2007 Draft, by the numbers

April 16, 2007 by Steel Phantom

2007 Draft: by the numbers.

This analysis uses two tools, value cluster and KEI, to create a class profile (sample Table 1.2 following), which is fleshed out as a Small Board of Big Value (SBBV, sample Table 1.2a following). That�s the final product, circa 2007, to be found at the close of this piece. First, some introductory remarks regarding method, then an assessment of the Steelers� needs, with some judgment as to how this class matches, or misses. Warning: this is a lengthy article; the short form can be found in Table 2.1, Steeler needs, then Table 9 and on, 2007 prospect boards.

Ok then.

Value cluster, introduced in 2004, sprang from a review of drafts from 2000 forward, revealing that while the numbers of prospects taken per position per most points in any draft tend to converge, subsequent on-field results did not match. For example: some years yielded several mid-R high quality RB, others, none at all. Suffice to say, for now, that the same has been so at positions all over the field.

It is well understood that any given class will be deeper at some spots than at others. The beauty part is in finding those positions, then harvesting that low hanging fruit. However, while value cluster has proven effective in identifying pools of equivalent prospects, results as to quality have been mixed. That some clusters have proven valueless (E.g. R3 CB, 2004) can be no surprise; after all, value cluster is merely a demographic construct, the collective of many (if not all) teams drafting, erroneously and perennially, on a needs-first basis. Demented or sad as may be, these (twin) facts remain: need is most often identified on a 1-year (next season) horizon, and few rookies play.

Since 2005, KEI (the so-called Kirwan Explosiveness Index) has been used, here, to assess quality. Pat Kirwan, formerly with the Jets FO now doing analysis at nfldot, has purported that impact on-field performance can be predicted by compiling the results of (3) Combine tests. Those are: vertical jump (VJ), long jump (LJ) and bench reps. Jump results are converted to decimal equivalents (E.g.: 37 �� = 37.5 and 10�-3� = 10.25) and added to the prospect�s rep sum. The magic number, as it were, is 70.

There are problems with KEI, mainly revolving around range factors. That is, the proportion of tested performance was varied (wildly) across those three metrics. See:

� Across all positions, bench reps have varied from ~10 to 40+. That is a range factor of ~ 4.

� Across all positions, vertical jump results have varied from ~ 23 to 46. That is a range factor of ~ 2.

� Across all positions, long jump results have varied from ~8 to 11+. That is a range factor of ~1.38.

The consequence, in general, is that bench reps tend to be over-weighted. Additionally, it could be said that vertical leaping ability correlates so closely with horizontal as to be, effectively, the same thing. Then too, although it should be obvious, common sense must apply:

� A 70 KEI edge rusher will show results in the range of: LJ 10, VJ 37 and reps 23.

� A 70 KEI IOL will show results in the range of LJ 8, VJ 30 and reps 32.

Those results do not describe the same kind of prospect. The short form is: KEI integrates three metrics even while experience has shown those ought not be weighted equally. Long ago, Bill Walsh, HOF head coach and GM extraordinaire, saw it that way:

� The vertical jump clearly demonstrates the explosiveness and extension and coordination. I think that is an excellent tool for anybody�an excellent measurable that can be applicable to explosion and movement that is so necessary in football.�

(Excerpted from an article available at NFL Draft Scout).

So there�s that.

It may be noteworthy that while the PS FO hasn�t used KEI, some rivals (apparently) have, and with impressive results. Here are two samples, (though these are not at all inclusive):

Table 1.1, two teams (apparently) emphasizing KEI:

Bolts� Front 7 2004-2006	Remarks	Bengals� OL 2003-2006	Remarks
Igor Olshansky Ryan Bingham Stephen Cooper Shawne Merriman Luis Castillo Marquis Harris Derrick Robinson	One of the deeper, more powerful 34 fronts in all of football. All players were taken since 2004, from top to bottom, R1 thru UDFA.	Eric Steinbach Stacy Andrews Elvis Ghiaciuc Adam Kieft Andrew Whitworth	Like the Steelers� of 2003, the 2006 Bengal OL was struck by injury. Unlike those Steelers, the Bengal reserves: Whitworth, Andrews and Ghiaciuc, played effectively. On the downside, Kieft has been IR for 2 years.
Others	Remarks	Others	Remarks
Nick Hardwick Vincent Jackson Antonio Cromartie Marcus McNeill	Rare, rarer and rarest: high KEI IOL, OT, and both DB and WR.	David Pollack Ethan Kilmer	CINC has not emphasized KEI elsewhere. Perhaps for that reason, they�ve generally been awful elsewhere.

Value cluster is a means of navigation; KEI is a means of evaluating quality at most, though not all, positions. Taken together, these may be used to profile any class (VC x KEI = class profile). As an example, consider this retrospective regarding the class of 2006:

� The 2006 Combine showed a high number of quality (read: high KEI) mid-R front 7 prospects. Performance proved out; players like Barry Cofield and Mark Anderson started and/or contributed heavily.

� The 2006 Combine showed a high number of quality (read: top end speed, COD and VJ) safety prospects. This set began with elite types, Michael Huff and Donte Whitner, ranged thru the mid-rounds to terminate with the likes of Antoine Bethea, Ethan Kilmer and Justin Hamilton. Performance proved out: rooks drafted from R1 thru R6C started, and most played well. Several R7 rooks contributed heavily.

� At CB, the senior class was thought to be bad but the juniors outstanding. Performance proved out: Jonathan Joseph and Richard Marshall were the top rooks at this position (Antonio Cromartie is in the wings). Further, that junior influx presented the possibility that the 2006 group would be far superior to 2007; this reinforced, in some aspect, by that depth projected (and proved) earlier, in the 2005 CB pool. It remains to be shown whether this suspicion proves prescient.

� Past Ferguson, Joseph and Mangold, the top OL prospects carried some risk, whether character (Justice) or medical (McNeill, Winston, and Spencer). With the exception of a few RT prospects (Whitworth, O�Callaghan and Trueblood) or ZBS types (Colledge, Spitz) those remaining were developmental prospects. Further, the RT prospects figured to have limited upside; it seemed a reasonable surmise that they would be about as good out of the box as at the end of their terms. Again, all this remains to be seen.

� The WR class was bad at the top, but very, very deep. Promising prospects figuring Day 2 were, say, polar: both bigs (including Brandon Marshall, Delanie Walker, Hank Baskett, Marquis Colston and Miles Austin) and ST smalls (including Jeremy Bloom, Adam Jennings and David Anderson). Performance proved out: while Day 1 picks Santonio Holmes and Greg Jennings played well, some Day 2 picks (Colston, Baskett) played as well, or better. So:

Table 1.2, 2006 PS-centric (somewhat retrospective) sample Class Profile:

R1.32

2^nd Quartile

PS: R2-4

3^rd Quartile

PS: R5

4^th Quartile

PS: R6-7

Value clusters

Front 7

Big WR

Return WR

DB: smalls and SS

Big WR

Others (sample)

Ryans, LB

(Klopfenstein, TE)

Spencer, OL

Alston, SS

Whimper, OL

Morris, OC

In profiling any class, it is best to start in the middle. As noted, the mid-R class of 2006 showed an unusual number of high KEI D-side bigs. Generally, performance followed suit; had the PS spent two to three picks in that 2^nd quartile, then they would not now be desperately seeking Front 7 types. Similar analysis for the class of 2005 predicted a R3/4 cluster both at RB and in the high KEI OL set. As it played out, Marion Barber headed a list including: Brandon Jacobs, Darren Sproles and Ciatrick Fason. Barber was the (high KEI) pick; he and (surprisingly) Jacobs have proved it. The same is so upfront, with Elvis Ghiaciuc and David Stewart, if not (yet) Adam Kieft and Scott Young.

The type of prospects at the top factors too. In 2004, top end OL prospects Shawne Andrews and Vernon Carey looked quite similar to mid-R and deep Day 2 types such as Max Starks, Jacob Bell, Brian Rimph and Jason Peters (among many other mid-KEI bigs). Similarly, 2005 featured small fast CB both at the top and throughout; e.g.: Fabian Washington to Ellis Hobbs and Dom Foxworth then on to close with Daven Holly. So, there�s this: if equivalent prospects figure to remain available, it seems fit, earlier, to seek value more rare.

Last (but far from least) well, delusion is ubiquitous: consider 2005, when WR Braylon Edwards, Troy Williamson and Mike Williams were (both projected and) drafted ahead of 34 OLB DeMarcus Ware and Shawne Merriman. There were equivalent (or better) WR prospects later (Mark Clayton, Reggie Brown, Vince Jackson) but OLB tapped out at 20, with the ill-fated David Pollack. Sampling:

Table 1.2a, naming names (somewhat retrospective) sample SBBV, 2006:

o Player name indicates high KEI.

o (Player name) indicates taken earlier than the PS pick, and/or earlier than projected.

o Slotting per NFLdraftscout rankings, mainly; listing within any cell are personal preference, mainly.

o (m) =medical risk; � = character risk.

	1.32	2^nd Quartile PS: R2-4	3^rd Quartile PS: R5	4^th PS: R6-7	Remarks
CB	(Cromartie) (Joseph) Marshall				R1 or not at all for potential #1 CB.
OT	(Ferguson) Justice � McNeill (m)	(Whitworth) Winston Spencer	(McQuistan) Whimper	McQuistan 2 LeVoir
SS		Alston (Harper)	(E. Smith)	Kilmer Hamilton	Several prospects ~ equal to Alston were available late.
Front 7	(Williams) (Ngata) (Wimbley) (Lawson) Ryans	(Gocong, LB) Cofield, DL Anderson, DE/LB (Hatcher, DL) (Dvoracek, DL) Wilkerson, LB	Ninkovich (Ingram, LB) Wright (m)	LaCasse Golston (m) Evans, DL	Most 2^nd quartile Front 7 types achieved academically and all had shown high football intelligence.
WR/TE	(Davis)	G. Jennings (Klopfenstein) Bloom, RT	(Marshall) (Smith, ATH) (Reid, RT) (Scheffler) (Walker) Hass	(Hixon, RT) Austin Colston (Daniels (m)) Baskett (m)	Jennings, Smith and Bloom achieved academically, both Hixon and Marshall had DB experience, and, like Givens 2002, Austin jumped out of the gym.
Hybrid DB	(Huff) (Whitner)	(Manning) Bethea		Finnegan	At Indy, Bethea matched Whitner; proved true in 2006 play too.
IOL	(Joseph) (Mangold)		(Cook) Boothe	Morris	Morris and Mangold are questionable fits for a power running team.

On a personal note: please allow that the preceding tables are offered by way of illustration, not to claim any marvelous precognition. However, as to bona fides, well, it may be noteworthy that Table 1.2a above is heavily representative of my own (then contemporaneous) SBBV of 2006. As noted in the opening, tables built on the line of those above, but circa now, will conclude this piece.

Anyway�

In considering that the 2007 PS best may have been served had the 2006 PS FO picked heavily from R2-4 among Front 7 players, and that the agony in that R1 ought have been found in the choice between Marshall and Ryans, (not, say, Holmes or Chad Jackson) it must be apparent that drafting on a needs-first basis is (here considered to be) the slick low road to oblivion.

Setting the notion of �reach� aside, injury is a fact of NFL life. That is surely not-for-long, whether for individuals or on a unit basis. In the latter case, we need look no farther than the PS OL: a juggernaut in 2001, abysmal in 2003, revitalized in 2004 but now, again, toeing the brink. Further, the pure fact is that need ever can be found at each and every position. See:

Table 2.1, PS roster needs, immediate and imminent:

	Now	2-years out	Remarks
QB	#3	#2 or 3 most likely but could be #1.	Despite his unprecedented performance Y1 & 2, Roethlisberger�s work habits raise concerns as to his capacity to lead the team, long term.
RB	#2	#2, minimum.	Willie Parker cannot sustain his 2006 workload. The PS need a #2 that can function as a #1. Those attributes typically considered to be 3^rd down ability (short yardage, inside running, receiving and blitz pickup) are required. Ref: Ravens, Games 1 & 2.
WR/TE	#1-2 TE ST tough WR	The new Hines.	The Steelers built this WR corps on the template perfected by the NE Pats, interchangeable smurfs. However, they lack a TE with the open-field athleticism of a Ben Watson. Additionally, it has been a gameday disaster that their backup WR are, variously, incapable of playing on coverage teams or incapable of playing WR. The PS run game has been predicated on Wards� blocking ability, a role into which none of their youngsters project. Finally, it is worth noting that NE has abandoned that (so-called) interchangeable smurf mode.
OL	Versatility	Faneca? Simmons? Starks?	The 2006 PS OL featured a number of 1-position only players: Starks, Simmons, Okobi and Phillip. Signing Mahan is a step in the right direction, but just one step. Additionally, three (projected) starters are in the final year of their deals.
S	Depth	Polamalu?	Logan contributed nothing and Carter contributed little. Both could be replaced Day 2. Replacing Polamalu, contract due 2007, is another matter.
CB	Depth. Size, with zone skills.	Townsend? Taylor? McFadden (RFA)	Whether the Steelers play Cover 3 in back of a 34, or Cover 2 in back of a Tampa 43, their CB must have solid zone skills and outstanding tackling ability. Any team needs three, minimum, but as of now, the PS have one, McFadden. Ike is a matchup CB with dubious zone skills and DT appears to be done. In sum: the three tops carry question marks; the smurfs, Madison and Johnson, really aren�t in it.
ILB	Youth	Talent	Foote has no position in the 43; Farrior did, years ago. Unfortunately, the Steelers have nothing behind those players. Note that, like the FB, the downhill inside thumper is approaching extinction, whether in the 34 or 43. It�s a pass happy League today; perhaps for that reason, a 34 team like San Diego fielded Donnie Edwards, an ILB best fit for a Tampa 2 43.
OLB	ROLB/DE	LOLB/DE	For years, the PSD has played (fairly) effectively without an elite pass rusher. In that regard, Porter�s departure changes nothing. However, Porter�s multiple skills will be missed; those are not immediately replaceable thru any venue: draft, within or FA. It is a matter of record that the Blitzburgh system has featured LOLB, not ROLB, as the primary pass rusher. Haggans has failed in that regard; unfortunately, there are no elite edge rushers in this class. 2006 yes, but that train is far down the track.
DL	UT Youth	Hampton, Smith and Keisel figure to remain; the others, not so much. At minimum 3, but up to 6 DL (if 43).	UT, not DE, is the centerpiece of any Tampa 2 front. That is why Sapp was Dungy�s first choice and Tommy Harris Lovie Smith�s. If the PS plans to go 43, UT is a high priority. Aaron Smith�s extension suggests they�ll remain in the 34 adding, perhaps, some more potent 43 morphs. Smith is a top quality 34 DE; he may be able to function as a base DE in a JAX-like 43 but he is not a viable 43 DT. That so, a UT, here, would amount to a dime CB, a package player allowing Keisel to remain at package DE. Conceivably, Hoke could take that duty, for a year or so.

(Like delusion), need is ubiquitous. However, in recognizing the obvious, that the PS Front 7 is aging, and that many a contract will come due following the 2007 season, we�ll begin reviewing this class upfront, D-side.

Table 3.1, Front 7 overview, high KEI at Indy:

	DT	DE	OLB	ILB
Average at position, 1999-2005	3	4	4	2
2006	8	10	7	2
2007	1	6	5	3

Bigs: by most metrics, an abysmal group. Last season�s class featured high KEI R1A/B prospects like Mario Williams, Broderick Bunkley and Haloti Ngata, high KEI mid-R prospects like Dusty Dvoracek, Jason Hatcher and Barry Cofield and high KEI late-R prospects like Rodrique Wright and Kedric Golston. This year, immobile NT Tank Tyler did hit the number, mainly due to his 42 reps, and both Alan Branch and Amobi Okoye did get close. After that, there�s the Tennessee tandem (Pro Day) but little else �til we reach that small set of UT clustered in the R6-7 area.

There is a glimmer of hope: jumbo DE Adam Carriker did show R1-worthy athleticism and some of the DT did show exceptional get-off (see sections following). Then too, results are incomplete (to this date) for Ray McDonald (warning: durability issues), Marcus Thomas (warning: drug suspensions), Paul Soliai (warning: unstated character issues) and Ikaika Alama-Francis (warning: production yet to match prowess).

Edge rushers: by the numbers, an above average group, but there is a caveat. As we�ll see in the following (Tables 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4), rush prowess correlates with both +70 KEI and excellent vertical jump results. Unfortunately, this year�s set wobbles between low-rise beanpoles (Jamaal Anderson, Jarvis Moss and Quentin Moses) with mediocre to laughable KEI and that low-rise Pump House Gang (Anthony Spencer, Charles Johnson and Tim Crowder) sporting mediocre to laughable agilities. Each in the latter set did 30-34 reps and all jumped low, 30-34.� Those are not DE numbers; those are IOL numbers. By means of context, consider that the Steelers� recent FA acquisition, IOL Sean Mahan, hit 30/30 too.

Of course, the same may be said of Adam Carriker; however, Carriker came in at 296# (about 30# heavier than Spencer etal) and history has shown that no one (this side of Mario Williams) ever has jumped great at + 290#. Then too, Carriker had better agilities than any DE mentioned here, posting DB-like scores of 4.18 SS and 7.06 cone. Bottom line: while most gurus consider DE to be among the best positions in this class that cannot be so. If it were, then this class would be historically horrific.

LB: by the numbers, an above average group. However, it is noteworthy that, with the (possible) exception of Patrick Willis, there are no elite types in this class, none on the order of, say, AJ Hawk, Ernie Sims or DeMeco Ryans. The top of this class seems to be vastly over-hyped, mainly comprised of prospects with durability issues and/or mediocre WO numbers (Beason, Posluszny, Timmons, Siler, Harris and Davis). On the plus side, five LB in this draft ran 4.51 (or under) and flashed excellent strength, hops and agility too. Those prospects are: Patrick Willis, Tim Shaw Justin Durant, Antwan Barnes and Quincy Black. Coming into Indy, all but Willis were projected in the mid-rounds; mainly R4, onward for Barnes. It is not unusual for mid-R LB prospects to have elite speed but it is unusual for those mid-R LB prospects to have both elite speed and elite KEI. If that projection holds, then LB figures as a top mid-R value cluster. (Note: later developments have cast this mid-R eval in doubt; see notes under The Draft Day Sins of Cowbert, sections 9 & 10).

Since many regard edge rusher as the Steelers� #1 need, we�ll begin comparing some 34 OLB who, in recent drafts were taken in the area of the Steelers� R1, with those now bandied for that slot (more or less).

Table 3.2, R1A/B 34 OLB, then and (not so likely) now:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
DeMarcus Ware	6040 251	38.5	10-2	27	75.67	4.56/ 1.62	4.07/ 6.85	Drafted 1.11; a complete 34 OLB.
Shawn Merriman	6043 272	40	10-1	25	75.08	4.64/ NF	4.12/ NF	Drafted 1.12; led rooks in sacks and all of the NFL in Y2.
Kamerion Wimbley	6037 248	38.5	10-9	25	74.25	4.61/ 1.60	4.48/ 6.98	Drafted 1.13: 2^nd in sacks among NFL rooks, even with no help.
Jamaal Anderson	6053 288	32.5	9-8	22	64.17	4.75/ 1.59	4.22/ 6.88	Pro Day results. Good get-off and agilities; bad hops and long speed.
Jarvis Moss	6064 250	30.5	10-0	16	56.50	4.70/ 1.59	4.41/ 7.21	Taller, lighter, slower, less agile and weaker than those drafted 2005-6.
Anthony Spencer	6027 261	32.5	9-4	30	71.83	4.70/ 1.64	4.43/ 7.14	Excluding weight and 40 numbers, looks like an IOL. Charles Johnson and Tim Crowder put up similar #s.

This 2007 set of prospects compares poorly with those drafted at roughly the same point in the past two years. Therefore, this set of DE/OLB prospects is not 1.15 worthy. It�s a numbers thing; it�s not a system thing, as is clear in the following table displaying one 34 ILB, some 34 OLB, many 43 DE and even one 43 DT. For the most part, edge rush success has followed VJ results.

Table 3.3, top rook pass rushers:

	Leader	Sacks	VJ (�)	Second	Sacks	VJ (�)	3^rd high rook	Sacks	VJ (�)
2006	Mark Anderson	12	42	K. Wimbley	11	38.5	Elvis Dumervil	8.5	NF
2005	S. Merriman	10	40	Demarcus Ware	08	38.5	Leroy Hill	7.5	34
2004	Jared Allen	09	33	Will Smith	07.5	38.5	Kenechi Udeze	5.0	NF
2003	Terrell Suggs	12	NF	Kevin Williams	10.5	30	Robert Mathis	3.5	NF
2002	Dwight Freeney	13	39	Julius Peppers	12	37.5	Carlos Hall	8	40
2001	Kendrell Bell	09.5	38.5	Justin Smith	08.5	34	Andre Carter Aaron Schobel Derrick Burgess	6.5 6.5 6	38.5 38 40

Of 16 known VJ marks, 12 are 37� or higher. In this class, one DE prospect hit the number. That was Brian Robison, generally regarded as a R4/5 prospect. CJ Ah You got close enough (36.5�); however, this man is generally regarded as R7-worthy, and carries (twin) burdens regarding character and durability. Also, three of four (known) low-rise formers (Allen, Smith and Hill) jumped higher than current prospects Jamaal Anderson, Jarvis Moss, Anthony Spencer, Tim Crowder and Quentin Moses.

Last spring, Elvis Dumervil had 30 reps; presuming he didn�t jump great (which is a good bet though not certainly known) Anthony Spencer, Charles Johnson and Tim Crowder may be equivalent prospects. Dumervil was drafted at the bottom of R4; Daryl Tapp, another from that 2006 class profiling similarly to this spring�s gravity-challenged trio, was drafted at the bottom of R2. That�s the range of true value for this spring�s Pump House Gang: 2^nd quartile, with picks 64 to 127 overall.

FWIW, a note on some others shown above: in 2005, Leroy Hill benefited from scheme; he was not then, or now, an impact player. Since his rook season, Udeze has dropped off the map, recording 1.5 sacks (total) in 2005 and 2006. That is not a good return on the Vikes 1.20 investment.

Table 3.3a, KEI tabulated for those above:

	+70 (High-KEI)	Below the fold	Not known (Except as noted, no reps found)
2006	Mark Anderson Kamerion Wimbley		Elvis Dumervil (30 reps, no jumps found)
2005	Shawn Merriman Demarcus Ware	Leroy Hill (68.67)
2004	Will Smith	Jared Allen	Kenechi Udeze (no information)
2003		Kevin Williams	Terrell Suggs (no information_ Robert Mathis (no information)
2002	Dwight Freeney Carlos Hall		Julius Peppers
2001	Kendrell Bell Derrick Burgess	Justin Smith (69.75) Andre Carter (69.91)	Aaron Schobel

Of note:

Of 14 known KEI figures, nine are 70 or greater; three are close.

Of the players listed above, only Jared Allen certainly can be said to have lacked any trace of measurables. KEI numbers for both Andre Carter and Justin Smith round up to 70; additionally, Carter jumped at near DB levels (38.5� and 11�-0�) and Justin Smith ran 4.64 at 264#. That 40 mark matches Gaines Adams (4.64 at 258#) and is faster than all other R1/2 DE in this class.

It is unsurprising that Kevin Williams jumped low; after all, he did weigh in at 303#. It is noteworthy that Williams turned a 4.81 40, surpassing all bigs in this class. Williams may be considered a mass accelerator: in recent times, only Jon Henderson, Charles Grant, Tommy Harris, Tank Johnson and Luis Castillo have compared.

Derrick Burgess has become one of the Show�s finest edge rushers. Another player in the same class, Reggie Hayward, has traced a similar arc. Burgess ran 4.92, Hayward 4.91; their subsequent success suggests that, for edge rushers, VJ (and KEI) counts, but 40 times mean little. Rosey Colvin is another example, running just 4.92 in 1999, but leading that DE class with a 36.5� VJ. VJ-wise, both Burgess and Hayward are in the elite class; now, Colvin�s mark may be considered the bottom end of acceptable (aka: the Colvin Limit). Like Burgess, Hayward hit the KEI number but that can�t be calculated for Colvin, as his reps were not found (NF).

Generally, skinny low-rise edge rushers don�t make it. Jared Allen is an anomaly, as is another low leaper, Shaun Phillips, also drafted in R4 2004. Exceptions they�ve proved to be, but many low hop edge rushers drafted earlier that same year proved the rule including: Jason Babin, Antwan Odom and Travis LaBoy. Keeping score: a R1, two R2 and not a player among them.

R1 heartbreaks from 2003, predictable simply on the hops vector, include: Michael Haynes, Jerome McDougle, Calvin Pace and Tyler Brayton (none high KEI either). In 2005, Marcus Spears jumped 31� and Matt Roth 32;�R1 and R2B respectively. In sum: six R1 and three R2, zero players; of those nine, two (Babin and LaBoy) hit the KEI number. It is worth noting that pair did so exactly as did Spencer, Johnson and Crowder: no hops, but pumps-a-plenty. In contrast:

Table 3.4, any team could do worse than simply picking the highest healthy leaper available.

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

Anderson

Merriman

Smith

Shurron

Pierson

Carlos Hall

Hayward

Burgess

Adalius Thomas

Joey Porter

Oops.

R7: 8 sacks as a rook, then injured

Boldface represents high KEI; neither Pierson nor Thomas lifted.
In 2005, Derek Wake topped Merriman, but Wake had some medical issues.

Low-rise, high-pump hasn�t gotten it nor, for the most part, has low pump, regardless of hops. That�s bad news for this 2007 set, since few Day 1 DE prospects have tested as abjectly weak as did both Quentin Moses and Jarvis Moss.

Table 3.5, Day 1 ranked DE who did 17 or fewer reps at Indy, 1999 to 2007:

Year	Prospect	Rank	Reps	Combine speed/W	VJ	KEI	Remarks
1999	Mike Rucker	R1	17	4.85 @ 260#	33.5	60.08	Solid #2 DE who benefited when Peppers came on. Averaged less than 5 sacks per season previous, 7.6 since.
2002	Dennis Johnson	R3	17	4.82 at 258#	35.5	62.41	Bust
2003	Zo Jackson	R2	14	4.86 at 266#	37	60.5	Bust
2005	Marcus Spears	R1	15	5.05 at 303#	31	54	Bust in the making
2006	Mathias Kiwanuka	R1/2	17	4.70 at 266#	32	59	Too soon to say; 4 sacks in 9 starts
2007	Jarvis Moss	R1/2	16	4.70 at 250#	30.5	56.5	Carries medical risk, was a 1-year starter at FLA. Drug ding.
2007	Quentin Moses	R2/3	17	4.82 at 261#	32	58.57	Started two seasons at Georgia, produced in one.

Past, say, Rucker and Jared Allen (13 reps, ranked R6-7, drafted R4), few DE have beaten the numbers. There is little reason to believe that this class contains two such oddities, Moss and Moses. Therefore, it may be said that those two and, for that matter, Jamaal Anderson (VJ 32.5� Pro Day) are developmental prospects. Perhaps they have some upside, though that VJ parameter says no, but regardless: that upside must be evaluated against other upfront, upside prospects like Amobi Okoye and Alan Branch, as well as Adam Carriker and Patrick Willis, two prospects (perhaps) less promising but certainly closer to good to go. On the plus side:

Table 3.6, 2007 DE prospects who did hit the numbers:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Brian Robison	6031 259	40.5	10-1	27	77.17	4.67/ 1.49	4.26/ 6.89	R4/5: High character, fine ST player, better athlete than DE. 1.49 thru 10 is excellent.
Lamarr Woodley	6014 266	38.5	9-9	29	77.25	4.74/ 1.65	4.42/ NF	R2/3: Fine football character. Dubious COD skills. Projects as a 9-tech DE, ILB or 34 LOLB like Kevin Greene. PD #.
Adam Carriker	6060 296	33.5	9-2	33	75.67	4.90/ 1.60	4.18/ 7.06	R1: Size similar to Richard Seymour when coming out. 40 Pro Day: 4.72 and 4.73 at 291#. Exceptional get-off for a big

The people�s choice, Ikaika Alama-Francis ran 4.85 on his Pro Day and jumped 35.5� and 9-6 at 6050, 281#. A pectoral injury prevented him from lifting. Nonetheless, those are impressive numbers, and his draft journal (NFLdraftscout) suggests he�s an intelligent, engaging person. However, all that ought be balanced against his track record: two years as a starter, with modest productivity.

Ike is (variously) slotted from R2 to R4. Another prospect with similar numbers is entirely unranked. That is, Marcus Smith of Arizona: 6041, 281; 35� VJ, 10-6 LJ and 24 reps for a KEI of 69.5. Smith is a 2.5-year starter; he comes from a military family and has no known character issues.

Ok then.

The following section compares some LB and DT prospects in this class with earlier results (drawn from the archives of NFLdraftscout). That is: some from this class versus once-upon-a-time prospects who, mostly, did prove out.

Table 3.7a: Patrick Willis, Paul Posluszny and DeMeco Ryans: leadership

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Patrick Willis Mississippi	6011 242	39	9-11	22	70.91	4.51/1.53 4.37 PD	4.46/7.23	High character, team leader who impressed at the Senior.
DeMeco Ryan, 2006	6012 236	39	10-9	23	72.75	4.65/1.64	4.18/7.19	High character, team leader, both at Alabama and with the Texans.
Paul Posluszny PSU	6015 238	37	9-8	22	68.67	4/70/1.56 4.58/1.53	4.20/6.94	High character, team leader who did not impress at the Senior.

To most, Willis� Pro Day results moved him beyond Ryans into the ultra-elite area. However, that negative differential between 40 and SS times suggests Willis is a straightline player. (4.37 � 4.46 = (-) 0.09); we�re looking for ~ (+) 0.50). Additionally, there are questions pertaining to Willis� ability to call signals but nonesuch regarding Ryan, then or now. Posluszny is a lesser athlete than both; as such, a R2 value much like his biggest booster, Jack Ham.

Table 3.7b: Justin Durant, Jon Beason and Jonathan Vilma: too small?

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Justin Durant Hampton	6007 230	36	10-1	25	71.08	4.51/1.55	4.09/ 6.77	Long arms and big hands; gets outstanding drops. Leader at a low LOC.
Jon Vilma, 2004	6004 233	37	10-1	23	70.08	4.54/NF	4.20/ 6.67	Once led a powerful Hurricane aggregate, now leads the Jersey Jets.
Jon Beason Miami	6002 237	DNP	9-3	19	NF	4.72/1.60	DNP	On a measurables basis, undraftable. Has an injury history too.

LOC is a big factor for Durant, who did not step up in post-season. Some see Durant as a SS conversion, ala Michael Boulware; his numbers do compare favorably with that (former) prospect.

Table 3.7c: Zak DeOssie and Brian Urlacher: how tall is too tall?

H/W

VJ

Reps

KEI

40/10

SS/C

Remarks

Zak DeOssie

Brown

6045

250

34.5

10-2

70.67

4.58/1.56

4.22/

6.89

Exceptional ST coverage prospect and long snaps too. Ivy LOC issues.

B. Urlacher,

2000

6037

258

10-2

71.17

4.59/1.62

4.18/

6.94

LOC was an issue with Urlacher too, once-upon-a-time.

At the Shrine, DeOssie made more impact than did Durant; that he grew up while his father was in the game may ease his transition.

Table 3.7d: Quincy Black and Mike Peterson: few LB prospects have run under 4.5.

H/W

VJ

Reps

KEI

40/10

SS/C

Remarks

Quincy Black

New Mexico

6015

240

41.5

10-4

75.83

4.42/1.53

4.34/

6.86

Athleticism jumps out on film and at Combine. With Durant top coverage LB

M. Peterson,

1999

6014

233

9-10

63.83

4.47/1.56

4.08/

7.07

Thought to be too small, once-upon-a-time.

Of all LB, or SS for that matter, Black had the most impressive Combine. This prospect has more than enough athleticism, though some have questioned his instincts, and his toughness. No such questions arose regarding Pete. Black bulked up for the Combine; like Durant, his best position may be SS.

Table 3.7e: Tim Shaw, AJ Hawk and Teddy Lehman

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
AJ Hawk, 2006	6010 248	40	9-7	24	73.57	4.59/1.56	3.96/6.82	First LB taken 2006, 1.05.
Tim Shaw PSU	6014 236	36.5	9-8 10-6	26	72.17 73	4.51/1.59 4.46 PD	4.12/7.01 (6.90) PD	Academic achiever. Defended more passes than Poz. Follower or leader?
Teddy Lehman, 2004	6014 240	34.5	9-5	26	69.91	4.55/1.62	4.20/6.85	Taken R2A, in the same area as Karlos Dansby, 2004. Injury-hampered since.

Hawk is the bigger man, more explosive and more agile; Shaw has better straightline speed. Shaw trumps Lehman (R2A, 2004) in nearly all aspects. Size-wise, Shaw closely compares to Nick Barnett, (6015, 236#; R1C, 2003). Shaw is faster, Barnett stronger (32 reps, 4.67/1.64); their agilities are comparable (Barnett: 4.08/7.00). Shaw may have some Tedy Bruschi in him too. In their final NCAA seasons (merely a decade split), both were undersized rush DE

Table 3.7f: hybrid rushers? Brian Robison, Antwan Barnes and Dwight Freeney: freakish times at 10 yards.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Brian Robison Texas	6031 259	40.5	10-1	27	77.58	4.67/1.49	4.26/ 6.89	Fine ST player, (kick blocker) but a better athlete than DE. 10-yard time is great, long speed is poor.
Dwight Freeney, 2002	6007 266	39	NF	28	NF	4.48/1.44	NF	Wonderlic = 35.
Antwan Barnes FLA International	6005 240	35	10-2	31	76.17	4.43/1.50	4.32/ 7.29	Competitiveness? Drilled well at LB on Pro Day. LOC a factor.

Both Robison and Barnes showed outstanding get-off. Neither is in Freeney�s class but no one is. Barnes is a smaller man; while better comparisons may be made to either Robert Mathis or Bart Scott, no info was found on either.

Table 3.7g: racial profiling: Adam Carriker, Ryan Denny and Igor Olshansky.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Igor Olshansky, 2004	6052 318	33.5	9-2	41	83.67	4.98/1.75	4.42/ 7.65
Adam Carriker Nebraska	6060 296	33.5	9-2	33	75.67	4.90/1.60	4.18/ 7.06	3/R1. Same size as Richard Seymour, circa 2001. Pro Day, Carriker ran 4.72 and 4.73 at 291#
Ryan Denney, 2002	6070 276	33	8-11	36	77.92	4.86/1.73	4.25/ 7.18	Taller, lighter and less explosive than the others.

Carriker is a different type. As noted, Carriker measured right on Richard Seymour�s template; unfortunately, no WO info on Seymour was found.

Table 3.7h: UT: Amobi Okoye with (class of �04) Tommy Harris and Tank Johnson; also John McCargo, 2006.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Tank Johnson, 2004	6026 302	34	9-6	31	74.50	4.72/1.69	4.67/ 7.59	Talent is not Tank�s problem.
Tommy Harris, 2004	6024 292	31	9-1	29	69.09	4.68/NF	4.31/ 7.41	For a man his size, Harris showed exceptional flat speed.
John McCargo 2006	6014 302	30.5	9-2	25	64.67	5.15/1.78	4.49/ 7.80	It�s difficult to imagine what the Bills saw in this prospect
Amobi Okoye Louisville	6020 302	30	9-3	29	68.25	5.07/1.65 4.88 PD	NF/ 7.46	1.65 is an exceptional 10-yard time but his long speed is ~ Jenkins� (see below).

Okoye is said to have the same kind of personality as Harris but provided little evidence at Indy to suggest he�ll be the same type of player. He did so, more or less, a month on at his Pro Day, when he hit 4.88 (at 301#). Later, it was reported that Okoye had a hamstring problem at Indy.

Deep-R/UDFA UT prospects may include Joe Anoai, Clifton Ryan, Joe Cohen and Daniel Muir; NT prospects may include Kelly Talavou, Keith Jackson and Ola Dagundro.

Table 3.7j: 4 beasts: Marcus Stroud and Kris Jenkins (class of �01) with Alan Branch and Paul Soliai.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Paul Soliai Utah	6040 344 332	29.5 30.5	8-7	NF	NF	5.10/1.63	4.69/7.66 4.53/7.77	Exceptional get-off, unprecedented for a man of this size. Undisclosed character issues reported; did take a 1-game suspension last year.
Alan Branch Michigan	6056 324	27.5	8-11	33	69.41	5.07/1.68	NF	Excellent get-off. Close comparison to Kris Jenkins and�
Kris Jenkins, 2001	6047 316	31	9-0	33	70.00	5.19/1.75	4.41/7.86	�Jenkins wins it.
Marcus Stroud, 2001	6061 321	30	9-2	21	60.16	5.13/1.77	4.75/8.07

The Tennessee twins, Justin Harrell (1.67) and Turk McBride (1.61) flashed some get-off too. Both times (thru 10 yards) are better than any put up by the (otherwise unparalleled) mid-R DT class of 2006.

Alan Branch is not the true freak in this class. Paul Soliai is the true freak in this class.

Table 3.8. 2007 DT prospects who did hit the numbers.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
Joe Anoai	6025 303	34	9-5	NF	NF	4.91/ 1.61	NF/ 7.29	R6-7. High try, productive at Georgia Tech. Family full of wrestlers
Mike DeVito	6033 295	33	9-0	31	70	4.87/ 1.62	4.53/ 7.50	UDFA out of Maine. Looks to be a fit in a slanting 34 like that in San Diego.
Turk McBride	6023 277	31	9-0	27 30	67 70	4.81/ 1.61	4.12/ 7.10	DE/DT with the Vols, looks to be a UT. Outstanding 10, and DB agilities. Pro Day.
Joe Cohen	6024 313	26 31	8-8	34	73.67	5.10/ 1.65	4.80/ 7.88	R6-7. Played FB, DE and DT at FLA. Not good against the run
Justin Harrell	6043 300 314	30.5	9-0	24 31	63.5 70.5	5.04/ 1.67	4.79/ 7.63	R1-2. High character player and top run-stopper. 31 reps and 314# Pro Day; no movement drills at heavier weight.
Daniel Muir	6017 303	29.5	9-7	37	76.08	4.90/ 1.69	4.59/ 7.39	UDFA from Kent State. 1^st team all-MAC. Makes plays behind the line
Tank Tyler	6022 306	28.5	NF	42	70.5 +	5.30/ 1.78	NF	R2, to most DND here. Character risk, poor Senior Week. Immobile, mainly.

Notes:

Others: UT Jeremy Clark, 69.16; NT Conrad Bolston, 68.25; NT Kelly Talavou, 67.25 and NT Matt Toeaina, 65.33.

Intangibles: when Tech met the Georgia Bulldogs this year, Anoai was the best Front 7 player on the field. 34� is a major VJ mark for a DT, Luis-Castillo-good; Anoai is a developing high-try, high character type. Harrell ripped a biceps tendon early last season, but attempted to play the following week anyway vs. main rival FLA. No-go then, but this does show commitment. Evidently, he�s re-habbed, per that reps improvement within the month from the Combine to the Vols� Pro Day. McBride is another try-hard guy; he was the Vols� 5^th guy for a couple seasons, but a starter for only one.

Front 7 Summary:

Bigs: Adam Carriker is the safest pick in this group; he may never be a Pro Bowl player, but he does figure as a 10-year core guy. Alan Branch, Jamaal Anderson and Amobi Okoye are upside picks; two are juniors and Okoye is younger than both. It is unlikely that any will make much impact next season; however, on a 2-year need horizon, any could be quality gets. Justin Harrell and Ray McDonald are character guys but both carry durability cautions. Marcus Thomas and Paul Soliai may to hit the KEI numbers; however, both carry character cautions, as does that high KEI Tank, Tyler. On his Pro Day, Polynesian phenom Ikaika Alama-Francis did: 35� VJ, 9-6 LJ and 4.85 at 280#. That VJ mark is promising; it does figure Ike will hit the KEI mark. However, all that promise should be balanced against his low production vs. a mid-level of competition.

DE/OLB: The top is vastly over-rated. On the plus side: Woodley, Spencer, Johnson and Crowder have been productive; sacks aside, each in this quartet compiled an impressive number of TFL, PD and FF. In particular, Woodley stands out, on a 4-year line, as does Spencer, a 3-year starter, who led Division-1 in TFL last year. Solid players any someday may be, perhaps, but none are elite prospects. As such, none are 1.15 worthy; whether any figure as BPA at 2.46 remains in question. Finally, value cluster demographics suggest, strongly, one will fall to the PS in R3.

LB: Generally, the big school, high profile prospects don�t have it athletically. Conversely, level of competition issues attach to many of the size/speed prospects mentioned earlier (Quinton Black, Antwan Barnes and Steve DeOssie). On the plus side, Tim Shaw and Brian Robison played at a high LOC, and showed make-it athleticism. It may be noteworthy that other some LB did too; those Pro Day phenoms are tabulated below. Most often, this sort of prospect figures in the R7-UDFA range. However, another of the type, Brad Poppinga, rose to R4 in 2005. This year�s Poppinga may be:

Table 3.9: Pro day results for some 2007 LB.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Remarks
William Beckford Rutgers	6012 224	38.5	9-10	32	80.33	4.59/ 1.59	4.31/ 7.01	3-year starter, despite height lined up, some, at rush end.
Johnny Baldwin Alabama A&M	6013 232	38	10-4	27	75.33	4.59/ 1.54	4.32/ 6.91	Dominated at 1-AA, +100T in 3 straight seasons. 11 teams at Pro Day
Matt Muncy Ohio	6005 242	37	9-8	26	72.67	4.58/ 1.56	4.22/ 7.18	3-year starter, all-MAC. Reportedly, high character player. MLB.
David Holloway Maryland	6015 229	37	9-9	32	78.75	4.72/ 1.62	4.25/ 7.13	3-year starter. Farther Brian played in the NFL.
Kyle Shotwell Cal Poly	6010 235	35.5	10-1	23	68.67	4.52/ 1.54	4.36/ 6.96	Buck Buchanon winner; Hula Bowl MVP.
Will Herring Auburn	6025 229	35	10-5	18	63.5	4.57/ 1.55	3.99/ 6.56	4 �year starter, highest character. Converted S; Tampa 2 candidate. Assets are intelligence and COD.

The last tabulates some quality deep in the LB pool. The results above compare with those shown earlier, in the 3.7 series; both exceed any posted by the so-called elite in this class. Again, there are LOC questions attached to several of these (both in 3.9 and through 3.7). It may be noteworthy that Shotwell answered in post-season play, as did DeOssie and Black, and that neither Muncy nor Baldwin had the opportunity.

In general, a similar profile is found in the DB set. As is so at LB, the top athletes are found outside the Combine invitee pool. Several of those high measurable non-invitees also (are said to) have high character, and (to) exhibit other, intangible make-it traits. In many cases, far too many cases, that is not so for the Combine invitees. In the following section, DB will be tabulated two by two by two, safeties and CB, Indy and not such. First, this look back, DB �cross (some of) the years:

Table 4.1, DB overview, various drills at Indy:

All DB	40 VJ	Sub 4.4 40	Sub 4.0 SS	Sub 7.0 Cone	Remarks
2007	3	8	1	15	Characteristically: average speed, average or below agilities and poor explosiveness.
2006	15	9	2	19	Big VJ numbers elevated slow safeties like the Smith Bros: Eric and Anthony. Infusion of junior CB enriched this class, and deflated the one we�re dealing with now.
2005	14	12	14	14	Characteristically, small CB from Pacman thru Ellis Hobbs and Dom Foxworth. Some bigs, like Paymuh and Routt, were over-drafted. Historic highs in Day 1 CB this year. Day 2 S like Considine, Rhodes, Sensabaugh and Beriault flashed make-it athleticism. 3 did.
2004	2	5	6	9	Top heavy: Hall, Robinson and Sander hit most or all of the numbers. Ahmad Carroll did too, a cautionary tale.
2003	3	8	6	17	Year of the CB with excellent prospects into R4 (McGee, Samuel and Taylor.).

Safeties:

Similar to edge rushers in that VJ has been a prime indicator. Last spring, elite prospects Michael Huff and Donte Whitner hit 40� or better (as did the #1 34 SS prospect in that class, Jon Alston). Mid-R picks Ko Simpson, Anthony Smith and Eric Smith did too; subsequently, all started or contributed heavily in packages. In 2005, both Kerry Rhodes and Gerard Sensabaugh went (well) over 40; both are starting, and Rhodes is a star. Back in 2003, the Steelers� own Troy Polamalu hit 43� on his Pro Day.

It is noteworthy that this metric holds regardless of flat speed. For example, Huff ran 4.34, Whitner 4.40, Alston 4.40 and Simpson 4.45 while Eric Smith and Rhodes dragged home in the mid-4.6 range, and Anthony Smith posted a DE-like 4.71. However, although VJ predicts which prospects may be elevated on draft weekend, (it should go without saying that) not all will play great. Exhibit A, Nate Salley, who, despite demonstrating over three long seasons at The OSU that he was all but undraftable, was picked R4. Subsequently, Salley was cut in camp.

Regarding this 2007 class: generally, the top prospects (Landry, Nelson and Griffin) did show R1/2 measurables, of a sort. However, other highly regarded prospects (Brandon Meriweather, Eric Weddle and Tanard Jackson) did not. The same is true of those projected from the mid-rounds into Day 2; a few hit, most didn�t. On the plus side, several prospects (barred from Indy) did flash on their Pro Days. We may hope, or we may imagine, one or more will trace that arc blazed by 2006 rooks Ethan Kilmer and Justin Hamilton.

Table 4.2, 2007 Combine invitees who hit the numbers, then or on Pro Day:

Arranged by VJ results, as will be so thru this section.
Pro Day results, typically.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	R/remarks
Gerard Alexander Boise State	6003 210	41	10-4	15	66.33	4.51/1.50	4.21/ 7.24	R6-7. Hard worker, team leader with dubious recognition and ball skills. Could function as a dime CB.
CJ Gaddis Clemson	5114 203	36.5 39.5�	10-1 10-7	20	66.57 70.08	4.45/1.53 4.43/1.52	4.30/ 7.28	R5-6: Hits and runs, has valid hands. Poor CB technique, dubious COD but (still) could become a hybrid. Seems to be team oriented.
Michael Griffin Texas	5116 202	36 39.5	10-0 10-8	16	62 66.17	4.45/1.49 4.40/1.51	4.10/ 6.60	R1/2. 3-year starter at a high LOC. Pit bull mentality. Hits and wraps. Exceptional cone. Great kick blocker.
Daren Stone Maine	6032 218	39	11-0 11-5	13 15	62 64.41	4.58/1.56	4.44/ 7.13	R5. Versatile, started at CB, SS and FS but is not a CB prospect (lacks route recognition); tackles but does not intimidate.
John Wendling Wyoming	6012 222	38.5	10-9	22	71.25	4.48/1.51	4.16/ 6.96	R5. Intelligent, Draddy semi-finalist. Production has yet to match character and measurables.
LaRon Landry LSU	6006 213	37.5 38	10-3 10-6	NF	NF	4.35/1.47	4.36/ 7.11	R1A. Safest D-pick in this draft but (of course) the Steelers have no chance at this prospect. Included for context.

Josh Gattis of Wake Forest ran 4.51 did 22 reps and had a LJ of 10-1. Poor VJ tho, 34.5� (35.5� Pro Day) setting him outside the KEI line. However, Gattis has shown an knack for creating turnovers, a large factor in winning (WF 1.81 over two years). Therefore, Gattis figures as a quality mid-R value.

Presuming Polamalu is here to stay, the PS figure to be looking at safeties Day 2. From the table above, that�s Wendling, Gaddis, Stone and Alexander. The following may expand that field.

Table 4.2a, S non-Combine invitees (five of 2007 compared to two of 2006) who hit the number:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	R/remarks
Justin Hamilton, 2006	6031 218	43	10-6	19	72.50	4.52/NF	NF	Drafted R7. Showed enough that the Browns let go Brian Russell.
Brannon Condren Troy	6007 208	43	11-3	24	78.25	4.47/1.49	4.10 6.94	R7/UDFA: box SS/ST at Troy, former home of D. Ware and Osi Umenyiora. Smart. Coaches loved him.
Charles Manigo Portland State	6015 211	42	10-9	09	61.75	4.53/1.54	4.41 7.10	Character guy, who is giving bone marrow to a cousin with leukemia. (-) 2 years at JUCO, poor COD, weak.
Jon Corto Sacred Heart	6001 208	41.5	10-2	14	65.67	4.56/1.53	4.02 6.50	Has the numbers, LOC is an issue. Shuttle times among he very best at any position. No play information found.
Ethan Kilmer, 2006	6002 204	41	10-10	19	70.83	4.45/NF	4.12/ 6.94	Drafted R7. ST demon now, and may start next season, either at FS or CB.
Melvin Bullitt, Texans A & M	6012 201	40.5	10-5	15	65.91	4.48/1.50	3.97 6.90	R6. Similar to Alexander: team leader with limited recognition skills. In the box S who is too slight to survive. Excellent COD.
Jay Staggs UNLV	5116 214	38.5	10-2	28	76.67	4.50/1.54	3.98 6.94	UDFA: Recruited as a WR. Productive, tough and had a big game in low-level all-tilt. Agility and VJ near the top for all Pro Days.

Others: Andrew Shanle, Nebraska (4.40, 38.5� and 6.80 cone); David Lofton, Stanford (6036, 212, 38.5�, 10-5 and 20; 4.48 on Astroturf, 4.18/6.80), Marcus Wimbush, Maryland (39.5� VJ but 4.61 40) and Chad Nkang, Elon.

Unlike Condren, Hamilton, Kilmer and Bullitt are big school guys. However, neither Hamilton nor Kilmer gained much advantage, experience-wise. Hamilton played one season at the position and Kilmer played none. It could be said Condren has Hamilton�s hops and Kilmer�s size and COD. Wendling, Gattis and, perhaps, Gaddis and Stone figure in the PS R4/5 range; Alexander and Bullitt are said to be R6 (note: Gosselin has Alexander much higher); the rest seem to be R7 to UDFA: Condren, Skaggs, Lofton and Shanle being most appealing. (Note: PFW has Condren, my favorite sleeper, R5). Out on the edge:

Cornerbacks:

KEI doesn�t apply because, for the most part, CBs do not lift. However, the so-called TEI (Tillman Explosiveness Index) may have some application. This metric, derived from KEI, is attached to Charles Tillman, who, in 2003, rose from obscure Louisiana-Lafayette to R2 and the Super Bowl. Tillman then hit 41� VJ and 10-11 LJ, 51.92 on the (soon-to-be) TEI. 40/SS differential factors too, (COD that is change of direction): in general, we�re looking for something in the range of 0.50. For example, Tillman ran 4.49, which is okay; his short shuttle was 3.89, which is outstanding, so too the differential, 0.60. Then, TEI may be taken as 50/0.50, or so; say: fifty/fifty.

Of course, CBs are superior athletes, even by the standards of NFL players. Consider the case of (the ill-fated) Sammy Davis (concussion, broken leg, appendectomy in his first two years with San Diego). Davis hit (exactly) the same jump numbers as Tillman; his flat/lateral differential was 0.40 (4.41-4.01), not ideal but certainly acceptable. Maybe, injury and illness wrecked the Davis Train, but maybe it was something else. Certainly, he did not look like the same player in 2006 as in 2003. After last season, the Niners let him go; today, he is with his third team, the Bucs, in (what may be) five seasons.

Numbers aside, considering that the NFL today is operating under the Manning Rules, tailored to titillate the casual fan, tickle QB and WR alike, while savaging DB, here, immeasurables may factor. Those include, but are not limited to:

Confidence: In some configurations, CBs play on an island and, since the advent of the Manning Rules; the odds are stacked against them. Like .350 hitters in MLB, failure is a constant. Marcus McCauley gets a caution on that basis; blessed with #1 skills, McCauley was never #1 on his college team. That rank belonged to Richard Marshall, a gifted prospect in his own right (if less so than McCauley), who, down inside, has the full package.

Toughness: a CB that won�t tackle is worthless. Size is not a factor. Consider that since Ty Law blew town, the NE Pats have fielded smaller, swifter CB (Samuel, Hobbs and Gay) who are not materially less tough. 2007 prospects eliminated on this basis include, but are not limited too: Aaron Ross, Jonathan Wade, Kenny Scott and Fred Bennett.

Zone awareness: The Steelers have been and figure to remain a zone team. Prospects eliminated on this basis include: Chris Houston (at 1.15 anyway, and he won�t get near 2.46), Travarous Bain and Anthony Airline.

Athleticism: awful numbers in critical categories (VJ, shuttles and 40) are a sure no-go. Prospects eliminated, by one or more of those metrics include Daymeion Hughes and David Irons. Flat speed and hip flip, which sum to recovery speed, certainly factor. One is measured; one is discussed.

Hands: two years of stat analysis revealed that (+2) in takeways is the top winning tell. Better to draft a cover guy who can convert an easy INT.

Bad acts, on or off field: a no-go at any position, here eliminating Eric Wright, Tarrell Brown and Bo Smith. Then:

Table 4.3, 2007 Combine invitees who are physical CB with acceptable zone awareness:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	TEI	40/10	SS/C	R/remarks
Darrelle Revis	5114 204	38	10-5	16	48.43/ 0.30	4.38/1.46	4.08/ 6.56	R1. Reps Combine, all others Pro Day. 1.15 worthy
Leon Hall	5112 193	37.5	10-5	NF	47.91/ 0.32	4.39/1.45	4.07/ 6.50	R1. Good character. Safe pick but not a #1 CB. To some, he�s just a guy.
CJ Wilson	6012 195	37.5	10-7	12 PD	48.09 0.42	4.62/1.50 4.54 PD	4.20/ 6.81	R6/7. Plays with confidence. Fits Cover 2 as to size, hands and a burst but has dubious top end speed.
Marcus McCauley	6006 203	36 36.5	10-9 10-8	17	46.75/ 0.22 47.17	4.39/1.43	4.17/ 6.61	R2. Plus tackler w. good recovery speed. Has #1 tools but never played that way. Head could be a factor; other negatives include: stone hands, few plays on the ball.
Josh Wilson	5092 189	36.5	10-0	NF	46.50 (0.04)	4.39/1.46	4.43/ 7.07	R2/3. Good academics, physical and tough. Some KR value. (-) Like McCauley, doesn�t make plays on the ball. Heavy hitter but a leaky tackler
Michael Coe	6005 190	35	10-2	17	45.17 0.20	4.53/1.53 4.49 PD	4.31/ 6.78	R3-4. Coach�s son. Good character guy who lacks top end speed. Played well in post-season all-stars but faced not a single quality WR while at Bama State.

Info missing: DeAndre Jackson, AJ Davis, William Gay and Tim Mixon. Davis and Mixon are micro-CB.

It is not likely that the PS will see either Revis or Hall at 1.15; McCauley is what he is, and so on. Additionally, these PS do have two young vets, Taylor and McFadden, who do figure to start. Therefore, for the 2007 Steelers, we may assume that depth is the prime factor. As such, R3 seems the earliest go and, as is so for S, Day 2 seems most fit.

Of those tabulated above, only CJ Wilson figures to last into Day 2. However, there are, again, some quality prospects among the non-invitees. Just as last year Hamilton and Kilmer showed make-it athleticism at the safety position, so too did CB Cortland Finnegan. Exemplar in Table 4.3a, Finnegan rode a jaw-dropping Pro Day performance straight from that fabled football power Samson State into R7. Subsequently, Finnegan proved as a high quality package DB. Today, any 2006 retrospective would place Finnegan R3/4, in the area of, say, David Pittman (a DB of a similar type drafted R3 by BALT who did nothing at all). Seeking another:

Table 4.3a, CB non-invitees, then and now:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	TEI	40/10	SS/C	Rated/remarks
Cortland Finnegan, 2006	5097 188	44	10-8	14	54.67/ 0.00	4.34/NF	4.34 6.95	Projected R5-6; drafted R7B. Explosive but has an unfavorable ratio between 40 and SS.
Usama Young, Kent State	5111 196	43	10-11	15	53.91 0.08	4.39/1.46	4.31 6.65	R7/UDFA. All-MAC 2^nd team (Kent State). Said to play a physical game. Smart. Following Pro Day, worked out for 10 teams, now may be R3/4.
Derrick Roberson, Rutgers	5092 188	42.5	10-11	18	53.43/ 0.37 (71.43)	4.41/1.52	4.14/ 6.87	UDFA. 2-year starter with some injury issues. Another Rutgers CB with measurables, Joe Porter, started in his sophomore season, then no more.
Courtney Brown, Cal Poly	6013 200	41.5	10-11	15	52.43 0.25	4.32/1.46	4.07 7.10	R5-6. Came back from a serious knee injury (2004). 1^st team GWFC 2005, 2^nd 2006. Civil engineering major. Subject of an NFL Network piece, now projected R3/4. Top character.
John Bowie Cincinnati	5107 188	40	10-6	10	50.5 0.26	4.37/1.46	4.11 6.79	Limited experience, career marred by injuries �til his senior season. Big East 100 meter champ. Terrible hands; durability issues as noted.
Marquice Cole Northwestern	5091 191	34	10-5	17	44.43 0.49	4.31/1.45	3.84 6.82	Five INT in his junior year; 13.8 YpPR senior year. Missed 1 game in two seasons, 3-year starter. Decent heft and strength, outstanding COD.

Others:

Calvin Bannister hit the KEI number, jumped 39� and ran 4.43; however, at 5075, he�s just too small. Geoff Pope ran 4.27, fastest of all prospects at any position; however, his TEI was just 44.91/ 0.10. Montrae Pitts is a big CB (6012, 195) who ran 4.39 on his Pro Day. Because that is the only number found, KEI/TEI cannot be calculated. However, we do know that Pitts left Auburn for Jacksonville State; we may surmise character/competitiveness issues attach to this prospect. Joseph Porter of Rutgers is the Big East 200 meter sprint champ, indoors and out. He proved his speed, again, at his Pro Day, turning 4.33 at 198#. Porter jumped well and did 23 reps for a KEI of 67.25. However, there have to be play issues associated with this prospect; Porter was a starter in his sophomore season, but never again.

Josh Wilson, Courtney Brown and Usama Young are (said to be) highly intelligent players, who will tackle. All have speed. Young has very good COD (top cone and long shuttle); Brown�s is acceptable (especially for a big CB) but Wilson�s is suspect. Most likely, Brown has the best hands (7 INT junior year); again, Wilson falls short here but he does bring value as a KR, and has no LOC item. Any seem to be quality picks, but acquiring one (or more) could require some movement. That is because Wilson does not figure to reach the Steelers� slot in R3 and, while most have Brown and Young low down, I doubt either will reach, say, the Steelers� R4 comp. (Note: views on Brown and Young diverge wildly. As of 14 April, PFW has Young R2C, Brown R7; in contrast, NFLdraftscout has Brown R3/4 and Young R7/UDFA. This fact remains: both have the numbers and, reportedly, the intangibles).

So, there�s that. Next case.

As bad as the athleticism is on the D-side, it is just that good in the O-group. Just as, long ago, we began with edge rushers, the set most likely to be the PS FO reach of choice this year; conversely, we�ll begin this O-presentation with receivers, the set they grabbed at far too soon last spring.

TE/WR:

As is true for CB, KEI doesn�t apply to WR (although high KEI WR include the Eagles� emerging #1 Reggie Brown and the Bolts� emerging #1 Vincent Jackson). It does apply to TE; however, since there are few draftable TE in this class, we�ll skip all that. Anyway, the attributes required for receivers are about the same as for CB: toughness (in this case to go inside the numbers), zone awareness (in this case to find the soft spots), measurables and hands. That criterion and, recapitulating per Table 2.1, these needs:

A TE with open field ability.

A WR capable in Z-find run blocking schemes (aka the next Hines Ward).

A developmental WR, or two, with legitimate ST coverage toughness. Prior experience as a DB suggests same, but is not a pre-requisite; prior experience on teams, at the college level, may be a tell too. It is a reasonable to presume that ST coverage is a proving ground with respect to that item just above, Ward-esque attributes since, originally, Ward did make his bones on teams.

As noted, the value cluster at 1.15 does not figure among edge rushers. Instead, it�s at receivers to include WR, Robert Meachum and Dwayne Bowe, and TE Greg Olsen. Of those, Olsen stands alone, in this class; Meachum trumps Bowe on the basis of speed, hands and consistency. All three are high character high quality team oriented prospects. Any would be defensible picks at 1.15; each is featured in one of four tables following. So:

Table 5.1, seeking the next Marquis Colston

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	TEI	40/10	SS/C	Rated/remarks
Marquis Colston, 2006	6045 224	37	10-2	NF	47.17 0.06	4.50/1.60	4.44/6.96	The Saints were so sure of Colston that they took Mike Haas a round earlier.
Greg Olsen, TE Miami	6057 251	35.5 37.5	9-6 9-11	23	47.43 0.03	4.51/1.59	4.48/7.03	R1: Lower # are Pro Day results. Olsen is bigger, taller, as fast and jumps as well. 70.41 KEI Pro Day. Good academics
Brad Ekwerekwu Missouri	6035 209	37.5	10-6	17	48/0.45	4.47/1.53	4.02/6.78	65 KEI. H-back and Z-WR, holder on ST, good academics (2^nd team all-academic Big 12). 3-year starter, high ranked DB out of HS
Matt Trannon, WR MSU	6060 216	36.5	9-10	13	46.33 0.23	4.57/1.50	4.34/7.09	R6-7. Trannon is taller, lighter, quicker but slower. Heavy footed, perpetual tease. DND Wonderlic 10.
Michael Allan, TE Whitworth	6061 255	36	10-3	19	46.25 0.19	4.71/1.61	4.52/7.31	R5: Allan and Olsen are about the same size but Allan is not the same kind of athlete. LOC is a concern too. Over-rated in a bad TE class.
Aaron Fairooz, WR Central Arkansas	6056 209	36	10-5	NF	46.5 0.23	4.49/1.50	4.26/6.89	R7/UDFA. Fairooz is taller, lighter, faster, quicker and more agile than Colston; brings value as a kick blocker but (probably) not on coverage units. Very thin, huge LOC step.

R5/6: Jordan Kent, Oregon (6041, 217) has size similar to Colston. WO numbers not found; however, Kent is a 3-sport letterman including football, basketball and track. All Academic in all 3 sports over multiple years; is said to have the body control of a hoopster and clearly has sprinter�s speed (200 and 400 meters, 4 x 400 relay, long jumps). Raw as sushi but a high character, intelligent quality developmental project.

TE Kevin Boss had a Combine similar to Allan�s. Boss is a basketball player too, ala Gates and Gonzales. However, he has a fairly lengthy injury history at a very low level of competition (LOC). DND on a durability basis.

On a maturity/team orientation basis, Sidney Rice and Dewayne Jarrett are excluded, to R3.

Olsen is not a WR; however, on a measurements basis, he is the prospect most comparable to Colston (though Kent may challenge and Ekwerekwu has his assets). Further, Olsen is the only Indy-invitee TE prospect with even the trace of open field ability. On a �value-most-rare� basis, he certainly merits consideration at 1.15.

Of course, on that basis, Adam Carriker is in it too, (as so this miserable D-class goes). However, the Steelers already have Adam Carriker; they call him Aaron Smith. What they don�t have is a second TE to pair with Miller, so completing that so-called Pats-style makeover: all smurfs, twin tight. Then, on this twin basis, rarity and need, Olsen is a top consideration at the spot. If not Olsen, one more TE merits consider, later:

Table 5.2, then and now: Braden Jones and Ben Watson

H/W

VJ

Reps

TEI

(KEI)

40/10

SS/C

R/remarks

Braden Jones

Southern Illinois

6031

260

10-6

49.6/0.30

(69.5)

4.58/1.58

4.28

7.29

LB-like KEI numbers no surprise as he was a 2-year starter there, at Northwestern. TEI is DB good too. Big off-field issues, but none since spring 2004. The Richie Incognito of TE.

Ben Watson

2004

6034

258

35.5

10-3

45.75/0.42

(79.75)

4.57/1.66

4.15

7.39

Watson had a Wonderlic of 41. Braden Jones was all-academic Big 10 two years at Northwestern (Biology).

Dan Coats is a blocking TE, #2 at BYU behind John Harline. At Indy, Coats did an Anthony Spencer: 34 reps and 30� VJ; with a 9-3 LJ, 73.25 KEI. Good, but a 4.94 put him out of the picture. On his Pro Day, Coats ran 4.78 and jumped 36�. At this point, he�s in it, with a 76.17 KEI. However, his fit for the PS is a dubious one, at best. They already have TE with mediocre/poor speed.

There are WO similarities between Jones and Watson. Watson is the player who has made the Pats� all-smurf WR set come good. If the PS FO takes a pass on Olsen in R1, Jones is an option; in fact, he would be the sole remaining TE option in this class. Needless to say, interviews must be a considerable portion in that eval process.

Onward.

Table 5.3, seeking the next Hines Ward:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	TEI (KEI)	40/10	SS/C	Rated/remarks
Legeda Naanee Boise State	6022 225	40	9-11	19	49.91/ NF (68.91)	4.41/1.50	NF/ 6.73 PD	Big play guy with David Givens measurables; former QB too. Tools to be a ST asset but is said to hear footsteps when working the middle. If so, he is DND.
Logan Payne Minnesota	6014 204	39	10-0	15	49.00 0.43	4.51/1.50	4.08/ 6.83	2-year starter, 3 years all-Academic Big 10. WR on a run-oriented team suggests he can play that game. Came up big vs. Michigan
Robert Meachum Tennessee	6020 214	37.5	10-1 10-8	NF	47.67 0.08	4.39/1.51 4.41/1.49	4.31/ 6.97	R1: Good team guy, consistent hands will give effort blocking. Accountable.
Dwayne Bowe LSU	6022 221	33 37.5	10-5	NF	47.91 0.05	4.51/1.53 4.40/1.52	4.35/ 6.81	R1: Team orientation, does all the winning things. However, athleticism and hands are inconsistent.
Jason Hill	6004 204	37	10-3		47.25 0.10	4.32/1.49	4.22/ 7.03	R2/3. Thought to be a possession-only receiver but was the #2 fastest WR at the Combine. Has been a gunner and is a high value kick blocker too.
Mike Walker Central Florida	6016 200	36.5	10-1	18	46.58 (0.04)	4.35/1.54	4.39/ 6.92	R4. Character guy. Played last season while re-habbing an ACL. Deep speed proved at Indy. ST tough: started 6 games at CB.
James Jones San Jose State	6006 206	34 35	9-11 10-6	22	45.50 0.34	4.54/1.54	4.20/ 7.06	R5/6. Out-muscled most DB in college; may not have the same success in the Show. DND Wonderlic 9.

Table 5.3a: other WR of interest

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	TEI (KEI)	40/10	SS/C	Rated/remarks
Maurice Price Charlestown Southern	6007 2002	40	11-0	NF	51.00 NF	4.48/1.54		Dominated Big South. Polished route runner, sudden, elusive and good hands. Will struggle against press. Does have the tools to develop.
Laurent Robinson Illinois State	6020 199	39	10-7	19	49.57 0.10 (68.57)	4.38/1.46	4.28/ 6.93	R5/6. An enigma: described him as �fearless and aware and the most �trustworthy� of their players; other reports say he lacks courage.
Tony Gonzales OSU	6000 193	38	10-6	16	48.50 0.36	4.44/1.48	4.08/6.54	Best agilities at Indy. Quite simply, a guy you want on your team. Not used on teams at OSU but has the traits.
Roy Hall OSU	6-2 229	37.5	10-3	19	47.75/ 0.28	4.41	4.13/ 6.65	UDFA: Pro Day results. Gulliver among the Lilliputians at OSU. Size compares to Bowe
Yamon Figurs K-State	5112 174	32.5	10-3	NF	42.75	4.30/1.47	4.21/6.85	Stunning top end speed. High value ST performer both as a returner and gunner. Started at Jayhawk CC, not a Mensa guy.

Mike Mason of Middle Tennessee hit some big numbers (50.33 TEI, 39.5�, 10-10, and a 4.34 Pro Day 40. Mason is a small WR (5115, 190) but strong (320# clean) and does bring value on return units. However, he�s said to be an extreme character risk; therefore, DND

On a maturity team orientation basis, Aundrae Allison is not considered.

Olsen, Meachum and (to a lesser extent) Bowe are 1.15 worthy. Gonzales is a fine R2 value; in fact, I�d prefer Gonzales to, say, Santonio Holmes at any spot (let alone that 1 for 3 stroke of genius Colbert & Co. engineered last spring). However, what�s done is done; in the same way, although 2007 ST/WR Yamon Figurs figures as a better get than 2006 ST/WR Willie Reid (if only because Figurs, unlike Reid, can be a factor on coverage units), still, the PS have what they have: scant space for more smurf-esque WR.

Despite that (apparent) 1.15 cluster of big receivers, it is likely the PS FO will look elsewhere. If so, both Jason Hill and Mike Walker figure as fine 2^nd quartile picks. However, the up-end, value-wise, may reside with Laurent Robinson, Jordan Kent, Brad Ekwerekwu, Legeda Naanee, Braden Jones, Maurice Price or Logan Payne Day 2, or even in the priority UDFA market. Such was the case last year, when numbers at the WR position pushed Hank Baskett, Miles Austin and Martin Nance beyond Mr. Irrelevant, 7.255 overall, into the chasm that is UDFA. Finally, if there is a Hines Ward lurking in here: Meachum, Bowe, Hill, Walker, and Payne figure as best bets.

Someone is going to have to get them the ball and, since history suggests BBR is not a 16-game guy, the PS ought be in it for a developmental QB. No doubt, Roethlisberger is locked in as #1 through 2008 (if not beyond) and Charlie Batch figures in his role over the same term. However, Brian St. Pierre has established nothing, so some new guy figures, per the criterion following:

� Has the toughness and team orientation to lead his unit.

� Takes care of the ball.

� Wants to play, and wants to be great doing so.

Table 6, two former Wolverine part-time QB:

H/W

Reps

KEI

SS/cone

Contemporaries/ remarks related to prospect

Tom Brady

6043

211

24.5

8-3

5.27

4.38/7.20

Rated R6/76, drafted R6

Matt Gutierrez

Idaho State

6042

237

31.5

9-0

5.00

4.28/6.99

6.69

Rated: R7/UDFA. Several publications noted his Brady-like leadership, want-to and coolness. Adequate arm, good size. Great Pro Day cone

There may be others, (Justin Zwick of OSU comes to mind) but Gutierrez will do. Finally, running backs close out this (so-called) skill position cavalcade. There, the Steelers� need is apparent. They need a 2^nd RB capable of taking 160 touches and up; they need a guy that can be the guy, should Parker blow out. Other items are noted in Table 2.1. For RB, the top indicator is time at 10-yards; here, unlike edge rusher, the PS are in luck. That is because (thru 10 yards anyway), this RB class is historically great. See:

Table 7, big RB, then and now, sorted by get-off:

1.54 or under thru 10 yards at 212# or more.

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40	10	Contemporaries/ remarks related to prospect
Justin Fargas 2003	6007 219	NF	11-5	27		4.35	1.47	Fargas was a workout wunderkind with durability issues. 2003: Larry Johnson did not participate (DNP)
DeShaun Wynn Florida	5103 232	31.5	9-7	18 PD	59.09	4.47	1.47	Wynn is a big RB with historical get-off but some character concerns. Limited receiver and indifferent blocker.
Edge James 1999	6000 216	NF	NF	NF	NF	4.38	1.49	1999: Smaller RB like Zereoue and Azumah got under 1.54 too. Ricky Williams drafted just after James, DNP.
Deuce McAlister 2001	6011 222	37.5	NF	20	NF	4.41	1.50	2001: bigs that were close include Lamont Jordan (4.57/1.59 at 234#) and Cornell Buckhalter (4.53/1.59 at 226#)
Ronnie Brown, 2005	6002 233	34	9-9	18	61.75	4.43	1.50	2005: Cadillac and JJ Arrington did run, but didn�t hit the number.
Joseph Addai 2006	5112 214	38.5	10-5	18	67	4.40	1.52	2006: Bush, Maroney and Williams DNP. Norwood (4.40/1.55 at 210#) and Andre Hall (4.40/1.54 at 208#)
Jackie Battle Houston	6017 235	41	10-11	19	70.92	4.42	1.52	R5/6: Pro Day results. Late bloomer out of Houston. Not used as a receiver but caught it well in PD drills.
Marion Barber, 2005	5113 223	41	10-7	20	71.58	4.49	1.53	2005: Cadillac and JJ Arrington did run, but didn�t hit the number. Cedric Benson didn�t run.
Adrian Peterson Oklahoma	6014 217	38.5	10-7	NF	NF	4.40	1.53	R1. Similar to Deuce McAlister.
Marshawn Lynch California	5111 215	35.5	10-5	20	65.41	4.46	1.53	R1. Good teammate, solid in pass pro and a great receiver. Similar size to Addai and Julius Jones; similar measurables to Lawrence Maroney.
Kolby Smith Louisville	5112 220	38	9-6	18	65.50	4.50	1.53	R4/5. Similar to Barber, but less so. Rotation RB at Louisville, handled it when Bush crashed.
Tatum Bell 2004	5110 212	38.5	9-9	25	73.25	4.37	1.54	2004: Julius Jones (4.43/1.56 at 214) Michael Turner (4.49/1.56 at 237#) and Ran Carthon (4.51/1.56 at 215) were close.
L Tomlinson 2001	5102 221	40.5	10-4	18	68.83	4.46	1.54	2001: Best of the best, then and now.
Brian Leonard Rutgers	6014 226	34.5	10-2	28	72.57	4.52	1.54	R2. Best receiver of all RB in this class. Best in pass pro too. Better get-off than bigs mentioned above such as Jordan, Buckhalter, Betts, and the Burner.
Tyrone Moss Miami	5091 231	31	8-10	16	55.83	4.65	1.54	R7-UDFA: struggling to return from injury, does have that Miami mystique. DND.

Alvin Banks of James Madison flashed on his Pro Day. Banks is 5105, 225; ran 4.47 including 1.52 thru 10 yards. However, his KEI is a mediocre 56.5, he has had some durability issues and there is a significant LOC item attached. UDFA.

These prospects figure to distribute fairly evenly throughout the draft. The Steelers have some shot at Lynch in R1 (not much, considering the Bills� issues) and some shot at Leonard in R2 (not much, considering he is the #3 RB in this class). Mid-R prospects include: Wynn (possibly DQ on character), Kolby Smith and the fast rising Jackie Battle. If receiving skills factor, and they should, then the picks, ordered, are: Leonard, Lynch and Smith. Judging from his stats, Battle was not used in the pass game.

Tony Hunt doesn�t have it like that. On his Pro Day, Hunt hit 1.60 through 10 yards and was over 3.0 the rest of the way. That�s the same top end as Ty Moss, at the same weight, give or take, with the partly crippled Moss having superior burst. Several other big RB looked far better at Indy, including Chris Henry, whose workout was nearly as astonishing as Battle�s. For reference:

Table 7.1, other big RB, 2007:

H/W

Reps

KEI

Contemporaries/ remarks related to prospect

Chris Henry

Arizona

5112

230

10-7

72.57

4.40

1.56

R5-6. WO compares to Ronnie Brown in some aspects, Michael Turner in others. Character, reportedly, doesn�t.

Corey Anderson

Tennessee

6022

247

9-7

65.57

4.70

1.59

R5. FB prospect began as a DE at Tennessee. Better get-off than any big in last year�s class.

Battle crushes Henry on TEI and, if the Steelers determine to go deep, better they go with a guy who played, Battle, rather than a guy who did not, Henry. Finally, there is a nice set of smalls in this class too; prospects that can help some team even if none are a suitable complement for Parker.

Table 7.2, smalls, with get-off, 2007:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40	10	Contemporaries/ remarks related to prospect
Lorenzo Booker FSU	5103 191	35.5	10-1	26	71.57	4.46	1.46	May compare to Brian Westbrook 72.83 KEI, at 5083, 200#. Like Westbrook, has WR skills; however, few 191# RB make it in today�s NFL.
Kenny Irons Auburn	5105 203	38	10-3	17 PD	65.25	4.45	1.50	R2. Said to need many reps to get it.
DD Terry Sam Houston	6005 191	38.5	10-2	12	60.67	4.40	1.51	5 games at LB in 2005 with 45 T including 9 TFL. Too small and too weak to be a RB but could be a CB conversion ala Jerry Azumah.
Mike Pittman OSU	5106 207	35.5	10-3	16	61.75	4.40	1.52	R2/3. Can run inside with good ball security. Fair, not great, receiver; perhaps a mini-Addai, with less explosion.
B. Jackson Nebraska	5097 210	37	10-2	21	68.17	4.54	1.54	Good receiver but has not been durable, even in a rotation. Can�t string moves together. DND on durability.
Darius Walker Notre Dame	5100 206	40.5	10-3	19	69.75	4.55 4.56	1.54	R4/5. Good receiver who can string moves together. Is poor in pass pro and hasn�t played teams.
Justise Hairston Central Conn.	6006 210	39	10-0	NF	NF	4.58	1.56	3 seasons at Rutgers, closed at 1-AA. Impressed at Hula Bowl. Joe Linta, noted Day 2 prospector, represents him. The Eagles, among others, have worked him out.

O-Line:

The Steelers needs are clear enough. Jeff Hartings has retired and three other starters (Alan Faneca, Kendall Simmons and Max Starks) are entering the final year of their respective deals. Neither Starks nor Simmons have shown the consistency to warrant a 2^nd deal and, as for Faneca, well, the chances are he�s looking for, say, Derrick Dockery money (which is about the same as Steve Hutchinson money). The too, there�s versatility, a desirable gameday factor (conspicuously) absent in the PS backup set: Okobi, Phillip, and Kemoeatu.

KEI is of limited value in establishing O-line prospects. That is because very few OL hit the numbers. Additionally, like no other position (this side of CB), intangibles factor: intelligence, toughness to play thru pain, accountability and durability. Still, to open this section, some avatars, make-it prospects having arisen from prior mid-rounds, or even beyond those.

Table 8.1, avatars: O-line mid-R (or later) prospects that proved out:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Arms (�)	Squat (#)	Remarks
Nick Hardwick 2004, OC	6034 295	34�	9-4	27	70.33	5.20/ 1.74	4.64/7.84	33 �	600	Drafted R3, started from Day 1. Wonderlic 28
Jason Brown 2005, OC/OG	6026 313	30.5	8-9	23	62.25	5.40/ 1.85	4.52/7.72	32 3/8	775	#2 ranked OC who fell to Day2. Has developed as a dominating LG. Wonderlic 30
Elvis Ghiaciuc 2005, OC	6040 302	32	8-9	30	70.75	5.09/ 1.79	4.64/7.87	32 1/2	630	Drafted R4, emergency starter in 2006, became the full-time guy last season. Wonderlic 24
Logan Mankins 2005, OG	6041 307	31.5	7-11	21	60.43	5.06/ 1.85	4.45/7.45	33	635	Considered a reach when drafted R1 but has started from Day 1. Wonderlic 31
Dan Buenning 2005, OG	6037 320	28	9-3	29	66.25	5.35/ 1.92	4.64/7.93	32 1/2	615	R4 and started from Day 1. Injured last season, and the Buc OL collapsed
Eric Heitmann 2002, OG/OC	6037 305	28	8-7	33	69.57	5.22/ 1.79	4.60/7.56	NF	NF	R7, developed as a starter at all 3 IOL spots, anchor at OC. Wonderlic 27.
David Stewart 2005, OT/OG	6064 317	34	8-9	28	70.75	NF	NF	33 7/8	500	Drafted R4: sat for a season but dominated in his 2^nd campaign. Wonderlic 17
Jason Peters, 2004, OT	6044 328	33.5	9-7	25	68.08	4.93/ 1.79 4.82	4.79/7.72	32 �	NF	UDFA who has become one of the rising LT in the League. Beat the Wonderlic curse, 9.
Ryan Diem 2001, OT	6067 338	34	8-6	30	72.50	5.13/ 1.78	4.46/ 7.00	34 �	620	R4: starter Y2. Best cone mark on record (note: DB good at 338#). Wonderlic 36.

Lower body power, squats, is one common thread; certainly, for Mankins and Brown, this metric trumped bench reps. Vertical leaping ability factors too (note: jump marks for OL are deflated as compared to DE, even big DL). While neither metric ought erase play grade (for example, LeCharles Bentley jumped just 25.5� but certainly rewarded his R1/2 grade), either may prove in identifying those mid-R, Day 2 wonder picks. Finally, although Jason Peters has proved an exception, good WQ is the way to bet, especially in the IOL stakes. So to the class of aught seven:

Table 8.2a, IOL with OC experience:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Arms (�)	Squat (#)	Remarks
Mark Fenton Colorado	6042 290	36	8-8	22	66.67	DNP	4.90 7.92	NF	NF	Best VJ since Eric Steinbach. Nasty, but said to lack confidence when calling protections.
Samson Satele Hawaii	6025 300	33.5	8-5	25	66.91	5.24 1.75	4.29 7.47	30 �	405	Excellent movement, and some nastiness. Arm length and weak lower body are real issues
S. Stephenson Iowa State	6032 297	30	8-7	22	60.57	5.11 1.74	4.57 7.62	NF	NF	Two-year starter: began as a DL at Minnesota. Durability issues: twin shoulder surgeries
Drew Mormino Central Mich.	6032 299	28	8-9	27	63.75	5.20 1.75	4.53 7.48	31 �	640	4-year starter at OC and RG. Smart, but missed bowl game due to academics. Good punch, good on the move; no Ghiaciuc tho.
Kyle Cook Mich. State	6035 291	28	8-5	40	76.41	5.28 1.82	4.51 7.56	NF	NF	3-year starter: mainly at LG but had 9 games at OC in 2006. Durable, graded 90% in 35 games.
Enoka Lucas Oregon	6025 303	27.5	8-8	34	70.16	5.46 1.78	4.84 8.10	32 1/4	505	3-year starter at all 3 IOL spots. Aware, tough but lacks all semblance of agility.
Dustin Fry Clemson	6025 315	27	7-6	34	68.5	5.40 1.84	NF	32 3/8	655	2-year starter: best run blocker in OC class. Versatile but limited movement skills
(Ryan Kalil) USC	6026 299	26	8-8	34	68.67	4.96 1.71	4.34 7.50	32 1/4	535	Top intangibles, the top OC too. PS will not see him in R2. Shown for context.
Doug Datish OSU	6041 302	26	8-6	31	65.50	5.13 1.75	4.65 7.41	31 3/4	NF	3-year starter at 3 positions: LT, LG and OC. Intelligent, highly aware calling protection.
Steve Vallos Wake Forest	6027 305	26	8-10	32	66.83	5.12 1.71	4.61 7.73	NF	NF	4-year starter, everywhere but OC. Projects there: leadership, intelligence and want-to.

Leroy Harris and Dan Mozes eliminated on durability factors. Both made every start in college but both show signs of wear.

On the hops vector, this is not a great group, and the best there have other issues, specifically: Fenton has WQ items at OC and toughness questions at OG; Satele seems to be too small and Sanderson has had shoulder problems. Nevertheless, there are some players: Kalil is, in my opinion, superior to either Chris Spencer or Nick Mangold, #1 OC prospects over the past two drafts. However, it is not likely the PS will be looking OC R1, and it is inconceivable Kalil will be there at 46. BK (beyond Kalil): Datish has nice versatility and a pro attitude; he figures as a quality backup out of the box, but little more down the line. Fry�s immobility makes him a dubious fit for the PS system. Mormino has some make-it traits, but blowing that bowl is a concern (short arms too). The interview process will be significant with him, as is so for Mark Fenton. Fenton has real athleticism; he, Cook and Vallos may constitute a deep Day 2/UDFA value cluster. However, and as noted, most flopped on hops and, while squat marks are of the essence in evaluating: Datish, Cook, Fenton and Vallos, none were found. Anyway:

Table 8.2b, left guard prospects:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Arms (�)	Squat (#)	Remarks
Brandon Frye V-Tech	6041/ 301	32.5	8-7	34	75.08	5.08/ 1.76	4.40/ 7.50	32 5/8	705	Superior athlete and intelligent. However, he�s a 1-year starter and durability is a concern.
Tony Ugoh Arkansas	6052/ 301	32.5	9-9	32	74.25	5.06/ 1.71		36	510	3-year starter but still a project as an LT: good run blocker but poor in pass pro. OG prospect, if he�s tough enough. Smart.
S. Barbre Missouri So.	6040 300	32	8-10	28	68.83	4.84/ 1.68	NF	33 �	NF	Small school prospect with make-it physical traits. Awful on-campus Wonderlic (11)
Andy Alleman Akron	6040 305	30	8-10	27 30	65.83 68.83	5.07/ 1.71	4.65/ 7.80	NF	NF	ZBS OG reportedly lugging an enormous sense of entitlement. If so, DND.
M. Yanda Iowa	6037 307	27	8-5	23	58.41	5.15/ 1.69	4.58/ 7.36	31 �	540	2-year starter: high try, well coached with some move skills. No anchor and a limited frame.
Herbert Taylor TCU	6037 296	27	8-4	26	61.33	5.19/ 1.81	4.54/ 7.65	NF	NF	ZBS OG with fine pass pro skills but limited athleticism
Ben Grubbs Auburn	6026 311	26.5	8-7	29 35	64.08 70.08	5.10/ 1.65	4.78/ 7.70	32 �	NF	Best possible fit for a power-oriented, pull run team. Fine Senior Bowl
Ryan Harris Notre Dame	6044 305	25.5	8-4	22 25	55.83 58.83	5.09/ 1.75	4.52/ 7.78	NF	NF	An enigma. Started 45 games at ND but didn�t progress; bombed at Senior. Interviewed well.

Grubbs is a pure LG, and a great prospect. The others drilled as OT at Indy but seem to project better inside. Frye has everything you want except experience and durability; it is a puzzle how a man with his physical skills failed to dominate at D-1. Ugoh has the full tool kit; interviews will be important towards establishing his want-to. Athletically, Barbre and Alleman are very close; however, Barbre is, reportedly, no Mensa candidate and Alleman is, reportedly, all but uncoachable. Taylor is the best athlete in that trio of big school finesse OL, to include Harris and Yanda. All are said to have top intangibles; still, all are Day 2 in my view, certainly so if the PSO is to remain power-oriented. On the plus side, several of those prospects tabulated below perfectly fit the PSO (prior) standard:

Table 8.2c, Maulers:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40/10	SS/C	Arms (�)	Squat (#)	Remarks
Arron Sears Tennessee	6032 319	30.5	8-7	21	60.08	5.09 1.74	4.50 7.63	33 1/8	500	3-year starter: versatile, fine in pass pro, can drive and down block. Smart player
Jake Kuresa BYU	6032 343	30	9-1	35	74.08	5.23 NF	NF	NF	NF	Iron man with 48 starts; played thru injury last year. Versatile (RT too), accountable. Top MWC pass pro OL.
Justin Blalock Texas	6032 320	28.5	8-5	40	76.41	5.10 1.73	4.72 7.75	33 1/8	545	Profile is similar to Kuresa above. Monster drive-blocker, top Combine Wonderlic. 10 yr. pro.
C. Stephenson Rutgers	6032 306	28.5	8-5	34	70.91	5.40 1.81	4.81 7.72	NF	NF	A project, two years from contributing. Darnell Stapleton was voted top OL at Rutgers
Uche Nwaneri Purdue	6031 325	27.5	8-1	24	59.67	5.37 1.81	NF	NF	NF	LG at Purdue, solid pass pro in their stick �n split system. Still, a questionable fit for the PS.
Nathan Bennett Clemson	6043 318	26.5	7-9	34	68.25	5.47 1.82	4.85 7.90	34 1/2	540	Movement from Pro Day, glacial at Indy. Combative, smart, long and durable. Sees the 2^nd level, but only on film. Buenning clone
Man. Wrotto Georgia Tech	6030 317	25	7-8	27	59.67	5.40 1.83	7.99	NF	NF	Converted DT, said to be athletic but WO numbers say that�s not so.

Missing info: Kasey Studdard, Texas and Robert Turner, New Mexico.

Like Ugoh (but not Grubbs) Sears, Blalock and Kuresa bring additional value as emergency OT. Blalock and Kuresa seem to have the traits to succeed. Sears� purported problems in space raise questions as to his fit in the PS system, and the same is so for Bennett. Bennett ran poorly, but not worse than Brown or Buenning (Table 8.1 previous). He does have some traits, as noted previously, similar (in some aspects) to Dustin Fry; if (just) one then Fry, on the versatility basis. Both Stephenson and Wrotto are projects; of the two, Stephenson seems more promising, though it remains (for others) to determine whether he has the learning ability to succeed. Finally, Nwaneri seems to be a limited athlete, whose resume does not fit the system. Onward:

Table 8.2d, OT:

	H/W	VJ	BJ	Reps	KEI	40 10	SS/C	Arms (�)	Squat (#)	Remarks
(Joe Thomas) Wisconsin	6065/ 311	33	9-2	28	70.16	4.92 1.75	4.88 7.95	32 �	NF	Not a chance for the PS. Shown for context. Arm length may be at issue
Dane Uperesa Hawaii	6043 309	33	9-6	28	70.50	5.25 1.76	4.58 7.66	34 1/2	550	2-year starter in a run and shoot O. Doesn�t clearly fit the PSO but certainly has pro traits.
(Joe Staley) C. Michigan	6057 306	32	9-4	27	68.33	4.79 1.64	4.40 7.09	34 1/2	600	Agilities on par with some DB. Except as they deal down, the PS won�t be in the market.
(?) Jermon Bushrod Towson State	6045 315	30.5	8-6	22	61.00	4.92 1.61	4.72 NF	NF	NF	3.5- year starter at a low LOC. Could develop within an NFL strength program.
James Marten Boston College	6074 309	30.5	8-4	25	63.83	5.08 1.72	4.54 7.68	34	400	Durable, 38 starts at LG and LT. Well-coached and nasty. Struggles with speed, poor at Senior and awful lower body strength.
Doug Free No. Illinois	6062 324	30	9-3	22	61.33	5.19 1.78	4.53 7.38	34 1/2	565	Good feet, durable and played hurt too. Country strong, big frame but he�s no Ryan Diem.
Mike Otto Purdue	6054 308	26.5	8-9	21	56.25	5.20 1.78	4.67 7.62	34	585	Durable, 4-year starter at LT in the Big Ten. ZBS best fit, but did maul guys at the Shrine. Draddy semi-finalist
Levi Brown PSU	6054 323	25.5	8-1	31	64.67	5.40 1.84	4.89 7.87	33 1/8	580	Like Otto, a durable 4-year starter in the Big Ten. Like Otto, disappointing Combine.
(?) Jacob Bender Nicholls State	6056 296	25	8-6	27	60.50	5.18 1.81	4.60 7.84	NF	NF	3-year starter at a low LOC. Like Bushrod, a developmental pick, tho Bender has fewer traits.
(?) Eddie Keele BYU	6051 303	DNP	DNP	43		5.21*	4.27 7.90	NF	NF	1+ year starter at LT. Blew knee prior to senior campaign. Over-age and will be IR in 2007.

Squats not found for: Thomas, Koets, Harris, Hilliard, Barbre, Denman, Heyer, Taylor, Hall, Wilson, Henderson, Vallejo, Johnson, Carnahan and Shackelford. Past Thomas, most are immobile, or soft as Charmin.
Totally immobile: Denman, Heyer, Julius Wilson, Johnson and Shackelford.
Robert Kraay: Air Academy, long frame OT who jumped 35� but had just 12 reps. Character and hops fit but strength is a real problem.

Both Staley and Free have enough lateral ability to play inside; as such, either may bring the versatile value of a Blalock or Ugoh. However, it is not likely that the PS will be looking at Staley R1, or that he will be available R2. That leaves a set of OT/OG ZBS types in the middle (Free, Yanda, Harris and Taylor), then that cache of Day 2 OT: Uperesa, Bender and (Bushrod) or, maybe, UDFA Keele or Kraay. As noted, there are question marks surrounding each prospect. Table 8.3 displays all prospects shown in the 8.2 series.

Table 8.3, integrating the 8.2 series:

Boldface is high KEI
Slotting per Gosselin position rankings, 6 April (subject to change, as reflected in final SBBV, without notice here).

	Elite	R1B/C	(3) 2^nd Quartile PS R2 thru R4	(3) 3^rd Quartile, PS R4c thru R5c	(2) 4^th Quartile PS R6 and 7	UDFA
Pure OC		Kalil	Satele		Fenton
OC/OG			Datish	Lucas S. Stephenson Fry	Mormino Cook	Vallos
Pure OG		Grubbs	Alleman	C. Stephenson Bennett Wrotto	Nwaneri
OG/OT		Staley	Blalock Ugoh Sears Free Barbre Frye Harris	Taylor Yanda		Kuresa
Pure OT	Thomas	Brown	Bushrod Marten	Otto Bender	Uperesa	Keele Kraay

On the face of it, this crop looks to be strong in the middle. However, considering all that previous per durability, accountability, awareness and athletic traits, well, not so much. See:

Table 8.3a, OL, towards a core group:

	Elite	R1B/C	(3) 2^nd Quartile PS R2 thru R4	(3) 3^rd Quartile, PS R4c thru R5c	(2) 4^th Quartile PS R6 and 7	UDFA
Pure OC		Kalil			Fenton
OC/OG			Datish	Fry	Mormino Cook	Vallos
Pure OG		Grubbs		Stephenson Bennett
OG/OT		Staley	Blalock Ugoh Sears Free	Taylor Yanda		Kuresa
Pure OT	Thomas	Brown	Bushrod (?)	Otto	Uperesa Bender (?)	Kraay

Blalock, Ugoh and Sears trend closer to R1 than to 2.46. Similarly, Free falls between 46 and 77.

Rich Gosselin has Bushrod ranked #9, a R4 mark. However, there must be some LOC issues with this player, as is so for Bender. On the flip side, there are no LOC items with the big school prospects in the middle: Harris, Datish, Bennett, Taylor, Yanda and Otto. However, all carry Combine type drill flags, so to speak, of one sort or another.

Those twin observations suggest that this OL group profiles as strong in front (to R2A) and in back (from R5c) with little between.

The following section integrates 2007 prospects with those demographics found in earlier research. Prospects are parsed per their rankings per position, as set by Rich Gosselin (1 thru 10) and NFLdraftscout (10 and beyond). Value per round, when given as (Rx), is per NFLdraftscout. Quite obviously, when a prospect carrying, say, a R2 play grade is slotted (by VC demographics) in R3 and beyond, that constitutes value. A cluster of such prospects constitutes a value cluster. Conversely, a prospect carrying a R3/4 grade but slotted in R2 (due to rank at position) defines the term: reach.

Table 9.1, O-side board:

Boldface indicates high KEI, except for WR, where it indicates high TEI. Script key: when used (5.R3/4) indicates #5 in Gosselin�s ranks and R3/4 per NFLdraftscout

	Elite	R1	R2	R3	(2) R4	(2) R5	(2) R6/7	UDFA
OT	Thomas	Brown	Free (6.R2/3)		Bushrod (9. Rx)	Otto (x. R4/5)	Uperesa Bender	Kraay
OT range 2000-05		2-4	5-6	7-8	7-10	11-15	14-17 21-23
OT/OG		Staley (3.R1/2) Ugoh (4. R1/2)	Blalock (3.R1/2) Sears (2. R1/2)					Kuresa
OG		Grubbs				Stephenson (7.R5/6) Bennett (10.R5)		Studdard Turner M. Jones Others
OG range 2000-05		1	1-4	5	6-9	9-10	9-11 10-13
IOL					Datish (4. R4)	Fry (8. R3)	Mormino (9. R6) Cook (10.R7/FA)	Vallos
OC		Kalil					Fenton
OC range 2000-05		0-1	1-3	2-4	3-6	4-7 (10)	5-7 (10) 7-11
Colston �types�	Johnson	Olsen, TE					Kent Ekwerekwu Jones, TE	Fairooz
The Wards		Meachum Bowe	Hill (10.R2/3)	Walker (13.R3)		Robinson (R4/5)	Naanee	Payne
Other WR			Gonzales (6.R2)		Figurs			Price Hall
WR range 2000-04		3-7	8-11	12-14	15-19	21-22	26-28 31-37
RB	Peterson	Lynch	Leonard (3.R2)		K. Smith (10.R4/5)	Battle (x. R5/6)		Hairston Banks
RB range 2000-2005		2-3	2-6	5-9	8-(11)-14	9-(12)-15	14-17 15-20
QB	Doesn�t matter						Gutierrez	Zwick

Notes:

WR takes were out of whack in 2005 (many thru R2) and 2006 (very few). OC was out of whack mid-R 2005.

RB: quality smalls with some receiving ability (Darius Walker, Lorenzo Booker among others) may push Kolby Smith towards the PS R5. Battle is moving up; those items suggest a mini-cluster to come.

Ryan Harris is generally rated R3; Marshall Yanda is generally rated R3/4; however, neither become values, in my opinion, until R4/5. Similarly, Herbert Taylor is not a value as the #8OG, which is an R4-comp slot. These players may be characterized as high production, high LOC with dubious athleticism (per Pro Day or Combine drills). Others, such as Doug Datish fit that description too.

On the face of it, O-side strategy revolves around the acquisition of OL. There is high quality in the front, (especially between the PS R1 and R2 picks) and some promising prospects, on athletic, experience and durability vectors, in the back. It may be said that: Fry, Bennett, Stephenson, Uperesa and Cook (among others) backstop Brown, Staley, Grubbs, Kalil, Blalock and Sears. At OL, the middle (R3 thru 5) features those big school ZBS types noted previously. As the Steelers have been constituted (run strong, throw long) there is little in the middle OL-wise.

The same is so at TE except that there, the numbers are: one, none and one (front, middle and back). In contrast, WR persist throughout, with R6 being an especially attractive cluster. Finally, running back where, in seeking a complement to Parker, options may include: Lynch, R1; Leonard, R2; Smith or perhaps, Battle R5. Of those, Leonard, having used Lynch to move towards OL value at R1B/C. On the other side of the ball:

Table 9.2, D-side board:

Boldface indicates high KEI, except for CB, where it indicates high TEI and S, where it may mean either or both. Script key: when used (5.R3/4) indicates #5 in Gosselin�s ranks and R3/4 per NFLdraftscout.

	Top 10-12	R1	R2	R3	(2) R4	(2) R5	(2) R6/7	UDFA
UT	Okoye						Anoai Cohen	Muir
34 DE		Branch Carriker Harrell		Alama-Francis (x. R2)				Smith DeVito
DT range 2001-05		3-5	5-7 (8)	7-10 (6) (12)	10-13 (7)	12-15 (8)	15-19 (22) 18-22 (24)
DE range 2001-05		3-4 (6)	6-8 (10)	8-10 (13)	12-14 (10) (16)	12-20 Scatter	20-23 (18) 24-27 (21)
Edge rushers			Spencer Johnson	Woodley (9. R2) Crowder (x. R2)
Hybrid LB			Bradley (4. R3/4) Barnes (5. R3/4)	Shaw (10.R2/3)	Robison DeOssie			Beckford
OLB range 2001-05		0-3	6-8	7-11	10-14	11-16	16-19 17-21
Other LB	Willis		Black (6.R4) Durant (3. R3/4)			Waters (7.R6/7)	Holloway Muncy	Shotwell Baldwin Herring
ILB range 2000-05		1-2	2-3	4-6	6-8	7-9	16-19 17-21
CB	Revis Hall	J. Wilson (5.R2/3)		Coe (13.R3)	Brown (16.R3/4) Young (x. R3/4)		D. Jackson (22.R5) CJ Wilson (25.R6/7)	Cole Bowie Roberson Terry?
CB range 2000-05		3-5	6-8-12	11-13 (18)	16-18	18-21	22-23 22-25
Safeties	Landry		Griffin (TEI)	Alexander (TEI) (8.R6)		Gattis Wendling (KEI/close) Gaddis (KEI)	Condren (KEI/TEI) Bullitt (TEI) Stone (TEI	Shanle Skaggs (KEI) Lofton Corto (TEI)
S-range 2000-05		1-3	5-6	7-10	9-12	11-14	12-17 16-21

DT: Harrell (#3 DT) would be vastly over-drafted at 15; he won�t be there at 46. Similarly, McBride (#5 DT) will be vastly over-drafted on the R2/3 cusp. Such is the paucity at the position.

DE/edge rushers: as we�ll see, value cluster suggests that Woodley, Alama-Francis and/or the last of the Pump House 3 will approach the PS pick at 3.77. For that reason (and because, by the numbers, the edge DE at 46 look just like IOL) pass to R3. (*) Spencer is unlikely to be there at 46 and Johnson is a dubious value there. These prospects are shown as placeholders, context.

Hybrid LB: prospects that drilled as LB and possess some edge rush ability. Like DT, demographics run ahead of rating by round; that is: some team is likely to reach for Bradley, Barnes and/or Shaw. Any may be value from R3 on, but not before.

Other LB: As above, here for Black and Durant. Their (apparent) elevation presents a scenario within which some big school/bad Combine prospect like Posluszny reaches the PS in R2, or Siler, R3, or Davis in R4 or R5.

� CB: demographics are skewed by a huge take in 2005. For the most part, takes through R2 have clustered at 8; however, in 2005, size/speed prospects like Nick Collins, Ronald Bartell, Karl Paymuh and Stanley Routt went off then, far ahead of projections. Value was found later, with smaller CB like Dom Foxworth and Ellis Hobbs. This spring, we may see something similar, this time within the LB sets noted above.

� S: cluster of exceptional athletes from R5 on corresponds to the PS need to replace Logan, and possibly Carter. That, and a clot of big school R2/4 types with dubious athletic credentials, strongly suggests that S is not a Day 1 get.

As mentioned, O-side strategy revolves around the OL. There are power players in front (Brown, Grubbs, Blalock and Sears); there are power players in back (Fry, Stephenson, Bennett and, say, Uperesa and Kuresa); between, mainly ZBS types (Free, Harris, Taylor and Yanda). If the Steelers are to remain a power run team, then there is little in the middle at OL

On the D-side, strategy revolves around two spots: DE and LB. The DE set is, in my opinion, vastly over-valued at the top; however, there is value later. Conventional rankings, players regardless of position, show a quantity of DE in the area of the PS R2 pick, 2.46. That suggests a value cluster there; however, by the numbers, it seems true value will be found R3. That notion is presented in Table 9.2a.

The LB position presents a quandary. That is comprised of big school prospects with dubious measurables and (mainly) small/mid school prospects with outstanding measurables. Neither set presents superb value in R2, let alone R1; therefore, value remains in the middle, R3/R4. The question is whether small/mid school prospects like Durant and Black will arrive, or big school fallers, perhaps a Siler. Value cluster demographics suggest the PS would help their cause R3/4 by passing on LB in R1 and R2. This notion is presented in Table 9.2b.

Table 9.2a, DE, takes over the years:

Prospect number shown is that available at the spot

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
1.15	4^th DE	5^thDE	3^rd DE	4^th DE	1^st DE	1^st DE	2^nd DE
2.46	6^th DE	6^th DE	7^th DE	6^th DE	6^th DE	4^th DE	4^th DE
3.77	7^th DE	10^th DE	11^th DE	10^th DE	9^th DE	6^th DE	5^th DE
Others	R5: KGB, 11^th		R4: Brown, 11^th R4: Green 12^th R5: Kampman 15^th,	R5: Mathis, 17^th	R4: Gaethers, 12^th R4: Allen, 13^th	R5: Cole, 9^th	R3: J. Hatcher, 6^th R4: E. Dumervil, 8^th R5: M. Anderson 13^th

Among Gosselin, Mayock and Rang: the consensus top 5 is: Adams, Carriker, Anderson, Moss and Spencer. Two or three may be available at 15; none will be available at 46.

Those with a partial consensus in the 2^nd 5 to include: Johnson, McDonald and Woodley. All will be available at 46; it is possible that one will be available at 77 (mean is 8^th, median is 9^th).

Abiamiri and Crowder are found in two of three 2^nd fives. Both will be there at 46; it is likely that both will remain at 77. Alternatively, Abiamiri, who is #6 on two surveys, might bump, say, Woodley down to 77. Either way, the PS could see the 9^th DE at 77.

Moses and Alama-Francis are in one of three 2^nd fives. In the worst case shown above (11^th on the board), both will be available. Well, that�s not the worst case, really; the worst case is that the Steelers pick either, there.

For a hybrid PSD, or future Tampa 2, Woodley and Crowder would constitute a value cluster at 3.77. The others (Ike and Moses), not so much: Alama-Francis has the measurables but not the production; Moses, mainly, has shown neither. Past R3, there is a clot of R4/5 DE to include: near-high KEI Jay Moore, mid-KEI Dan Bazuin and high KEI Brian Robison. As shown above, DE can be had Day 2 so, if not, say, Woodley (or, maybe, Crowder) R3, then WR, a certain persistent value through all rounds. OLB figure too, per the tabulation below:

Table 9.2b, OLB, takes over the years:

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
1.15	2^nd OLB	1^st OLB	1^st OLB	1^st OLB	1^st OLB	4^th OLB	4^th OLB
2.46	7^th OLB	3^rd OLB	2^nd OLB	4^th OLB	4^th OLB	7^th OLB	5^th OLB
3.77	9^th OLB	7^th OLB	4^th OLB	9^th OLB	6^th OLB	11^th OLB	5^th OLB
Others	R6: Adalius Thomas, 18^th		R4: David Thornton, 7^th	R6: C. June, 17th	R4: Shaun Phillips, 11^th	R3: L. Hill, 12^th	R3: C. Ingram, 6^th R3: G. Wilkerson, 9^th R6: K. Ellison, 12^th

The rising tide of 34 defenses has affected OLB hauls. In 2005, Ware and Merriman went 1.11 and 1.12; in 2006, Wimbley went 1.13. In past years, all three may have been considered DE. This tends to conform R1 takes for the sum of DE and OLB.

Stewart Bradley is the marker. A consensus #4 in the OLB group (Timmons, Beason and Posluszny higher), Bradley may go as early as R2B, but seems more suitable as a R3 value. Adding in the ILB, Bradley must surely drop to #5 overall (behind Willis) but not lower than #8 (Siler, Harris and Durant).

That set of high KEI, high speed LB (Black, Barnes and Shaw) cluster around Bradley, mainly behind. That�s 9^th to 11^th in considering all LB; lesser athletes such as Alexander, Nicholas and Everett may be in that mix too.

Prolegomena to the 2007 SBBV, aka: the Draft Day Sins of Cowbert:

It now appears that the mid-R (Day 2) value cluster earlier predicted (ref: under Table 3.1 and Front 7 Summary) regarding high KEI, swift LB will not eventuate. The Gosselin Ranks suggest that FO about the League have been discounting the big school/bad Combine LB, which, by the reciprocity found within value cluster demographics, tends to elevate those small school/fine Combine LB (add Shaw). Not good and it�s no better upfront where, say, Pat Kirwan recently mocked Justin Harrell to the PS at 1.15. On the plus side, last spring Mr. Kirwan mocked Rodrique Wright to the PS at 1.32. That so, his projections may be discounted.

Mockery aside, these facts remain. Last spring, the Front 7 crop was strong throughout; this spring not. This year, the WR set is strong throughout, last spring not. Yet, last spring Cowbert (essentially) accomplished this: traded DeMeco Ryan (or Richard Marshall), Barry Cofield and Mark Anderson for Santonio �Baby Daddy� Holmes. Those were the Front 7 prospects available (and, contemporaneously, slotted here) at 32, 96 and 129 respectively. Ryan, then the 5^th LB taken, was a better prospect than any in this class, Willis excluded. Cofield was a better DT prospect than any in this class, from Harrell down. Anderson was a better edge rush prospect than any in this class, no exclusions. On the flip side, Holmes, 1^st WR taken last year, would struggle to reach #6 this time.

So it goes. Drafting need-first, scratching last season�s itch that is, is no doubt the low road to competitive ruin. Had the 2006 PS gone Front 7 early, this 2007 PSD would be good to go, whether in a LeBeau 34, Tomlin Tampa 2 or some yet unknown morph. True enough; the 2006 PSO would have been light at WR but not-for-long, considering that the 2007 PS are ideally positioned to draft at that position, early and often. As it is, chock-a-block with numbers if not talent at the spot, this PS FO figures to perform some contortion, reaching for that value imagined elsewhere. Front 7 figures, where the incumbents are approaching antiquity, or OL, considering that exodus (likely) to come past the 2007 season.

Front 7 we�ve been over. As for OL, well, there we�ve seen a (nearly) unbroken string of futility commencing from 2004: Starks, Lacy and Caylor, continuing through 2005: Essex and Kemoeatu to 2006: Colon and Phillip. That comes to: three classes, seven picks, and two players, with those contending for the same position. So, we are where we are: with the PS needing help upfront on both sides of the ball.

Of course, those are failures of different sort. The failure to draft Front 7 in 2006 is a failure of foresight. The failure to find suitable replacements for Hartings and Faneca is a failure of, say, evaluation. The following, class profile and SBBV, is intended to forestall those of the former type, the latter being (well) beyond this scope.

Table 10.1, 2007 PS-centric class profile:

1.15

R1B/C

Deal from 1.15

2^nd quartile

PS R2 thru R4

3^rd quartile

PS R4c thru R5c

4^th

R6/7

UDFA

Value clusters

Big receivers

DL, maybe

OT/OG

R3: DE/OLB, LB. WR anytime

R3/4: CB

Safeties and punters

R5c: IOL & S

R6: Colston(s)

R6: OT

R6/7: IOL

IOL

CB and S

O-skill, samples

Lynch

Meachum

Bowe

Olsen

R2: Leonard

Smith, Battle.

Jones, TE

Naanee

Hairston

Price

Payne

Zwick

Others, samples

Brown

Carriker

Grubbs

Harrell

R2: Griffin

R2/3: J. Wilson

Waters

Anoai

CJ Wilson

Kuresa

Notes:

Circa 15 April; subject to change over the final two weeks.

(2 picks) R1 & R2: except as Carriker arrives R1, value is on the O-side. R2: fourth of four elite IOL (one of Grubbs, Kalil, Blalock and Sears) may arrive at 2.46. However, the sure play is to deal from 1.15. Staley may be a target in that move.

(4 picks) R3 to R5a: The bet is that one, at minimum, of: Woodley and/or the last of the Pump House Gang will arrive at 3.77. If not, well, some regard Barnes (Gosselin, #5 OLB) and Robison (PFW, R3A) as R3 worthy. With or without those edge rusher/hybrids, value remains on the D-side, especially at: LB, CB (small school prospects shown in Table 10.2) and S (note: best to play on Day 2 strength at the safety position). There are these caveats: WR is likely to be BPA at any given point (R3: Hill, Walker; R4: Robinson), and if the PS have not gotten a RB earlier, then either Smith or Battle may become best possible fit. Finally, the PS would do well to draft one of the top punters, Sepulveda or Podlesh. Sepulveda figures as early as R4; conceivably, the PS may wait on Podlesh at that R5-comp following.

(3 picks) R5-comp and on: value reverts to the O-side, except that the PS must draft a Day 2 safety. This sets up a reciprocal between punter and safety. If Sepulveda earlier, safety now (Gaddis or Condren); if safety earlier, Podlesh now.

Table 10.2, PS-centric 2007 SBBV:

From 1.15 on, (prospect name) indicates those with a fit play grade but, due to value cluster demographics, are unlikely to be available at the spot. Prospect name indicates high KEI or high TEI, as position appropriate.

	If they fall (Unlikely)	1.15	Down for:	R2	R3.77	R4a-comp	R5a- comp	R6/7	UDFA
�Colstons� (5)	Johnson WR		Olsen TE				Jones, TE	Kent, WR Ekwerekwu
(2) QB	Trade bait							Gutierrez	Zwick
(7) OT	Thomas	Brown					Bushrod	Otto Uperesa	Bender Kraay
(11) S	Landry			(Griffin)		(Gattis) (Alexander) Wendling	Gaddis Condren		Shanle, Lofton Skaggs and Corto.
(7) RB	Peterson	Lynch, Trade bait		Leonard		Smith	Battle	Hairston	Banks
Front 7 bigs (6)	Branch	Carriker		(Harrell)		Alama-Francis			Smith DeVito
(3) UT	Okoye							Anoai	Cohen
(8) LB	Willis				(Black) (Durant)	Waters		Muncy	Holloway Baldwin Shotwell
Hybrid LB (9) Edge Rush	No interest	None		(Spencer)	Woodley Shaw Robison Crowder Bradley Barnes	DeOssie			Beckford
(12) CB	Revis Hall				(Wilson)	Brown Young Coe		D. Jackson CJ Wilson	Cole, Bowie Roberson & Terry
� Wards� (6)		Meachum Bowe			Hill Walker			Naanee	Payne
(5) OT/OG			Staley Blalock	(Ugoh) Sears					Kuresa
(12) IOL			Grubbs	(Kalil)			Datish Fry	Stephenson Bennett Mormino Cook	Vallos Turner Studdard Fenton
Other WR (3)				Gonzales		Robinson			Price
(2) Punter						Sepulveda	Podlesh
Totals	9 (3O/6D)	5 (4O/1D)	4 (4/0D)	3 (8) (5O/3D)	8 (11) (2O/9D)	10 (12) (2O/9D/1S)	9 (6O/2D/1S)	15 (11O/4D)	26 (11/15D)

Circa 15 April: subject to change over the final two weeks.

Working from the middle out (see note under Table 1.2), value from R3-R5a is likely at: hybrid/edge, LB, among small school CB, safeties and punter. That is: five spots within a range in which the Steelers presently have four picks. In the best case, they grab another sending, say, Marshawn Lynch to the Jersey Giants for 1.20 and 3.81. Per the trade value chart (TVC), value is close (1.15 = 1050; 1.20 + 3.81 = 1035). Moving down, the PS would be in position to take one of the R1/2 OT/OG, TE Greg Olsen or, maybe, to dangle, say, Ryan Kalil, and go down again.

Chicago may be in the mix too. The Bears have 1.31 and 2.37, 1130 TVC points. Imagining CHI had some interest in Lynch (to tandem with Cedric Benson and to rob Green Bay); the PS could make their 3^rd pick (Brian Leonard) at 2.46. To do so, they�d give 4.119, their R4a (for 1106 TVC points). So would go one of those mid-R defenders but on the plus side, they�d be in it early for two of: Staley, Grubbs and Blalock (maybe Ugoh). Twin OT/OG (Staley and Blalock) would go a long way towards stabilizing their OL; one and Grubbs would do the same. Failing all that, well, it�s a long, long way to Jake Kuresa.

Even, say, Olsen, Bowe or Gonzales at 31 then Blalock at 37 with Leonard at 46 would constitute superb value, exactly were that resides in the early going, on the offensive side of the ball. Follow that R3 with one from the hybrid/LB cluster, Sepulveda in the 4-comp slot, two of the DB R5 (of Brown, Young, Condren and Gaddis); a Colston in R6 and another OL in R7�

�dream on and, in the same vein, this final table, to close the show.

Table 10.2a, 2007 sleepers (and/or under-valued as ranked):

Front 7

Courtney Brown

Usama Young

Brannon Condren

Brian Robison

Tim Shaw

Joe Anoai

Braden Jones

Mike Walker

Jordan Kent

Maurice Price

Logan Payne

Dane Uperesa

Jake Kuresa

Kyle Cook

Brian Leonard

Kolby Smith

Jackie Battle

Justise Hairston

Matt Gutierrez

Justin Zwick

All small school non-invitees. The PS could do worse than 2 of 3.

All have make-it traits; all under-valued as ranked

R1 workouts but character is a (?)

Walker is undervalued R3/4. Kent, Price and Payne seem to have make-it traits.

All high KEI, durable starters

All but Leonard have explosion (VJ). Smith is undervalued R4/5, Leonard at R2/3

Both got lost in big school programs. One could make it.

Acknowledgments:

Workout numbers are taken from the archives provided at NFLdraftscout. By far, the best draft site on the net and, as such, worth every bit of ~$25/year.

Those comments characterizing various prospects (found in Remarks columns) are heavily compressed alloys of those found at PFW, Lindy�s and, again NFLdraftscout.

Using his contacts about the League, Rich Gosselin of the Dallas Morning News produces highly accurate position ranks. From there, value cluster demographics may project where prospects will be taken. Will be taken is the operative term, best play is something else; in short, it may be said that those ranks are most valuable in predicting drafting errors to follow. That criticism is not directed at Mr. Gosselin, who is the very best at what he does. Error accrues elsewhere.

Take numbers, the basis for value cluster and Tables 9.2a & b, are from the draft history at NFLdotcom.

Like this? Share it with friends:

2007 Draft, by the numbers

April 16, 2007 by Steel Phantom

QB

Table 3.1, Front 7 overview, high KEI at Indy:

VJ

KEI

Leader

Second

Below the fold

Not known

VJ

KEI

Adam Carriker

VJ

KEI

Patrick Willis

VJ

KEI

Justin Durant

VJ

KEI

Zak DeOssie

Table 3.7d: Quincy Black and Mike Peterson: few LB prospects have run under 4.5.

VJ

KEI

VJ

KEI

Tim Shaw

Table 3.7f: hybrid rushers? Brian Robison, Antwan Barnes and Dwight Freeney: freakish times at 10 yards.

VJ

KEI

Dwight Freeney,

Antwan Barnes

VJ

KEI

Adam Carriker

VJ

KEI

Amobi Okoye

VJ

KEI

Paul Soliai

Alan Branch

Table 3.8. 2007 DT prospects who did hit the numbers.

VJ

KEI

Joe Anoai

VJ

KEI

Johnny Baldwin

Matt Muncy

Kyle Shotwell

All DB

VJ

CJ Gaddis

John Wendling

LaRon Landry

VJ

Jon Corto

Melvin Bullitt,

Jay Staggs

VJ

TEI

Darrelle Revis

Leon Hall

CJ Wilson

Marcus McCauley

Josh Wilson

Michael Coe

VJ

TEI

Marquice Cole

Table 5.1, seeking the next Marquis Colston

VJ

TEI

VJ

TEI

VJ

Legeda Naanee

Big play guy with David Givens measurables; former QB too. Tools to be a ST asset but is said to hear footsteps when working the middle. If so, he is DND.