Tweet
Steelers Know How to Pick 'Em, But Only in Round One
Posted May 31, 2009 8:32PM By JJ Cooper
[url="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/05/31/steelers-know-how-to-pick-em-but-only-in-round-one/"]http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/05/31/stee ... round-one/[/url]
The early reports on the Steelers' 2009 draft picks is very favorable. Mike Wallace has shown speed. Frank Summers is just as big as everyone expected and Ziggy Hood has shown an outstanding motor.
Of course, there's yet to be a draft pick who's publicly been called out for disappointing at offseason workouts, so as always, we won't know very much until they put the pads on for real in two months. But if history is any kind of guide, expect Hood, the Steelers' first-round pick, to do quite well, while several of the later-round picks will fail miserably.
That's what Steelers.lifer found in a recent analysis of how the Steelers draft compared to other teams. In comparing the Steelers to the rest of the AFC North as well as the Patriots, Colts and Chargers, he found that Pittsburgh is awful at succeeding with its mid-round picks and even worse at picking in the sixth and seventh rounds.
The bust trend in mid-rounds in the Kevin Colbert era is disturbing, probably among the worst in the NFL. It's a trend that also applies to late-round picks. Of their 13 picks in the sixth and seventh rounds from 2002-06, only two played in the league last year but they were both starters on a SB-winning team: Brett Kiesel and Chris Kemoeatu.
It's like baseball. Do you prefer a team with a consistent high batting average, or a team that hits home runs and strikes out a lot? When the home runs contribute to championships, it's more than acceptable... but you can understand when some people get frustrated about the high number of strikeouts.
But Steeler.Lifer also makes the point that the Steelers record on first-round picks is exceptional. Not counting Lawrence Timmons (projected to start this year) and Rashard Mendenhall (projected to split time this year) you have to go back to 1999 (Troy Edwards) to find a Steelers' first-round pick who failed to turn into a long-term starter. When you consider that Pittsburgh is usually drafting late in the first round, that's an enviable record.
So it comes down to which would you rather have? Would you take the Steelers' sure-fire success in the first round or would you rather see them show more success in later rounds. As for me, I'll stick with the approach that has given Pittsburgh two Super Bowls in four years.
Posted May 31, 2009 8:32PM By JJ Cooper
[url="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/05/31/steelers-know-how-to-pick-em-but-only-in-round-one/"]http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/05/31/stee ... round-one/[/url]
The early reports on the Steelers' 2009 draft picks is very favorable. Mike Wallace has shown speed. Frank Summers is just as big as everyone expected and Ziggy Hood has shown an outstanding motor.
Of course, there's yet to be a draft pick who's publicly been called out for disappointing at offseason workouts, so as always, we won't know very much until they put the pads on for real in two months. But if history is any kind of guide, expect Hood, the Steelers' first-round pick, to do quite well, while several of the later-round picks will fail miserably.
That's what Steelers.lifer found in a recent analysis of how the Steelers draft compared to other teams. In comparing the Steelers to the rest of the AFC North as well as the Patriots, Colts and Chargers, he found that Pittsburgh is awful at succeeding with its mid-round picks and even worse at picking in the sixth and seventh rounds.
The bust trend in mid-rounds in the Kevin Colbert era is disturbing, probably among the worst in the NFL. It's a trend that also applies to late-round picks. Of their 13 picks in the sixth and seventh rounds from 2002-06, only two played in the league last year but they were both starters on a SB-winning team: Brett Kiesel and Chris Kemoeatu.
It's like baseball. Do you prefer a team with a consistent high batting average, or a team that hits home runs and strikes out a lot? When the home runs contribute to championships, it's more than acceptable... but you can understand when some people get frustrated about the high number of strikeouts.
But Steeler.Lifer also makes the point that the Steelers record on first-round picks is exceptional. Not counting Lawrence Timmons (projected to start this year) and Rashard Mendenhall (projected to split time this year) you have to go back to 1999 (Troy Edwards) to find a Steelers' first-round pick who failed to turn into a long-term starter. When you consider that Pittsburgh is usually drafting late in the first round, that's an enviable record.
So it comes down to which would you rather have? Would you take the Steelers' sure-fire success in the first round or would you rather see them show more success in later rounds. As for me, I'll stick with the approach that has given Pittsburgh two Super Bowls in four years.
Comment