23 with guys like Dan Connor, Quintin Groves, or Rodgers-Cromartie on the board and we take a left guard who really has not distinguished himself from the other guards, then we are dumb as a box of rocks. Is Albert the best guard in the draft? I do not see him as being vastly better than Roy Schuening, who may not put up the numbers in shorts that Albert does, but is a stud when you pop in the mouthpiece. Schuening probably cannot pull as well as Albert, but he does not have the issues once he locks on that Albert does. And, while everyone talks about Albert's great athleticism, Schuening's 10 and 20 yard splits were not far off Albert's and his bench number was a little better. Albert is not a great finisher and is only an average run blocker. He is inconsistent. Schuening is that blue collar lunch pail guy that works his ass off. He finishes his blocks and comes to play every game.

And, as a guard, Zuttah may have more potential. He is a tackle moving inside, so he has the feet to play tackle in college and he is a dancing bear. He has great strength and better feet than Albert. He needs more time to develop....and you can get him much later.

I would easily take Schuening in the 2nd or Zuttah in the 4th over Albert in the 1st. Not even a question in my mind.

[deljzc]

TMC... I completely understand your position if you think that way about Albert.

I said this whole discussion starts with the assumption Albert is close on the big board to the other options available.

On my big board I have Alberts ahead of both Conner and Groves. I do have DRC ahead of Albert and would consider any of the Big Three CB's (DRC, McKelvin and Jenkins) over Albert.

I would not draft Conner or Groves over Albert. That's my opinion.

[smithessmokin]

TMC... I completely understand your position if you think that way about Albert.

I said this whole discussion starts with the assumption Albert is close on the big board to the other options available.

On my big board I have Alberts ahead of both Conner and Groves. I do have DRC ahead of Albert and would consider any of the Big Three CB's (DRC, McKelvin and Jenkins) over Albert.

I would not draft Conner or Groves over Albert. That's my opinion.


let me guess.....a big WR???? what a waste when we dont need one.

[deljzc]

There isn't a wide receiver in this class I take ahead of the major offensive line talent I have in that same range: Otah, Williams, Albert, Cherlius.

I'm philosophically opposed at taking WR's ever in the first round, unless in crazy, no way possible scenarios (like Calvin Johnson falling to #15 overall last year).

Read hear for the boom/bust discussion of WR's in the first round:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=776&Category=11

[TMC]

There isn't a wide receiver in this class I take ahead of the major offensive line talent I have in that same range: Otah, Williams, Albert, Cherlius.

I'm philosophically opposed at taking WR's ever in the first round, unless in crazy, no way possible scenarios (like Calvin Johnson falling to #15 overall last year).

Read hear for the boom/bust discussion of WR's in the first round:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=776&Category=11

Yeah, I have saw this. In fact, I have used some of this stuff before....but you have to look at his numbers. He considers Ike Hilliard a scrub as well as Bryant Johnson, Reggie Williams, and Mike Jenkins. It took several years for some receivers to get acclimated to the NFL. Three years in, Hines Ward would have been a scrub. Jimmy Smith and McCardell would have been on the scrub list.

His list of journeymen include Terry Glenn, Eddie Kennison, Burress, Donte Stallworth, Javon Walker, Andre Johnson, Roy Williams, Lee Evans, and Mike Clayton.

I wonder how many teams would spend a first right now on Andre Johnson or Roy Williams?

Some of the receivers he pointed to as failing just 2 years ago have become downright studs on their team. Now, he calls a journeyman a decent pro performer. He does not consider Hilliard, Johnson, Williams, or Jenkins decent pro performers even though one averaged more than 50 receptions a season, another played with Mike Vick, and yet a 3rd played behind two explosive WRs on a team without a QB. Still, he has 22 guys ranked as decent pro performers or better and 6 were not ranked because they were just drafted. So, just 17 out of 45 selections qualify as scrubs or busts.

IF we draft a WR in the first, I do not expect him to sniff a Pro Bowl until Hines hangs up his cleats. I do not expect Santonio to see one until then either. They only take so many guys to the Pro Bowl.

[TMC]

let me guess.....a big WR???? what a waste when we dont need one.

To simply state we do not need a WR is ignorant. Last season, we did not have ANY receiver get over 1000 yards. Not one. Hines Ward led the team with 71 receptions and Holmes was 2nd with 52. Do you know how many games Ben Roethlisberger had where he topped 250 yards passing? 3. THREE. One, Two, THREE. You know how many times he topped 300? None. We had three games where A Steeler WR got over 100 yards.

With Arians style of offense that is predicted on being able to pass to open the run (same one the Colts use), we have to have more receiving weapons than Hines Ward and Santonio Holmes. Washington has not proved to be that go-to guy and behind Washington we have Willie Reid, who appears to be a bust, and a bunch of practice squad players.

One injury at WR, we are done. Not only do we not have talent, we lack warm bodies. We have better depth on the offensive line than we do at WR. We have our starting tackles coming back and transitioned a 3rd. We have one starting guard, signed a starting center, have a backup that could step in for Faneca, have the former starting center, and the backup center. In fact, WR MAY be our weakest position heading into this draft, especially when you consider that Hines Ward is 32 years old and his contract runs out after 2009. As mentioned in the link posted above, there are WRs that are considered scrubs that developed 2-4 years AFTER being drafted.....so, it is my opinion that you better draft your WR early and give him some time to settle in.

We have areas we can upgrade. Our offensive line can be upgraded across the board. We need to upgrade our pass rush. We need to upgrade our receiving unit. We need depth in several positions including RB, DB, and LB.

There are very few positions where this draft cannot help us in the first round....but to lock onto a player or position is ludicrous. You take the best talent available. If that is a WR, you draft the WR. If it is an OT, you take the OT. If it is an OLB, then you draft the OLB.

[deljzc]

TMC... people here are complaining about Timmons not contributing in year one, yet now it's okay for 1st round WR's to not produce until year 3 or 4? Their rookie contract is practically over by then and you're going to have to pay the piper anyhow. Why not just pick up WR's in free agency or using draft picks to trade for establithed players?

The problem with first round WR's isn't just the big bust factor (and I think it exists more for WR's than any other position), it's also the long time frame it seems to take for WR's to get acclumated into a system and become good players. Bryant Johnson IS a bust if you're looking at it from Arizona's perspective. Did Arizona really get #17 overall value out of that pick for the last four seasons? As are Reggie Williams and Mike Jenkins in my opinion.

I think even being generous HALF of the wide receivers drafted in the 1st round during that time frame underperformed their rookie contract and didn't start contributing until they either switched teams, got deep into their rookie contracts or even until they signed a new contract.

As much as Hardy, Sweed and Kelly look like these great saviors, history says we should expect one or two of them to develop so slowly they would be considered busts and give very little to their team in years 2-3.

And since we're looking at wide receivers in the 2nd half of round 1 (not the elite talents/top-10 picks), the bust factor on them is pretty high. Here are all the WR's drafted in the 1st round after pick #16 since 2000:

R. J. Seward
Sylvester Morris
Reggie Wayne
Freddie Mitchell
Javon Walker
Ashlie Lelie
Bryant Johnson
Rashaun Woods
Michael Jenkins
Roddy White
Michael Clayton
Matt Jones
Santonio Holmes
Anthony Gonzales
Craig Davis
Robert Meechem
Dwayne Bowe

That's nothing to write home about in my opinion and certainly not the offense changing talents many here are promoting Hardy, Sweed and Kelly are going to be for Roethlisberger right away.

I look at that list and thank our scouts for picking Holmes, because he's one of the best of the bunch. I guess some would have faith we can dip into that well again, but I'm not so sure.

[dobre shunka]

There is no more empirical evidence to suggest WRs are more bust prone than DT or DE or RB or LB or QB. The thing is WRs may not start right away, but they do contribute right away. Like Calvin Johnson last year, he may not be out there much of his rookie year in 2 WR sets, but he was still out there in 3 and 4 WR sets which amounts to well over half of their offensive snaps. And he was very productive. Same with an Anthony Gonzalez. Plus WRs are natural special teamers, unless they're a puss. See Ward. WR can be eased into the starting lineup because of the different formations and sets. Doesn't work that way with OL or to some degree DL. You're either thrown in or you sit and wait.

The Steelers were looking hard at tall WRs last year early in the draft, thru the Spaeth pick. They had a number of tall-ish WRs in for visits. IIRC, Jarrett, Smith, Hill, Laurent, Jacoby Jones, maybe Rice, Allison. Smith the smurf of the bunch at 5'11. Obvious that was high on their wishlist last year, and also obvious they didn't get it with Baker. Same can be said of Cornerbacks (WG is a nice player, but a career nickelback). And those are two positions that are drawing high early interest from the Steelers. Would not be surprised at all if they address both early. If it was a high need/priority to them last year, can't imagine it's any less so now.

[deljzc]

There is no more empirical evidence to suggest WRs are more bust prone than DT or DE or RB or LB or QB. The thing is WRs may not start right away, but they do contribute right away. Like Calvin Johnson last year, he may not be out there much of his rookie year in 2 WR sets, but he was still out there in 3 and 4 WR sets which amounts to well over half of their offensive snaps. And he was very productive. Same with an Anthony Gonzalez. Plus WRs are natural special teamers, unless they're a puss. See Ward. WR can be eased into the starting lineup because of the different formations and sets. Doesn't work that way with OL or to some degree DL. You're either thrown in or you sit and wait.

The Steelers were looking hard at tall WRs last year early in the draft, thru the Spaeth pick. They had a number of tall-ish WRs in for visits. IIRC, Jarrett, Smith, Hill, Laurent, Jacoby Jones, maybe Rice, Allison. Smith the smurf of the bunch at 5'11. Obvious that was high on their wishlist last year, and also obvious they didn't get it with Baker. Same can be said of Cornerbacks (WG is a nice player, but a career nickelback). And those are two positions that are drawing high early interest from the Steelers. Would not be surprised at all if they address both early. If it was a high need/priority to them last year, can't imagine it's any less so now.

Well, here is the list of the #1 guard taken in each draft since 2000 and where they were drafted:

2000 - Travis Claridge (#37)
2001 - Steve Hutchison (#17)
2002 - Kendall Simmons (#30)
2003 - Eric Stienbach (#33)
2004 - Chris Snee (#34)
2005 - Logan Mankins (#32)
2006 - Davin Joseph (#23)
2007 - Ben Grubbs (#29)

I don't know about you, but that's a pretty consistent bunch of draft picks. Personally, I'd take ANY of those guys over a wide reciever in this draft considering our needs, salary cap position and how much guards are now going for in free agency.

That's just me.

[FlaStGrad]

I like the point that was made if the player we take at #23 is vastly better than what we could get with a later pick. Say Albert ranked as the #1 OG versus the #2 or #3 OG we could get in round 2.

I equate it to the Dolphins decisions in this draft. Is a combo of OT Long and QB Henne better than QB Ryan and OT Nicks? That is what this comes down to for us as well. Do we want to go with WR Hardy and OG Schuening or OG Albert and WR Nelson? Personally, I think the difference between skill players is uch more drastic then those in the trenches so I woul dopt for the first scenario.

[TMC]

TMC... people here are complaining about Timmons not contributing in year one, yet now it's okay for 1st round WR's to not produce until year 3 or 4? Their rookie contract is practically over by then and you're going to have to pay the piper anyhow. Why not just pick up WR's in free agency or using draft picks to trade for establithed players?

The problem with first round WR's isn't just the big bust factor (and I think it exists more for WR's than any other position), it's also the long time frame it seems to take for WR's to get acclumated into a system and become good players. Bryant Johnson IS a bust if you're looking at it from Arizona's perspective. Did Arizona really get #17 overall value out of that pick for the last four seasons? As are Reggie Williams and Mike Jenkins in my opinion.

I think even being generous HALF of the wide receivers drafted in the 1st round during that time frame underperformed their rookie contract and didn't start contributing until they either switched teams, got deep into their rookie contracts or even until they signed a new contract.

As much as Hardy, Sweed and Kelly look like these great saviors, history says we should expect one or two of them to develop so slowly they would be considered busts and give very little to their team in years 2-3.

And since we're looking at wide receivers in the 2nd half of round 1 (not the elite talents/top-10 picks), the bust factor on them is pretty high. Here are all the WR's drafted in the 1st round after pick #16 since 2000:

R. J. Seward
Sylvester Morris
Reggie Wayne
Freddie Mitchell
Javon Walker
Ashlie Lelie
Bryant Johnson
Rashaun Woods
Michael Jenkins
Roddy White
Michael Clayton
Matt Jones
Santonio Holmes
Anthony Gonzales
Craig Davis
Robert Meechem
Dwayne Bowe

That's nothing to write home about in my opinion and certainly not the offense changing talents many here are promoting Hardy, Sweed and Kelly are going to be for Roethlisberger right away.

I look at that list and thank our scouts for picking Holmes, because he's one of the best of the bunch. I guess some would have faith we can dip into that well again, but I'm not so sure.


That is because people have expectations of a 21-year old guy making a drastic impact on a team in his first season....and it simply does not happen that often.

Along the same train of thought where you point out WRs that fail in the first round, how many drafted WRs fail in the 2nd? 3rd? 4th? I believe the first round bust potential is somewhere in the range of 50% for WRs. I doubt very seriously that the number increases as you move back in rounds.

Ourlads did a study of the NFL 2-deep rosters and where those players came from over a 3-year span (2005-2007). The percentage of WRs on NFL 2-deep rosters that were 1st round selections was 25%. One out of every 4 NFL WRs on NFL 2-deep (starter/backup) were first round picks. Another 20% came in the 2nd with 13% and 10% coming in the 3rd and 4th respectively. It dropped to 6% or less for every other round. The undrafted guys comprised 16%.

Now, it did not specifically break out guards, but it covered the OL. In the first round, 14% of the NFL's 2-deep rosters were first rounders with another 15% being 2nd rounders. The numbers were 13%, 11%, and 11% over the next three rounds. So, while the quality of player obviously drops significantly at WR, it does not drop that significantly at OL. IN fact, the best three positions to NOT take in the first are OL, LB, and TE as you are able to get those in the middle rounds.

So, while WR may have the bigger bust factor, it also has the biggest reward factor. Half of the WRs in the NFL's 2-deep rosters were taken in the top 2 rounds.

[deljzc]

That is because people have expectations of a 21-year old guy making a drastic impact on a team in his first season....and it simply does not happen that often.

Along the same train of thought where you point out WRs that fail in the first round, how many drafted WRs fail in the 2nd? 3rd? 4th? I believe the first round bust potential is somewhere in the range of 50% for WRs. I doubt very seriously that the number increases as you move back in rounds.

Ourlads did a study of the NFL 2-deep rosters and where those players came from over a 3-year span (2005-2007). The percentage of WRs on NFL 2-deep rosters that were 1st round selections was 25%. One out of every 4 NFL WRs on NFL 2-deep (starter/backup) were first round picks. Another 20% came in the 2nd with 13% and 10% coming in the 3rd and 4th respectively. It dropped to 6% or less for every other round. The undrafted guys comprised 16%.

Now, it did not specifically break out guards, but it covered the OL. In the first round, 14% of the NFL's 2-deep rosters were first rounders with another 15% being 2nd rounders. The numbers were 13%, 11%, and 11% over the next three rounds. So, while the quality of player obviously drops significantly at WR, it does not drop that significantly at OL. IN fact, the best three positions to NOT take in the first are OL, LB, and TE as you are able to get those in the middle rounds.

So, while WR may have the bigger bust factor, it also has the biggest reward factor. Half of the WRs in the NFL's 2-deep rosters were taken in the top 2 rounds.

TMC,

I have a spreadsheet which shows where opening day starters in 2006 were drafted, and you are correct, of the 64 starting WR's in 2006, 24 were drafted in round 1 and 14 in round 2.

But OT's were actually higher (and again, my ranking of Albert is based not only on his potential guard play which I think is good, but maybe an upside to play LT). Of the starting 64 OT's (they didn't break it between LT/RT), 24 were drafted in round 1 and 15 were drafted in round 2. I'm sure left tackles, it's an even bigger percentage.

OG's is one of the more spread out (12-10-8-10-6-3-3 and 12 UFA).

And centers one of the lowest percentage (4-6-6-1-3-3-4 and 5 UFA).

If you actually did a spread sheet of the shear numbers of WR's drafted in the 1st two rounds vs. OT's and OG's and C's I think that will support my "higher bust percentage" too.

However, I also contend that those percentage for interior linemen will change because we've obviously hit an era where good guards/centers are now worth on the free agency market $7M/year+. 10 years ago, interior linemen were treated like dirt in the free agency market and now they are getting paid equivalent to a lot of other positions.

And while I'm a proponent of Albert as our 1st round choice, that's not to say I'm against another tackle prospect if the Steelers evaluation yields those results. If Williams or Cherilus or Otah end up higher on the Steelers boards, I'm okay if that's the selection too.

I am just dead set against a WR or CB in round 1 (unless something really strange like McKelvin or DRC drop to us at #23).

BTW, if you want information on where starters were drafted for each position, I'll provide that.

[kurtistb]

here is that ourlads link for anyone that wants to take a look

http://ourlads.com/dayone.cfm

[deljzc]

here is that ourlads link for anyone that wants to take a look

http://ourlads.com/dayone.cfm

What does the adjective "two-deep" mean? Does that mean the top 2 guys at that position on the roster?

Does the analysis include two running backs? Two quarterbacks? Two centers? Two linebackers, three linebackers or six linebackers?

I'm confused by that analysis (even though my percentages of starters is fairly similar).

[TMC]

What does the adjective "two-deep" mean? Does that mean the top 2 guys at that position on the roster?

Does the analysis include two running backs? Two quarterbacks? Two centers? Two linebackers, three linebackers or six linebackers?

I'm confused by that analysis (even though my percentages of starters is fairly similar).

It means the starter and backup. It is 2 QBs on a team, 2 RBs, 4 WRs, etc.....

[Max Power]

There is a good argument for and against the Steelers picking OL and WR in the first round. That said, no one here is privy to what Dan and Art Rooney along with Colbert and Tomlin are thinking, nor will we know any of it. TMC has always been at the top of his game in bringing both Logic and thought process to Steelers Football Strategy and I'd side with him anytime.

Truely an exciting time of year Draft Day is. Fact of the matter is that those picks have almost no chance of being a strong influence on the up-coming season. If they do then it is a tribute to the scouting of the team and likely a bad break for someone too.

Ben has made his desires known, and all that's left is for us to get him that big target WR. May be it comes down to that.

The Steelers are a team that does not often make mistakes on Draft Day. I have complete total faith in the hopes that our pick will be a good one in the first round and elsewhere on down the line. I've lived to see some pretty darn good ones, believe you me.

[deljzc]

There is a good argument for and against the Steelers picking OL and WR in the first round. That said, no one here is privy to what Dan and Art Rooney along with Colbert and Tomlin are thinking, nor will we know any of it. TMC has always been at the top of his game in bringing both Logic and thought process to Steelers Football Strategy and I'd side with him anytime.

Truely an exciting time of year Draft Day is. Fact of the matter is that those picks have almost no chance of being a strong influence on the up-coming season. If they do then it is a tribute to the scouting of the team and likely a bad break for someone too.

Ben has made his desires known, and all that's left is for us to get him that big target WR. May be it comes down to that.

The Steelers are a team that does not often make mistakes on Draft Day. I have complete total faith in the hopes that our pick will be a good one in the first round and elsewhere on down the line. I've lived to see some pretty darn good ones, believe you me.

Is this Kevin Colbert's son?

Man, you're drinking the kool-aid aren't you.

[leftcoaststeelerfan]

I know which way the Rooney's and Colbert are going in relation to the draft, but I can't tell you until 4/27/08 at about 5:00 pm PST.....

[Supersteeler]

Is this Kevin Colbert's son?

Man, you're drinking the kool-aid aren't you.

Lol that's ironic, I thought you were bubsters' son or dad depending on your age.

[TMC]

Look, I really have no problem with an offensive lineman in the first, but it damn well should be an offensive tackle. IMO, the best interior guy is Mike Pollack and while he may not have the athletic gifts of Albert, he can play center....and that in itself gives him value that Albert does not have.

Since Albert is not even the highest rated interior guy on my board, I cringe when I think of taking him in the first. This may be the draft to take that corner we really do not need or that WR. Of course, we could grab a defensive end....especially if a guy like Phillip Merling falls in our laps. Hell, we could grab that runningback....I just know this is the season we better NOT fuck up and piss away our first on a reach.

[kurtistb]

Look, I really have no problem with an offensive lineman in the first, but it damn well should be an offensive tackle. IMO, the best interior guy is Mike Pollack and while he may not have the athletic gifts of Albert, he can play center....and that in itself gives him value that Albert does not have.

Since Albert is not even the highest rated interior guy on my board, I cringe when I think of taking him in the first. This may be the draft to take that corner we really do not need or that WR. Of course, we could grab a defensive end....especially if a guy like Phillip Merling falls in our laps. Hell, we could grab that runningback....I just know this is the season we better NOT fuck up and piss away our first on a reach.

This pretty much somes up how I feel. I wouldn't rather get a stud at a position that isn't our most glaring need (which OT obviously is), than grab a guy just because he fills a whole. I have 3 tackles that I think are first round studs that can play LT and then a clump of guys that are either under that group at LT like Baker or guys that can play RT like Cherilus. I place Albert in that second group but to me they are guys I grab if I trade back for or if I trade up in the second to get if there is a run.

My first choice is Merling since I think other than a tackle its the best chance for us to improve in both the short and long term if he's not there are WR like Sweed or Hardy or a CB like Cason would be next on my wish list. If none of those guys are there and no trade opportunity presents itself then I grab my second tier tackle or Albert. However I honestly have to say I'd rather have Cherilus than Albert since I am certain Cherilus can play tackle but don't have the same level of certainty with Albert.

Also note I have not and will not say that Albert is the wrong guy all I need to know is do NFL scouts (not Mayock or Kiper) think he can play tackle. If so he moves into my second tier or guys. As a guard I just don't think he is 1.23 value if guys like Rachal or Schuenig are 3.x value.

[deljzc]

All this discussion comes back to how we're rating these players.

I mean, it's obvious TMC and I see things completely differently, because I can't stand Pollack and think his climb up draft boards doesn't make any sense and he's a 4th round talent at the head of an incredibly weak class of centers. I guess I would be just as upset if we get Pollack in round 2 as TMC would feel if we get Albert in round 1.

But that's our right as fans to kind of create our own big boards and make those decisions ourselves.

Truthfully, I have Albert and Cherilus very close in my brain for who I'd be most happy with. I like Cherilus a lot. To me he'd start year one at RT and probably stay there for 10 years. That would be a really good pick in my book.

I just have a gut feeling that I think Albert is a real gem in this draft. That he's on the upswing of his career and will exceed expectations.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right. Who knows. Heck, something may happen between now and draft day and I'll change my mind and start liking Williams or Cherilus over Albert. It doesn't change my opinion we should almost definately go O-line in round 1 or my belief there are no WR's and very few CB's I would choose over an O-linemen in round 1.

[dobre shunka]

Well, here is the list of the #1 guard taken in each draft since 2000 and where they were drafted:

2000 - Travis Claridge (#37)
2001 - Steve Hutchison (#17)
2002 - Kendall Simmons (#30)
2003 - Eric Stienbach (#33)
2004 - Chris Snee (#34)
2005 - Logan Mankins (#32)
2006 - Davin Joseph (#23)
2007 - Ben Grubbs (#29)

I don't know about you, but that's a pretty consistent bunch of draft picks. Personally, I'd take ANY of those guys over a wide reciever in this draft considering our needs, salary cap position and how much guards are now going for in free agency.

That's just me.

Really? Cuz I'd take a living Sweed over a dead Claridge any day. But that's just me. Hell, I'd take him over a live Simmons too.

I'm not opposed to ever taking a guard or center in the first (I was all for it last year). I'm just not going to bump them up because of need. Particularly those two positions. There are certain positions you have to get early or not at all. And guard and center ain't them. In fact those are two positions where value carries thru the draft historically. Colbert aside, they are the smart money positions on Day 2. Higher success rate at those positions than almost all others.

Besides, need is persistent/constant. They don't call it the Not For Long for nothing. Look at last year. OL wasn't an urgent need. OLB/pass rush was, so they drafted Timmons while declining a tradeback offer that would've put them on the leading edge of a very good cluster of OL. Now here we are. I'm just not too eager to see a repeat of last year.