Is cornerback a risky position for the Vikings in the draft?
Predicting a cornerback’s success in college has been one of the most difficult things for analysts and NFL franchises. In the last few years many of the best cornerbacks in college turned out to be middling or busts in the NFL. Why? Sometimes they’re not drafted into the right scheme, sometimes they get unlucky with injuries, and sometimes the jump from facing college receivers to NFL receivers is too daunting. While that could apply to every position, it appears to be exaggerated with corners.
The Vikings haven’t necessarily been great at drafting cornerbacks early on since picking Xavier Rhodes in 2013 (Trae Waynes, Mike Hughes, Jeff Gladney, Can Dantzler, Andrew Booth Jr. etc.), but they are far from alone. Below we can see exactly how hard it has been for recent cornerbacks to improve on their college performances once they reach the NFL.
Out of the 34 cornerbacks drafted in the first and second rounds since 2019, only two (!) have improved on their college PFF coverage grade – Sauce Gardner and Kaiir Elam. However, Sauce was stellar in his last season of college while Elam was not and they each have only played one season so far, so we don’t have the full picture on them yet.
We can generally claim that a cornerback will not improve on their coverage grade from college – so we can probably regard that as their max. Therefore teams should probably tread lightly with college cornerbacks with PFF grades below 75. The chances are already slim enough that they become the next Darrelle Revis when they grade around 90.
(It should be noted that there are always outliers and caveats. PFF grades don’t capture everything but we can see that no first or second round picks below 75 in college have succeeded in the NFL lately.)
With that known, let’s take a look at some of the top cornerbacks in the 2023 NFL Draft, and which ones would be the safest and most risky picks for the Vikings…
Devon Witherspoon — Illinois
Key Stat: 25.3 passer rating against, 92.5 coverage grade, 14 pass breakups (really, he doesn’t have a bad stat)
Recent Statistical Comparison: Caleb Farley (90.5 Coverage Grade, 36% reception percent, 26.8 passer rating against)
It’s hard to pick one key stat for Witherspoon since he tops the list in every stat we have by far. After allowing receptions on only 35% of his targets for a 25.3 passer rating, he’s truly in a league of his own in this cornerback class.
You won’t love the Caleb Farley comparison simply because he’s been the most underperforming corner in the NFL, but both of their college stats were basically identical. Daniel Jeremiah described him as a twitchy and quick athlete – almost sounding like Sauce Gardner (who he also had some similar stats to), so he has the ability to break out in the NFL as a man-coverage ready cornerback. Even though he’s a perfect fit, chances seem low that he will be available for the Vikings at pick No. 23.
Risk factor: Low
Christian Gonzalez — Oregon
Key Stat: 83.9 coverage grade
Recent Statistical Comparison: Andrew Booth Jr. (78.7 Coverage Grade, 63.6% reception percent, 71.1 passer rating against)
Gonzalez has been receiving a ton of praise from analysts, but when you look deeper into his stats and they are not as dominant as you would expect. While his coverage grade is decent, allowing a 60.9% reception rate in college is concerning and the QB ratings when targeted over the last two years are 90.0 and 74.4 — OK but not spectacular. With his prime size and length for an NFL cornerback and a near-perfect Relative Athleticism Score, it’s possible he can develop more with the right coaching. Still whichever team is considering taking Gonzalez super early has to be sure that he can develop and smooth out some of the edges.
Risk factor: Medium
Joey Porter Jr. — Penn State
Key Stat: 9.5 yards per reception
Recent Statistical Comparison: Cam Taylor-Britt (76.1 Coverage Grade, 53% reception percent, 10 yards per reception, 9 pass breakups)
Porter has been regarded as the top press coverage corner in this class, and also had one of the lowest yards per reception allowed, at 9.5. In fact, he only gave up one single play over 15 yards last season (per PFF), and analysts have praised his arm length and long stride to shorten the distance to the receiver. You can’t get much closer than he and Cam Taylor-Britt’s stats, and I like this comparison since Taylor-Britt was a decent corner in coverage his first season with room to improve. Porter’s father was a four-time Pro Bowler, so I wouldn’t doubt the younger Porter can get on the same track. He could be a great scheme fit for the Vikings if he falls to No. 23.
Risk factor: Low
Deonte Banks — Maryland
Key Stat: 10.0 relative athleticism score
Recent Statistical Comparison: Patrick Surtain (41% reception percent, 7 pass breakups, 9.95 Relative Athleticism Score)
With each corner we go through, they keep one-upping each other in their size and athleticism – but no one beats Deonte Banks. With a perfect Relative Athleticism Score and some promising stats like a 43.3% reception rate allowed, he almost resembles a player like Patrick Surtain in college in terms of their stats. His one question mark on film was his ability to change and flip direction, according to Daniel Jeremiah but with freak athleticism, he could work around that shortcoming. Banks has the statistical profile of the safest bet but a PFF grade under 75 earns him a least a little skepticism.
Risk factor: Medium
Cam Smith — South Carolina
Key Stat: 47.4% reception percent allowed
Recent Statistical Comparison: Kaiir Elam (57.8 Coverage Grade, 78.5 passer rating against, 10.3 yards per reception)
Cam Smith didn’t have the best 2022 season (64.4 coverage grade) after being stellar in 2021 (89.7 coverage grade), so I’d consider him more of a risk given the sudden drop-off. However, you can still work with his above-average reception percent of 47.4% and the fact that he’s one of the best at breaking up passes. He and Bills cornerback Kaiir Elam had similar college careers, since Elam also dropped off in his final season after amazing seasons before that. Elam was one of the two early-round cornerbacks since 2019 who improved their coverage grade in the NFL, so Smith may be able to get back on track to where he was in 2021.
Risk factor: High
Emmanuel Forbes — Mississippi State
Key Stat: 89.6 coverage grade, 9.3 yards per reception
Recent Statistical Comparison: Trent McDuffie (89.2 Coverage Grade, 44.4% reception percent, 52 passer rating against, 5 pass breakups)
If we disregard the fact that he’s one of the lightest cornerbacks out there, Emmanuel Forbes is my second favorite corner in this draft behind Witherspoon. His stats are stellar – only allowing 9.3 yards per reception and a passer rating of 44.4. Although they don’t have same body type, his stats are pretty close to Trent McDuffie, who has transitioned really well to the NFL. Given the fact that he’s improved each year in college, I think Forbes can be a star in the NFL in the right situation once he develops a little more strength.
Risk factor: Low
Kelee Ringo — Georgia
Key Stat: 63 passer rating against
Recent Statistical Comparison: Kelvin Joseph (70.7 Coverage Grade, 55.9% reception percent, 14.3 yards per reception, 1 pass breakup)
Ringo isn’t the most athletic corner on this list, but Lance Zierlein has loved the physicality in his playstyle. He doesn’t really have a single standout stat but he’s a very consistent player who’s faced some of the best competition in college. Current Cowboys cornerback Kelvin Joseph was his closest similar statistical comparison, though we haven’t gotten a clear look at how he’s performed in the NFL yet since he’s played minimal snaps and been very inconsistent, so Ringo is probably a big question mark.
Risk factor: High
Tyrique Stevenson — Miami
Key Stat: 42.5% reception percent allowed
Recent Statistical Comparison: Jeff Gladney (72.7 Coverage Grade, 46.6% reception percent, 77.4 passer rating against)
Stevenson is the final cornerback on this list who’s been lately mocked in the second round. Another Viking, Jeff Gladney gets the comparison here since they both allowed a decently high passer rating against but a very low reception rate. Giving up 20.8 yards per reception explains the difference — he’s been susceptible to giving up the big play. Zierlein describes Stevenson as potentially being scheme-dependent so he may only be attractive for certain teams.
Risk factor: High
The bottom line
Overall, it’s near impossible to predict how well a cornerback will perform in the NFL given his college statistics, but there’s a lot of good options to choose from in this year’s draft. With Witherspoon likely out of the question at pick No. 23, Joey Porter Jr. and Deonte Banks could be the top options for the Vikings if they choose to take a cornerback in the first round.
Porter’s strength in man coverage makes him an immediate fit, and Banks’ athleticism is unmatched. Forbes could be a player the Vikings target if they choose to trade down (based on draft projections). However, if the volatility of the position scares them off and the Vikings elected to take a different route to filling up the cornerback room, it wouldn’t be surprising.
