At pick #30 corner a must!

[thisisnate]

I would be fine with a CB in round 1, but it's hardly a "must". Honestly at this point with Raji and Guion re-signed and a pretty weak ILB class, I would be perfectly fine with drafting pretty near any position in round 1.

 

[Poppa San]

Going into the draft with a "must pick player *** or position yyy" attitude is a surefire way to be picking early in the draft after a few years.

 

[thisisnate]

Going into the draft with a "must pick player *** or position yyy" attitude is a surefire way to be picking early in the draft after a few years.

Ain't that the truth

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Quentin Rollins looks to be very good. Looks really aware when the ball is in the air. Doesn't get that lost look a lot of corners do when the ball is coming.

Rollins has only played football for a single season and while putting up impressive numbers in 2014 hasn't faced elite competition with Miami (Ohio).

He's a talented guy but I think he would be a risky selection and it would probably take him some time to have an impact in the league.

 

[Ace]

Perryman doesn't fit the Packers needs as the defense needs someone to complement Barrington. Kendricks is the best three down ILB available.

YES YES YES. This is the guy I want @ 30.

 

[PikeBadger]

Yes to Kendricks or Anthony.

I don't like McKinney much at ILB; he lacks fluidity, chops steps getting through or around traffic, has a tendency to play high. Perryman is a question mark in my mind and therefore a "pass" in the first round. He's a downhill attacking player, strong, not especially athletic. I question his coverage skills and adaptability to a more nuanced defense.

Dawson is what the measurables say he is. His out-of-shape indifference in preparing for the Combine should be concerning. His coverage skills are suspect. He'll be a good player for somebody that wants a guy who can work 10 yds. on either side of the line of scrimmage on instincts and puts in 60 minutes of work per week.

Yes to Goldman. He's a hard working player with sufficient athleticism.

I question Phillips' motor, but would defer to Montogomery's opinion, whatever that might be.

Yes to Harold.

This is a guy who has no business playing with his hand in the dirt, where Virginia used him at times. His stand-up edge rushing is pretty exciting to watch. His measurables are nearly indistinguishable from Matthews' Combine numbers. As a rookie, he'd be a nice complement in spot duty on passing downs when Matthews moves to the middle. Peppers, Perry and Neal are all on the bubble for 2016. I await the wailing and gnashing of teeth if the Packers go this route.

Wouldn't bother me in the least if that's who he thinks fits best at that pick. Another 1st round defender works for me.

 

[Vrill]

I've said all along that we'll have the pick of the litter of ILB's at #30. Its just a matter of if TT wants one that high or not. Or if Marcus Peters is sitting there....it will be extremely hard to pass on Peters.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

For all those on the Kendricks bandwagon, College Football Focus now has an article (free) up examining the linebackers in this class. Best part is that they define in the article what a run "stop" is, for those that have been curious in the past. Paul Dawson, while terrible in workouts, is far and away the best looking linebacker by production in this class. Kendricks, while close to the top 10 in some categories, doesn't excel at anything in their charts.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/09/cff-sig-stats-linebackers/


A side note, in their articles on interior defenders, why isn't Henry Anderson being talked about as an option at #30? The guy had a combine performance that was amazing and his production on the field, against similar competition, was better than Leonard Williams' production. CFF has him as the fourth best run stopper and BEST pass rusher (when looking at Power 5 opponents only).

 

[jetfixer]

Dawson was the best player on the field in the ilb class as far as a natural talent. Does he have what it takes to be a true Pro, IDK. I said in another thread, I wouldn't mind trading back in the first and up in the second to get a combo of two good guys. The four or five LB's , Peters, Johnson, P.J. Williams, Collins, or Byron Jones. Goldman would make me happy in that combo too.

 

[HardRightEdge]

For all those on the Kendricks bandwagon, College Football Focus now has an article (free) up examining the linebackers in this class. Best part is that they define in the article what a run "stop" is, for those that have been curious in the past. Paul Dawson, while terrible in workouts, is far and away the best looking linebacker by production in this class. Kendricks, while close to the top 10 in some categories, doesn't excel at anything in their charts.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/09/cff-sig-stats-linebackers/

A side note, in their articles on interior defenders, why isn't Henry Anderson being talked about as an option at #30? The guy had a combine performance that was amazing and his production on the field, against similar competition, was better than Leonard Williams' production. CFF has him as the fourth best run stopper and BEST pass rusher (when looking at Power 5 opponents only).

It depends what you're looking for. Dawson is highly instinctual and anticipatory in the run game and a good pass rusher. He's the best in this class with the play in front of him. His anticipation and burst are good enough that the 40 time does not show up on tape going sideline to sideline from the box. If I was going to pick a nit, I'd say he's better at anticipating the hole and eluding blocks than shedding them, which can be an issue in 3-4.

However, lets take a look at the Texas game last November.

First, here are some post game notes:

http://www.gofrogs.com/sports/m-footbl/recaps/112714aaa.html

"Paul Dawson had a team-best 10 tackles. He has been in double figures in eight games this season and 13 of the last 18. Dawson had the stop on all three Texas plays on the Longhorns' 3-and-out on their second offensive series. He had the solo stop on five of Texas' first nine snaps, including two for loss."

All of that shows up on the tape:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Here are my concerns:

See 2:00: Pass coverage - hold - called
See 5:00: Pass coverage - hands to the face/hold - not called
See 7:15: Pass coverage - hands to the face - not called - interception
See 8:12: Pass coverage - hold - not called

Further, in looking at every snap in this game, I noted only once where he dropped deeper than about 5 yds. from the line of scrimmage. His job is playing the run; this goes to the PFF comment regarding scheme factors. His transition from run read to pass coverage is weak; he's consistently left flat footed.

I'd also be less concerned if the Packers already had an ILB who was strong in coverage. While Barrington is serviceable in coverage, we see him get exposed down the field. Barrington looks like the guy for the strong side, so in this way Dawson is somewhat redundant.

The attraction of Kendricks is he's an all-around player. I would characterize him as a flow-to-the-ball player as opposed to Dawson's attacking style, which suits the weak side position. His coverage instincts are far better than Dawson's, and he's less likely to be left in the dust when an NFL back runs a wheel route or an NFL tight end runs the seam. Kendrick's long speed is superior, and that will show up in the NFL game.

Dawson would likely make more splash plays and more mistakes. Kendricks would add some of that intangible glue to this defense that I perceive to be lacking.

 

[jetfixer]

Good break down there. I see a guy who had a very good game in that tape. One penalty was called on him, thats one too many. He may have gotten away with some, but it happens alot.
Now, if he isn't the best guy for our scheme, i'm ok for going to the right guy for what we need......i'm not sure who that is, I like Kendricks too.

 

[Ace]

It depends what you're looking for. Dawson is highly instinctual and anticipatory in the run game and a good pass rusher. He's the best in this class with the play in front of him. His anticipation and burst are good enough that the 40 time does not show up on tape going sideline to sideline from the box. If I was going to pick a nit, I'd say he's better at anticipating the hole and eluding blocks than shedding them, which can be an issue in 3-4.

However, lets take a look at the Texas game last November:

First, here are some post game notes:

http://www.gofrogs.com/sports/m-footbl/recaps/112714aaa.html

"Paul Dawson had a team-best 10 tackles. He has been in double figures in eight games this season and 13 of the last 18. Dawson had the stop on all three Texas plays on the Longhorns' 3-and-out on their second offensive series. He had the solo stop on five of Texas' first nine snaps, including two for loss."

All of that shows up on the tape:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Here are my concerns:

See 2:00: Pass coverage - hold - called
See 5:00: Pass coverage - hands to the face/hold - not called
See 7:15: Pass coverage - hands to the face - not called - interception
See 8:12: Pass coverage - hold - not called

Further, in looking at every snap in this game, I noted only once where he dropped deeper than about 5 yds. from the line of scrimmage. His job is playing the run; this goes to the PFF comment regarding scheme factors. His transition from run read to pass coverage is weak; he's consistently left flat footed.

I'd also be less concerned if the Packers already had an ILB who was strong in coverage. While Barrington is serviceable in coverage, we see him get exposed down the field. Barrington looks like the guy for the strong side, so in this way Dawson is somewhat redundant.

The attraction of Kendricks is he's an all-around player. I would characterize him as a flow-to-the-ball player as opposed to Dawson's attacking style, which suits the weak side position. His coverage instincts are far better than Dawson's, and he's less likely to be left in the dust when an NFL back runs a wheel route or NFL tight ends run seams. Kendrick's long speed is superior, and that will show up in the NFL game.

Dawson would likely make more splash plays and more mistakes. Kendricks would add some of that intangible glue to this defense that I perceive to be lacking.

Very good analysis.

If Dawson were better in coverage IMO he's be the run away #1 LB in this draft. I want a guy who can do it all and that to me is Kendricks. I don't need him to knock someone's head off, more than likely that's a penalty in today's NFL anyways, just be where you're supposed to be and make the play. That's what I want.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

My concern isn't about whether Kendricks or Dawson are better, it's about the fact that you could Kendricks in round 1 or a linebacker almost as good in round 2. Not sure you could say the same about corner (which is not a strong group this year) or dline.

 

[HardRightEdge]

He may have gotten away with some, but it happens alot.

Whether he was called for those penalties in that game isn't the main point. It's that he stands flat-footed 5 yards off the line of scrimmage and grabs guys as they go by. That's not a good look. And it might go some ways in explaining the high stop count...that's what he's positioned for.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Go through and look at the salaries that are paid to 3-4 ILBs. Unless they're REALLY good (as in, top-five LB good) teams don't pay them much. They don't get drafted very highly (unless they're projected to be REALLY good). There are no 3-4 ILBs that fit that mold in this class. People point to Kendricks as a likely pick but he's only mentioned because he's the best in a weak ILB class. PFF now charts every player in Division 1 (not for the public, only for NFL front offices) but yesterday one of the guys from PFF tweeted out that Kendricks ranked 19th among ILBs in this draft class in run stop percentage...that's not very good. Another PFF guy responded that Kendricks never really impressed him very much (and bear in mind, these guys have watched every single play from these players, not just a couple of games). They're not draft "experts" but you'd think that a first round linebacker would be one of the best in the nation, not "m'eh".

ILBs make some pretty good money.

http://overthecap.com/position/inside-linebacker/

 

[Sky King]

His teammate #54 looked as good, if not better.

 

[HardRightEdge]

A side note, in their articles on interior defenders, why isn't Henry Anderson being talked about as an option at #30? The guy had a combine performance that was amazing and his production on the field, against similar competition, was better than Leonard Williams' production. CFF has him as the fourth best run stopper and BEST pass rusher (when looking at Power 5 opponents only).

Anderson is 6'6", 294 lbs. That's the prototype build for 3-4 DE. But a 23 bench press at his Pro Day?

He's lauded for his effort; downgraded on stiffness and strength. Does he project to the NFL game? There is a serious question as to whether he'll just get handled by NFL OTs once they get their hands on him. And if we were to get overly wonky, 33 1/2" arms are a little stumpy for a man of that size...another issue relating to getting off NFL OT blocks.

If college productivity was sufficient, Ricky Elmore would be playing outside linebacker for the Packers right now.

 

[HardRightEdge]

His teammate #54 looked as good, if not better.

In that game, nearly so. Which, when you look at the following link, raises questions about the competition. It also serves to illustrate why college productivity is not enough; imagination needs to be applied as to how the player projects:

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=110033&draftyear=2015&genpos=ILB

#54 is 5'11", 217, and ran a 4.95 at his Pro Day, with 15 bench reps. He's got strong safety dimensions but he's too slow to play the position. UDFA, maybe.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Anderson is 6'6", 294 lbs. That's the prototype build for 3-4 DE. But a 23 bench press at his Pro Day?

He's lauded for his effort; downgraded on stiffness and strength. Does he project to the NFL game? There is a serious question as to whether he'll just get handled by NFL OTs once they get their hands on him. And if we were to get overly wonky, 33 1/2" arms are a little stumpy for a man of that size...another issue relating to getting off NFL OT blocks.

If college productivity was sufficient, Ricky Elmore would be playing outside linebacker for the Packers right now.

And yet his shuttle and jump were terrific and his production was better against similar opponents compared to Williams. If Williams was worse against the same guys, why is Williams suddenly projected to be better against nfl guys?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And yet his shuttle and jump were terrific and his production was better against similar opponents compared to Williams. If Williams was worse against the same guys, why is Williams suddenly projected to be better against nfl guys?

Anderson greatly benefitted from the scheme at Stanford. He lacks the power to play inside on the DL, is too easily handled by OL in the run game and gets occasionally blocked by a TE. He's a fourth rounder at best.

 

[thisisnate]

Anderson greatly benefitted from the scheme at Stanford. He lacks the power to play inside on the DL, is too easily handled by OL in the run game and gets occasionally blocked by a TE. He's a fourth rounder at best.

No no, every single scout on the planet is wrong. Much more likely.

 

[HardRightEdge]

And yet his shuttle and jump were terrific and his production was better against similar opponents compared to Williams. If Williams was worse against the same guys, why is Williams suddenly projected to be better against nfl guys?

Here's the Oregon St. game cut up on Anderson:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

He's quick off the ball, good footwork, finds angles, motors. His hand work is better than some scouts give him credit for. I could see him playing 3/5 technique. I don't see a second round pick, but I wouldn't mind the Packers picking him up in the middle rounds. He needs to get stronger to hold the point of attack...right now he's a finesse/gap player, which is a good start.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

No no, every single scout on the planet is wrong. Much more likely.

Just curious, who does this help? I mean, besides your sense of superiority?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Tyler Dunne article about Eric Kendricks:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...inebacker-prospect-b99479904z1-299514361.html

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Here's the Oregon St. game cut up on Anderson:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

He's quick off the ball, good footwork, finds angles, motors. His hand work is better than some scouts give him credit for. I could see him playing 3/5 technique. I don't see a second round pick, but I wouldn't mind the Packers picking him up in the middle rounds. He needs to get stronger to hold the point of attack...right now he's a finesse/gap player, which is a good start.

Look, I've got no vested interest in the guy personally. My question is why Leonard Williams is a top 3 player and Henry Anderson isn't even top 60. People say he lacks strength but his broad jump (explosion) was better than Williams', 3 cone drill was better than Williams', 20 yard shuttle was better than Williams' and his 10 yard dash was better than Williams' (please don't talk about 40s for dlinemen, how many times do you see a dline guy running 40 yards?). About the only "measurable" that Williams' beat Anderson in is arm length (and I still haven't heard any NFL dlinemen ever say that bench press is a core workout for them).

The two players played the same opponents and yet, against Power 5 teams, Henry Anderson was the best in this draft class (among interior dlinemen) at generating pressure on the passer and Leonard Williams was 30th. Williams was the best run stopper but you don't draft a guy in the top-5 to be a great run stopper. Anderson tests as being more explosive, more agile and better at changing directions and Anderson was more productive on the field (something that supposedly counts). Yet everyone loves Williams because of his potential or "upside".

Anderson greatly benefitted from the scheme at Stanford. He lacks the power to play inside on the DL, is too easily handled by OL in the run game and gets occasionally blocked by a TE. He's a fourth rounder at best.

Guys get drafted in the fourth round because they can play the run. Guys get drafted earlier because they can rush the passer. I would argue that it's much easier to teach a guy to defend the run than it is to teach him to rush the passer. Coming out of college, based solely on the field, Anderson is the much better pass rusher and Williams the better run defender (and before someone mentions something silly like Michael Sam, Anderson actually tested better than Williams while Sam bombed in workouts).