1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

What positions will be the focus in the 2013 draft?

Discussion in 'Draft Talk' started by rodell330, Dec 26, 2012.

  1. Whatthehellsgoinonouthere
    Offline

    Whatthehellsgoinonouthere Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    241
    Ratings:
    +42 / 66 / -8
    Packer Fan Since:
    1981
    I'm saying Te'O or Barrett Jones in the first. Then again I don't think either of them will be there, so maybe Ted moves back to the 2s, and picks up a 1st next year?
  2. HyponGrey
    Offline

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    South Jersey
    Ratings:
    +1,021 / 54 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1998
    Te'o will probably go before we have a shot at him, but why get a younger Hawk? You haven't heard? Jones injured his knee, he might even be there for our second the way his stock plummeted. I don't see us grabbing either. Depending on how the board shakes, I wouldn't mind trading back, but there should be plenty of strong value picks at our spot or close to it.
  3. tynimiller
    Offline

    tynimiller Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2012
    Messages:
    222
    Ratings:
    +63 / 5 / -3
    Packer Fan Since:
    1986
    Oddly enough I'm liking this option more and more depending what TT can get for our 1st round spot. Honestly while I don't feel this draft is loaded with 1st round talent worthy of the round...I do believe the middle or the meat of this draft could have high yield for a guy like TT and his draft savvy.
  4. HyponGrey
    Offline

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    South Jersey
    Ratings:
    +1,021 / 54 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1998
    Absolutely. I'm practically salivating over the value picks in the middle and even a few of the late guys in this draft.
  5. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    Commentary on Sherrod's recovery has been mixed.

    On the one hand, MM displayed his usual injury optimism when Sherrod was not not activated from PUP:

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/28/packers-wont-activate-derek-sherrod-from-pup-list/

    On the other hand, one reporter (I cannot recall which) commented that Sherrod was limping in practice before he was shelved, a full year after the injury.

    He was a good pick at that spot in the draft. I'm confident he would have bumped Newhouse had he not been injured. However, the athleticism margin between "good" and "questionable" at LT is not that great; even a small permanent impairment might be troublesome. His status for 2013 has to be viewed as tentative pending further information.
  6. ExpatPacker
    Offline

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,068
    Location:
    A Galaxy Far, Far Away
    Ratings:
    +388 / 7 / -0
    Getting a high 2nd plus another 3rd round pick making for 2 picks in both of those rounds would be just ducky.
  7. AJ Young
    Offline

    AJ Young Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2013
    Messages:
    6
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    2002
  8. HyponGrey
    Offline

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    South Jersey
    Ratings:
    +1,021 / 54 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1998
    I think I don't want him playing Center. Looks MUCH better as a Guard
  9. Shawnsta3
    Offline

    Shawnsta3 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    926
    Location:
    Manawa & Shawano, WI
    Ratings:
    +319 / 41 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1996
    With C Wood leaving I think it's all but a certainty now we address Safety in the top 2/3 rounds of the draft.

    I am hearing a lot about a speed guy that could cover the sidelines at the SS position on Green Bay Sports Talk Radio. I for the most part agree. Although bulk wouldn't hurt to pair with Morgan Burnett, speed could take away the sideline that guys like Kaepernick torched us with. Heck, that was the great thing about Nick Collins, his tremendous combo of speed and bulk.

    Matt Elam could be a great candidate. Tremendous speed. Only a junior. Blue chip college. Questions about his height keep the All-American from jumping in the top 10 range but hey, Nick Collins and Ed Reed are both only one inch taller than the 5"10er.
  10. texaspackerbacker
    Offline

    texaspackerbacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    347
    Ratings:
    +58 / 12 / -7
    I doubt we take a DB in the early part of the draft. There are a lot of other greater needs. IMO, D Line is at the top of the list, although O Line could be even more of a need if Bulaga is damaged goods and/or Sherrod can't contribute. There's also a shortage of wideouts, and a better TE would be helpful also. A lot has also be said that we could use LB help - maybe on that. Compared to all of that, the quality and depth at Corner and Safety ain't too bad.
  11. HyponGrey
    Offline

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    South Jersey
    Ratings:
    +1,021 / 54 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1998
    It's not the depth, it's the mold. Jennings and Burnett are the only guys with range and cover ability, and they're more like half range. McMillian is fast, but he's a box guy, do not like his coverage. Richardson is a low safety too. IMO we need one more guy with range, true (full) range and cover ability because if either Morgan or MD goes down we can't play 2 high Safety. I didn't like seeing Jennings this year, and unless we see some MAJOR development from the box boys, I won't like it next year either. DL is the only need IMO that trumps S. LB the starters are pretty much "set." RB and WR isn't value, TE is underrated.
  12. smuggler
    Offline

    smuggler Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    25
    Location:
    Okaloosa, FL
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1994
    I've got my heart set on Georgia DT John Jenkins, but I still think he goes before we pick in the first.
  13. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,738
    Ratings:
    +1,886 / 48 / -33
    After watching EDS at OC for the last part of the season and through the playoffs, I'm changing my tune about the need at OC. Unfortunately even after selecting OTs in the first rounds of two consecutive drafts just two and three drafts ago, IMO LT remains the biggest need on the OL. Maybe Newhouse will improve a lot on his 42.5 pressures surrendered, maybe Sherrod will return healthy enough to start at LT, maybe Bulaga will make the switch to LT and play as he did two seasons ago. But maybe not. So here we are again with a large question mark at the most critical pass blocking spot on the OL.

    But I no longer want to see an OC selected early in the draft. Here's what McGinn had to say about the performance of EDS in the playoff game vs. SF:
    That performance was in the biggest game EDS had started to date in his young career and it was against a very good opponent. In his season ending piece, McGinn noted EDS didn't screw up a shotgun snap and "seemed to handle the mental part of the game without a hitch. Will be hard to dislodge from the lineup." He's got room for improvement but I think they've found their starting OC for the next few seasons. Saturday was an "oozer", too often on running plays Newhouse is an oozer who doesn't finish. If EDS is the antithesis of that as McGinn says, he'll be a valuable asset in the middle of the OL. As I said backups inside are needed but I hope Thompson doesn't take an interior OL in the first three rounds and I don't think he will.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    While I'm certainly not in the "In TT We (Blindly) Trust" camp, there is one aspect of his draft philosophy I agree with: he does not draft high for C or G. It's an example where money and scheme converge...run a zone blocking scheme, avoid paying up for road graders, pick "finesse" players who come cheaper, and apply the savings elsewhere. Here's a complete list of his draft history at C and G:

    2011, 6th. round, Schlauderaff (G)
    2009, 4th. round, Lang (G/T)
    2009, 5th. round, Meredith (G/T)
    2008, 4th. round, Sitton (G)
    2007, 4th. round, Barbre (G)
    2006, 2nd. round, Colledge (G)
    2006, 3rd. round, Spitz (G)
    2006, 5th. round, Moll (G/T)
    2005, 5th. round, Coston (C)
    2005, 7th. round, Whitticker (G)

    The 2006 draft, heavy in guards, was a byproduct of (1) letting go of Rivera and Wahle in 2005 and (2) the wash out of O'Dwyer and Klemm who were acquired to replace them.

    I think EDS was a pleasant surprise this past season. He's adequate, and might improve. We'll probably need to put a second round tender on him. We'll likely draft a C, but not in the first 3 rounds. If I'm not mistaken, Garth Gerhardt, a late season PS pickup, is the only other guy on the full roster who has experience snapping the ball (Goode doesn't count). It seems we might want mid-to-low round depth at the position.

    One way to set priorities is to ask the question: If everybody came back healthy and nobody else is released (which admittedly won't be the case), which positions do not have a 3-down player who has proven himself to be at least adequate"?

    So the baseline starting point would be (1) safety, (2) prototype 3-4 DE (not the NT variety) and (3) TB for best available players at positions of need in the upper rounds.

    TE pops toward the top of the list if Finley is released.

    There are so many injury and performance question marks at ILB, it should probably be in the initial list anyway.

    If Sherrod is still limping around, move OT up the list.

    We could need 2 NT/DE by 2014...if the plan is to not resign Raji, NT moves up the list.

    If we're dumb enough to 2nd.-round-tender Shields and somebody signs him away at a price we can't match, move CB up the list.

    I just hope we don't see a repeat of last season...Perry, Worthy, Daniels...these guys don't look like 3-4 players.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Whatthehellsgoinonouthere
    Offline

    Whatthehellsgoinonouthere Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    241
    Ratings:
    +42 / 66 / -8
    Packer Fan Since:
    1981
    Why get a younger Hawk? Don't care younger or older, I just want my inside linebackers to be able to tackle and cover, I don't want a younger anything, I want a BETTER player at Hawk's spot. Better question is, with the way this girlfriend fiasco shaked out with Te'O, and they he's flying down the board why WOULDN'T you draft him if he's there?
  16. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,738
    Ratings:
    +1,886 / 48 / -33
    Perhaps because there is a player rated higher than him on the Packers' draft board? Perhaps because they view him as being similar to Hawk? And that may be the case because they studied his game against Alabama. (I only watched two of his games this season and as I've said I'm not a "draftnic" who really studies potential draftees but he did not help himself IMO in that game.)
  17. PikeBadger
    Offline

    PikeBadger Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2013
    Messages:
    188
    Ratings:
    +51 / 3 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1963
    Miami has picks 42,54 in the second round. I think Cincinatti has picks 39,53 in the 2nd.

    I think Thompson may try to work a trade with both of these teams. Though I suspect he might want to do something on the order of our 1st and 5th for the two 2nds, 6th, and 7th. That way he ends up with 2 extra picks in the exchange. I still think we are going to receive compensation for Pat Lee. His compensation package wasn't large, but he started 7 games for the Raiders.
  18. Shawnsta3
    Offline

    Shawnsta3 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    926
    Location:
    Manawa & Shawano, WI
    Ratings:
    +319 / 41 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1996
    It appears so far at the combine that the Packers have been looking at ILB's and S's closely. It is a deep draft for Safety's and we all know that one famous ILB that is available. Betting one or the other happens in the first 2 rounds.
  19. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,055
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,308 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    John Jenkins...down to 346 lbs. at 6' 3 7/8" at the Combine.

    I watched most of the DL running and agility drills, but I didn't see him. Mayock didn't even mention his absence. Did I miss something?
  20. Packerboy95
    Offline

    Packerboy95 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2013
    Messages:
    7
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    1st. Matt Elam S
    2nd. Justin Pugh LT
    3rd. Christine Michael RB
    4th. Brian Schwenke C
    5th. DE
    5th. OLB
    6th. Wr
    7th. DE, DT, or OLB
  21. HyponGrey
    Offline

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    South Jersey
    Ratings:
    +1,021 / 54 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1998
    Limiting Rounds to positions is always bad practice. Michael is a bum, no thanks. Maybe a bit high for Pugh, and a bit low for Schwenke.

Share This Page