ShareThis Page

Website rating shows Steelers declined at majority of positions

| Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2013, 12:01 a.m.
Steelers receiver Antonio Brown 2012. 
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Steelers receiver Antonio Brown 2012. Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Steelers linebacker Lawrence Timmons plays against the Eagles at Heinz Field Sept. 2012.
Chaz Palla | Tribune Review
Steelers linebacker Lawrence Timmons plays against the Eagles at Heinz Field Sept. 2012. Chaz Palla | Tribune Review
The Steelers' Troy Polamalu plays against the Ravens at M&T Bank Stadium Dec. 2, 2012.
Chaz Palla | Tribune Review
The Steelers' Troy Polamalu plays against the Ravens at M&T Bank Stadium Dec. 2, 2012.

The Steelers must be wondering if it was merely a one-year decline by numerous players or a sign of big trouble ahead as they evaluate an accomplished-but- aging team.

Their slump to an 8-8 record in 2012 after being 12-4 each of the previous two seasons is evidenced in the final position grading by Pro Football Focus, a website that analyzes every NFL player on every play.

Of the 24 positions analyzed — each starting position minus fullback, which the Steelers didn't utilize in 2011, plus the two kickers and kick returner — the Steelers declined at 15. Some of the falloff was steep and alarming.

There was improvement at nine positions, though some of it was negligible. Ben Roethlisberger, for example, graded out as the NFL's seventh-best quarterback each season, but his QB rating was higher in 2012 than in 2011.

And there were some surprise grades. Maurkice Pouncey was the All-Pro center in 2011 but slipped to second team in 2012. Yet he graded out a much-higher 12th at his position, compared to 19th during the season he was chosen as the NFL's best.

Eight positions on offense declined, with the must precipitous drop at wide receiver. Antonio Brown (No. 6) and Mike Wallace (No. 12) graded out in the NFL's top dozen in 2011, but neither was in the top 40 in 2012. Brown also dropped from No. 2 to No. 19 among kick returners.

Defensive end Brett Keisel fell from No. 4 to No. 21. And nose tackle Casey Hampton, whose Steelers career might be done, dropped from No. 34 to No. 77 among all defensive tackles.

At running back, Rashard Mendenhall graded out at No. 11 in 2011, but he was on the field only sporadically in 2012. Team rushing leader Jonathan Dwyer graded out at No. 58 at a position where there are only 32 starters.

“We are going to need a better performance out of the running back position if we're going to be successful,” team president Art Rooney II said last month. “Whether it's Rashard or Jonathan or Isaac (Redman) or somebody else.

“Again, in this offseason, that's something we've got to look and decide how we get better and who we get better with.”

The grades didn't always truly represent the slippage in play.

Safety Troy Polamalu was No. 1 ranked in 2011, and was one of the league's highest-grading players overall. He was 13th in 2012 yet was on the field for only 402 snaps — compared to 930 in 2011 — because of a torn calf.

Outside linebacker James Harrison's overall grade didn't change that much, from No. 6 to No. 11, but his overall impact did because a knee injury sidelined him for the first month of the 2012 and limited him for weeks after he returned.

The biggest improvement was made by inside linebacker Lawrence Timmons, who jumped from 28th to fifth. Shaun Suisham missed only three times all season and improved from 21st to 11th among kickers.

Several players graded out at nearly the same. Guard Ramon Foster was No. 31 in 2011 and No. 34 in 2012. Defensive end Ziggy Hood went from No. 32 in 2011, the lowest-ranked among all starters at the position, to No. 31.

In cases where a starter changed, the replacement's grades were matched against those of the previous starter.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.