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 or

    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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Ha-Ha Clinton Dix Overrated?

Discussion in 'Draft Talk' started by D3uc3, Apr 13, 2014.

?

Who would be the best fit for the Packers Defense at Safety

  1. Ha Ha Clinton Dix

    19.2%
  2. Calvin Pryor

    50.0%
  3. Jimmie Ward

    7.7%
  4. Deone Buchannon

    19.2%
  5. Ed Reynolds

    3.8%
  6. Ahmad Dixon

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    One that's good now? That's too much hindsight. There were a couple of good mid round FS prospects who never really panned out, but the draft is all about the prospects. Something this draft lacks IMO
     
  2. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,244
    Ratings:
    +457
    So we trust the guy to cover fast, shifty receivers that can break either direction (ie., slot corners don't have the boundary to help them) but we can't trust him to provide help over the top? I think you might be putting too much stock into 40 times. I agree that being a good corner doesn't automatically make you a good safety. However, one of the other major jobs of the free safety is being a good tackler, since they're the last line of defense. The post I was responnding to said that Hyde was more of a strong safety, so one can assume that he's a solid tackler (since strong safeties need to be strong tacklers).
     
  3. Sunshinepacker

    Sunshinepacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    1,244
    Ratings:
    +457
    He was a rookie playing in a terrible defense?
     
  4. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Last rookie CB we threw in the slot on a terrible defense didn't do too bad. LOL seriously though, that's tough to argue, but you've still got to win your matchup. It could be argued that Hyde did not consistently.
     
  5. brandon2348

    brandon2348 GO PACK GO!

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,524
    Ratings:
    +396
    Yes. Post draft grading which is generally 3 years down the road is obviously much more important then any pre-draft grade. I could see easily 3-4 safeties in this draft that could become regular starters especially with the need at the position across the league and maybe even a Pro-Bowler(my money is on Brooks).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Well, while it´s fun talking about the potential of possible prospects before the draft the only way to evaluate a draft class is by doing it in hindsight after three or four years. Once a guy is drafted I don´t care about what was said about players by draft experts around the country anymore, the only thing that matters to me is production on the field. A player that doesn´t pan out in the league doesn´t do anything good for a team, no matter if the guy was considered a mid round pick with potential in a deep group.

    Taking a look at the last five drafts the best way to add an impact free safety is to add one within the first two rounds. If the three guys graded as first or second round picks this year turn into solid FS this draft would turn out to be at least average for the position.
     
  7. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Once again, the main responsibility of a free safety isn´t to cover a specific receiver but to help out CBs and LBs over the top. While having some speed is essential to play the position the most important thing while playing FS is having great instincts. No player would be able to cover the entire field when being fooled by a QB constantly. So while Hyde should some promise as a rookie playing the slot (although he wasn´t great by any means) that doesn´t mean he would be able to translate into a solid FS.

    Another thing nobody has brought up in that discussion is that a FS actually makes all the calls in the secondary. With all the miscommunications that have happened in the Packers secondary over the last few seasons I really want to have a guy playing there who has already made that calls over a period of time.

    It´s not about the 40 time at all. Straight line speed isn´t a good indicator in judging the potential of a FS.
     
  8. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    You're trying to compare apples to oranges. Perceived talent/depth will always be higher than what the actual talent/depth turns out to be, no team expects their picks to bust. As you said, we won't be able to evaluate for a few years. Unfortunately after a few years of DEVELOPMENT these kids are completely different players. I'm looking at the perceived talent/depth going into the draft (what we think now), and compared to the last 5 years (what we thought then, not what we know now) the perceived talent/depth at the FS position is below average. Apples to apples, perception to perception. Prospects are to prospects, not finished NFL players, because you can't compare the speculative to the real.
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2014
  9. brandon2348

    brandon2348 GO PACK GO!

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,524
    Ratings:
    +396
    I'm seeing Brock Vereen's name thrown around by several "so called experts" as a possible safety option for Pack. Vereen's combine numbers look great but his film doesn't really match IMO, however a lot of it is him playing in the slot. He is a high character guy so I could see why some are projecting him as a Packer option in the draft. I really don't see him as a viable option at free safety. I would rather see Hyde back there.
     
  10. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    Terrence Brooks really stands out for me. Like your idea of trading back and getting another pick in the first 100. And TT seems to be better picking in rounds 2 through 5 anyway, with all due respect to Clay Matthews where trading up was brilliant. Anyway I like your ananlysis. And intelligence at Safety and ILB is a must have. Finally, you're spot on about the new rules. A finesse guy at safety is better than a pure hitter.
     
  11. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    You've got it right. In my perfect world we get Mosley or Shazier Round 1 and hopefully Brooks Round 2. Actually in a perfect world we'd get both Pryor and Shazier. Mosley scares me with his injury history. Had enough of that in GB.
     
  12. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    I don't think TT would ever admit it but I don't think he would ever take a S or CB in Round 1. I expect he'll draft Shazier Round 1, or if it looks like Shazier will slip to early Round 2, trade back and get another pick. A lot of this is going to depend on how many QBs are taken in Round 1. It would be to GB's advantage if that number is high, but I've seen draft boards with only Bortles going Round 1.
     
  13. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Well, taking a look at the perceived depth of the free safety position since 2009 this year´s class is average IMO. While there were more talented guys available in 2013 and especially in 2010 there´s more depth available next week than there was in 2009 and 2011. The 2012 class has to be considered as one of worst in history.
     
  14. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Vereen´s actually one of the guys I could imagine working out pretty well at free safety.
     
  15. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    IMO that would be the worst case scenario.
     
  16. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Where do you want the Packers to line up Shazier??? I don´t think that the number of QBs taken in the first round will have any influence on the Packers pick at #21.
     
  17. SoonerPack

    SoonerPack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2014
    Messages:
    389
    Ratings:
    +317
    I just can't see only one QB going in the first. The NFL is 100% a QB driven league and there is always a team that makes a "are you kidding me" move i.e. Ponder to the Vikes a few years ago. Plus when you throw in a Johhny Football and a guy like Bridgewater who does have some pretty impressive tape I can't help but see low end 2 and all the way up to 4 going early (a lot of people are talking up Carr). Well at the very least I am selling myself on this so the first round will play out perfectly for us!! GPG!
     
  18. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    Line up Shazier at ILB. As for QBs, if there are three or four taken before #21 makes it more likely a guy like Pryor or Mosley would be available at #21. I like Mosley, and he IS an ILB, just concerned about injury history. Shazier is very athletic, and while he is an OLB, I could see him moving to the inside where we don't have anyone close to "athletic".
     
  19. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    I hope you're right and there are 4 QBs taken before #21. Might make it more likely that Mosley or Pryor are there.
     
  20. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    Shazier isn´t a good fit to play ILB in a 3-4 defense. He won´t be able to get off blocks by offensive lineman getting to the second level.
     
  21. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    Good point. Well then address safety round 1 and maybe a guy like Borland is around in Round 3. Stronger play from the ILBs will take some pressure off the CBs and especially the Safeties if we can consistently generate a pass rush across the "front" seven.
     
  22. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    6,086
    Ratings:
    +2,672
    I agree the ILB position needs an upgrade, I´m not sold on Borland either though. If we don´t address it in the first round with Mosley I would like Thompson to take a gamble on Smallwood. I dont expect the ILBs to be part of the pass rush constantly though.
     
  23. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    2012 was BAD.
     
  24. thequick12

    thequick12 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2014
    Messages:
    176
    Ratings:
    +34
    Lamin Barrow would be a good pick at ILB in say the fourth round. He would challenge Hawk and Jones to start from day one.
     
  25. Joe Nor Cal Packer

    Joe Nor Cal Packer Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    249
    Ratings:
    +68
    Yeah I wouldn't spend more than a 3rd round pick on Borland. Jones was showing some signs of coming to life late last year. Hawk is always going to be Hawk. I don't know about Smallwood. What is his first name and school?
     

Share This Page