Steelers’ 3 best, 3 worst TE draft picks in Kevin Colbert era | TribLIVE.com
Steelers/NFL

Steelers’ 3 best, 3 worst TE draft picks in Kevin Colbert era

Chris Adamski
1021709_web1_gtr-heathmiller
AP
Heath Miller dominates receiving records for a tight end in Steelers history.

Editor’s note: This NFL Draft will be the 20th under the eye of Pittsburgh Steelers general manager Kevin Colbert. In conjunction with the Trib’s daily positional previews leading up to the April 25 start of the draft, we’ll look back at Colbert’s three best — and three worst — picks at each position.

The Steelers widely are expected to take a tight end at some point in the draft later this month, and they could do so early. That’s a departure from the team’s typical tack during the Colbert era.

Over the 19 drafts since Colbert took over football operations in 2000, the Steelers have selected a tight end just nine times. Of those picks, six were in the final two rounds and just two were among the first 159 picks of a draft.

Of course, this tendency to stay away from the tight end position is no small part because of how successful the Steelers were the time they took one with a premium pick. No. 30 overall selection Heath Miller became a starter immediately as a rookie in 2005 and was consistent for the next decade. For many years, that effectively took away the need for the Steelers to look for tight ends in the draft outside of a late-round flier.

With so few to choose from other than those particular types of instances, it’s not the cleanest position to evaluate. But here goes:

Three best

1. Heath Miller

2005, 1st round, 30th overall

Miller is not going to make the Hall of Fame, but he is an all-time Steelers great. As popular among fans as he was with his teammates, Miller was a starter for two Super Bowl champions and was a two-time Pro Bowler. He dominates the Steelers’ record books for receiving by a tight end.

2. Jesse James

2015, 5th round, 160th overall

James last month signed a four-year, $25 million contract with the Detroit Lions. If that’s any indication of his value as a player, it represents a steal to get him for four years at a bargain salary as a fifth-round pick. Though his tenure as Miller’s successor did not last long, James was a reliable and durable Steeler.

3. David Johnson

2009, 7th round, 241st overall

Johnson appeared in 105 games (including the playoffs) for two teams at two positions (including fullback) over an eight-year NFL career. Any team will take that from its second of two seventh-round picks in a draft. The Steelers liked Johnson so much, they brought him back after he spent his sixth and seventh seasons with the Chargers.

Three worst

1. Charles Davis

2006, 5th round, 167th overall

With no egregious reaches, the “winner” of this category becomes the highest-drafted player at the position over this time span who never even spent a day on the Steelers’ 53-man roster or practice squad. Although Davis scratched his way to stay in the sport for five years, he never appeared in an NFL regular-season game.

2. Jason Gavadza

2000, 6th round, 204th overall

Who? Yeah, he was the final pick of the first draft that had Colbert at the helm. While no one expects a sixth-rounder to become a star, Gavadza didn’t even make it to the end of August of his rookie year before the Steelers released him.

3. Rob Blanchflower

2014, 7th round, 230th overall

It’s wholly unfair to label a pick just 26 selections away from Mr. Irrelevant as a poor one, but Blanchflower earns the dubious honor by default because he never so much as appeared in an NFL regular-season game, whereas other late-round Steelers tight ends David Paulsen and Matt Kranchick did.

Chris Adamski is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chris by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Steelers
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.