For a several years now, I have kept a personal running spreadsheet during the draft process. The goal for me was to learn about the players through information gathering. I will share a visual and some takeaways from the data points I create each year, simply called interest and athletic scores with explanations to follow.
UPDATE: This post has been edited to reflect Minnesota CB Justin Walley coming in for a pre-draft visit Monday.
As Dave Bryan and Alex Kozora discuss regularly, the Steelers have a type of player they look for, and what the scores attempt to achieve is seeing who checks many of those boxes, or vice versa. You will notice many of the inspirations for these scores come from their studies of Pittsburgh’s draft trends over the years, and has fared well in who Pittsburgh has ultimately drafted.
While there is no perfect way to predict what the 2024 Steelers selections will be, I feel great about what the data points measure and of course would love to hear feedback. Also, there is only so much time in the day and additional things I’d like to measure, so I focus on the crucial and/or practical choices in my opinion.
Now for more explanation to how the scores come together. The biggest point I want to make is this is not a big board or round projection view, rather trying to pinpoint names the Steelers may select regardless of when they are drafted. After I get a healthy pool of names that I hear about or research, I begin the scoring.
Interest Score: Here I configured a points system for the following important factors. College performance, body type, experience, age, position, competition level, pro day attendance, pre-draft meeting(s), and Senior/Shrine Bowl invitations/participation.
Athletic Score: Simply 11 combine metrics excluding wingspan, and whether or not they were within a threshold in each metric of any player drafted at their position by the Steelers since 2013. Pro day numbers are only included if the player didn’t do the drill at the combine.
Clear as mud? Here are the cornerbacks (CB) that were combine invites:
NOTE: If you don’t see a name please ask, I have many more non-combine players compiled but excluded them for a cleaner chart.
The top interest score was Trey Amos of Ole Miss (10.3), tied for sixth best in the entire draft class. Highly attended pro day (Assistant GM Andy Weidl, Scout and former Steelers CB Ike Taylor). Pre-draft visitor, Senior Bowl, college performance, and experience were his strongest scores. Age (23) was a lower mark. Eight athletic score, missing in vertical jump and three cone, with a DNP short shuttle. Mostly outside corner snaps, Day Two projection.
For context, here are the prior scores for recent Steelers picks: Joey Porter Jr. (10.8 interest, nine athletic), Ryan Watts (8.9, perfect 11 athletic).
Second in this class is Notre Dame’s Benjamin Morrison (10.0). Highly attended pro day (HC Mike Tomlin, GM Omar Khan, DC Teryl Austin). Formal combine meeting, age (21), and college performance are other positives. No all-star game and experience lower marks. Five athletic score, only measuring and bench, checking those boxes. Primarily outside snaps, likely requiring a first-second round selection.
Third is Jahdae Barron of Texas (9.4). Multiple meetings (pro day dinner, formal combine). College performance and experience where high end scores, with age (23) and lack of all-star game on the lower end of things. Nine athletic score, notably missing in arm length (which Pittsburgh has prioritized heavily recently), and no bench. Outside most, with some alignment versatility. Also an early round possibility.
Florida State’s Azareye’h Thomas (9.2) was worked out by Taylor at FSU’s pro day, and was brought in for a pre-draft visit. Age (20), Senior Bowl, body type (namely 32 3/8” arms), and college performance are impressive, with less experience naturally on the other side of the coin. Seven athletic score (missed in 40-time, three DNPs). Mostly outside, and early round prospect as well.
Michigan’s Will Johnson (8.8) had Austin at his pro day, along with a formal combine meeting. College performance and age (22) were also strengths, but less experience than some peers. Four athletic score due to DNPs, checking all the measurement boxes. Primarily outside alignment, and consensus first rounder.
Ohio State’s Denzel Burke (8.3) had high pro day attendance (Tomlin, Kahn, Austin), but an asterisk with a slew of quality prospects Pittsburgh is likely eying harder. Plus college performance, age (22), and experience. No meetings or all-star games were his worst interest marks. Five athletic score, missing in hand size, along with five DNPs. Mostly outside snaps, seemingly a late Day Two/early Day Three possibility.
Six players land in the seven tier of athletic scores: Florida’s Jason Marshall Jr. (7.8 interest, eight athletic), Minnesota’s Justin Walley (7.8, eight), South Carolina’s O’Donnell Fortune (7.8, seven), USC’s Jaylin Smith (7.6, eight), LSU’s Zy Alexander (7.4, six), and Iowa State’s Darien Porter (7.0, ten).
Walley had a pre-draft visit. Defensive backs coach Gerald Alexander was at Fortune’s pro day, while Assistant DB coach Anthony Midget attended Marshall’s at Florida. Alexander had an informal combine meeting. Porter was the only player to meet Kozora’s What The Steelers Look For Study. None of the six had a perfect athletic score though.
Kansas State’s Jacob Parrish (6.5, nine) was the only other CB with a meeting (informal combine). Two others had perfect 11 athletic scores: Virginia Tech’s Dorian Strong (6.7 interest) and California’s Nohl Williams (6.0). The lowest interest score is Villanova’s Isas Waxter (4.7).
It isn’t the greatest position of need in Pittsburgh, with lower interest scores than other positions overall. There are some clear players they like though, and it will be fascinating to see if Pittsburgh adds to the room. One thing’s for sure, I can’t wait to see how it pans out.
Do you think Pittsburgh will draft one of the names listed above? Who are some of your favorites? Thanks for reading and let me know your thoughts in the comments.
