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!
    Dismiss Notice

Pack should take Gin at #16

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by starpass, Apr 13, 2007.

  1. starpass

    starpass Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    Messages:
    144
    Ratings:
    +0
    Gin is both a KR and WR...he would fill both roles nicely...no need for Moss if the pack takes Gin...he should be there at 16...I watched ESPN tonight and the Cal Running Back is falling back in the draft...worries about nagging injuries, etc....SO...I am calling it here First...GB take Gin from Ohio State at #16...and if they do...this forum owes me an Old Style
     
  2. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    I disagree, we should take Rum or Vodka before Gin. Anyways, it's not exactly an earth shattering prediction as this has been discussed over and over. I personally would pass on Ginn.

    I hear "we need to stretch the field" but you don't need a super fast guy to do that. Moss can stretch the field but he's not overly fast. Same thing with Chad Johnson. Whether you run a 4.3 or a 4.7 you are pretty damn fast. Ginn doesn't have the craftiness like some of the others do. The NFL isnot a track meet
     
  3. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Moss did run a 4.3 I believe. So he's pretty close to overly fast. He has long strides.

    For some reason I think the Packers take Greg Olsen if he's there. If not then I think Lynch or trade down. Right now though I am getting a feeling that Olsen is the pick which would be okay by me. TE is probably our weakest position.
     
  4. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    (Dam you Pyle!!! You beat me too it!!!LOLOLOL!!!)
    I DO think we should take Gin.
    Then follow up in the next round and take "Tonic!" I think they would make a great ONE TWO punch! (And a SPIKED punch at that!!!) :rotflmao:
     
  5. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    I don't think TE is our weakest position, Bubba isn't a huge threat, but he isn't in the class of of Safety or Running Back issues. I will be really disappointed in it is Olsen, this is a pretty deep class as far as TE.
     
  6. flapackfan

    flapackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    379
    Ratings:
    +0
    You really think it is a deep class at tight end this year? Im not much of an evaluator of college tight ends but i was not all that impressed with any of them. In my opinion, if we have a chance of drafting a tight end who can be a dynamic receiving threat as good as one of the top 5 - 7 tight ends in the league, draft him. Otherwise, last thing we need to do is waste a pick on another mediocre tight end since we've tried and failed at that.

    Other than tight end at our 16th spot, i dont like the idea of keeping the pick. If we go running back or receiver, we could get about equal value in the early/mid second round. Im not big on using first round picks on "decent" or "project" defensive backs who arent ready to start from day one so i say, either draft a tight end who will make a difference or trade the pick. Maybe trade up and try and get one of the top safeties, top cornerbacks, Adrian Peterson, stud offensive lineman.

    I definitely dont think we should take Ginn. He is too small and is not a great route runner. His legs are like sticks. Of course you're gonna be fast if you are that small, thats how it works :) If you saw any OSU games last year you know that in crunch time, they were throwing to Anthony Gonzalez because he is a good route runner. I think Gonzalez might turn out to be a better pro anyway.
     
  7. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    There are several TEs in this draft else than Olsen that may develop into pretty good NFL TEs.
     
  8. flapackfan

    flapackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    379
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'd trade our 1st rounder and try to get a late first and an extra 3rd rounder. Take the best running back or offensive lineman or linebacker available in the first round. Maybe we can get Bowe, Jarret or meachem in the second round or trade the pick for Randy Moss(whatever). Take (2) tight ends in round 3 and hope one of them develops. Get some more D-line/O-line depth in round 4 & 5.

    But there are just too many decent receivers in the draft to use it on Ginn @ 16 in my opinion.
     
  9. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    Check out this thread on these boards:
    http://www.packerforum.com/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8825

    :whippin: It's obvious you are far from the first to suggest Gin for GB. I've seen several mock drafts across the net having GB take Gin.

    If you want to make a bold prediction then you need to call something that no one else has. How about this, correctly predict GB's 3rd round choice (position and player). I mention the position because TT could trade up or down in that round. If you are able to correctly make that prediction, then you have definitely earned yourself a beer my friend.

    GO PACK GO!!!
     
  10. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree, but the problem is that none have the speed of Olsen. The next fastest guy is D-III Michael Allan (4.67 if I remember correctly), and he is at best a 2-3 year project.

    That is what the Pack need more than anything, because Bubba can be an adequate 2nd TE option and he is a good blocker. We need a TE who is fast, and can stretch the field, and Olsen is the best in that regard.

    Chicago and Minny both run Cover 2's, and since the Lions HC came over from Tampa Bay, I wouldn't be surprised if he ran a version of the Cover 2. That style of play calls for us to have a fast TE to exploit the middle of the field. A Zach Miller or Ben Patrick wouldn't allow us to exploit the middle like a Greg Olsen would.

    Last game of the season versus the Bears, I remember Holiday exploiting the middle in a couple of his catches, and they were for big gains. I think Olsen would be a wonderful fit, and he's the one I'm hoping the Packers get.

    I've soured on Ginn, but if the Packers staff get him then I'll be convinced they think his injury isn't a huge factor. The Packers still need playmakers, and to get a player with the playmaking potential of Ginn at 16 is something that is too good to pass up IMO.
     
  11. robkeg

    robkeg Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    38
    Ratings:
    +0
    If we stay with our pick at 16 I believe the guy should be an immediate impact player. I am staying with my first overall statement that if Lynch or Olsen are not there trade down and get more early to midround picks that can translate into deepth.
     
  12. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0
    Although Ginn would fill a couple of team needs, I would make sure to check out his health situation. He apparently dropped out of his pro day activities this week due to an ankle injury. If this is the same injury or one related to the one he suffered in the title game (which was almost 3 months ago) it may be an indication of a chronic problem.
     
  13. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Looking at Ginn here smacks of the same trap we got ourselves in when A. Carroll was chosen in the first round.

    Had all kinds of speed but by most accounts was considered a reach.

    The ONLY reason we would reach for this guy at #16 is our NEED for a speedy playmaker.

    IMO that is SCARY as hell.

    From all accounts this draft is not as strong as last years (which was considered one of the strongest in years) which would be obvious for all to see if Ginn was, in fact, the 16th best player in it.

    Because we cannot expect to find the quality in later rounds that was there last year we sure as hell don't need to blow another first round pick.

    Ginn could turn out to be great but the chances are greater that others will go on to have better NFL careers. I want one of those. I don't care what position he plays.

    I would like to add that a lot of the draft sites I see make their predictions and fit players into slots based on that teams NEEDS. It's obvious when you read the little blurbs that justify their thinking. It usually always pertains to a weakness the team has.

    Any draft site that has Ginn at #16 is doing exactly that.
     
  14. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    Here is some analysis on Olsen, so because I don't have much of a life :rubeyes: , I decided to watch the FSU/Miami (yep and FSU fan) game late last night cause I couldn't sleep. To basically watch Olsen, and although he may run the 40 fast, he doesn't appear really fast on the field. Plus that was a horrendous effort in blocking in that game. Didn't look like a game changer to me.

    From NFL.com

    Positives: Has a good frame with adequate muscle definition in the chest and arms, good bubble, quadriceps and calves … Has the long arms to extend for the ball away from the frame and can carry at least another 15 pounds of bulk with no loss in quickness … Demonstrates very good balance and body control, with good timed speed and quickness for his position … Shows good vision throughout the route and has the flexibility to make adjustments on the field, once he locates soft areas in the zone … Has soft, natural hands and loose hips to adjust to the off-target throws … Good game player who competes for the ball in a crowd and has good playmaking ability when he maintains concentration on the field … Uses his size and strength well when extending his arms to keep defenders off his body … His initial step lets him gain advantage on the opponent and his loose hips let him redirect when the route progression is impeded … Flashes the lower-body agility and feet to plant and drive quickly out of his breaks … Best when used on screens and fades, as he has the size and strength to power through the jam and enough quickness to get open underneath … Shows the feel to adjust and uncover and effective ball reaction to look the pass in … Big target over the middle who does a very good job of adjusting to the ball in flight … Shows the speed, body control and timing to catch the ball in stride and is alert enough to settle in the zone's soft spots … Much more effective when he reads coverages, as he can isolate the linebacker … Has enough timed speed and balance to pull away from second-level defenders … Much more effective when he uses his size and strength to ward off the jam … Shows very good overall flexibility to adjust to the low throws and is alert coming back to the play when the quarterback is pressured … Effective when working over the middle than on isolated routes … Physical receiver who will use his body to shield the ball from defenders … Does a good job of reading the flight of the ball to get under it and shows true courage sacrificing his body to get to the ball in traffic … Very good at breaking arm tackles. He runs with good body lean to gain yardage after contact … Has the straight-line acceleration and run vision to power through the trash … Good position blocker with the balance and lower-body strength to gain movement off the snap.

    Negatives: Because of a lack of explosion, he does not appear as fast as his timed speed indicates, but he has the agility to adjust and get under the pass once he is on the move … Needs to do a better job of recognizing the blitz and pass rush, as he appears slow at times to slide in pass protection … Must show better urgency taking angles to block along the perimeter (slow to kick out and block for the outside running game) … Has good short-area quickness and strength to power through a hold-up, but needs to be more active with his hands to get a clean release … Will sometimes be late into his route when he fails to use his hands to defeat the press … Lacks the vertical explosion to get deep consistently, but can power through arm tackles to gain additional yardage after contact … While Olsen is good at uncovering, he needs to do it with better consistency, as he tends to run to spots on the field (see 2006 Houston and Virginia Tech games) … The staff says that Olsen has excellent field vision, but when used in critical situations on third-down plays, he lacks consistency, converting only 7 of 30 third-down plays over the past two seasons … His focus is erratic at times, as he has the natural hands to reach and pluck away from his frame, but has had several drops because he prefers to let the ball absorb into his body … Has good vertical agility, but needs to improve his timing, as he had 16 passes deflected out of his hands over the past two seasons (see 2006 North Carolina and Maryland games and 2005 Florida State and Georgia Tech contests) … Needs to show a better understanding for gaining leverage on pulls and sweeps (gets too erect in his stance and needs to sink his hips better).

    Sorry I am not an Olsen fan whatsoever in the first round (*EDIT @ 16 that is, late in the round yes)... to me Miller is a better value at TE comming out with Chandler not so far behind.
     
  15. flapackfan

    flapackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2006
    Messages:
    379
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good find Pack93. Looks like Olsen just isnt going to do it. I dont like the idea of drafting the best tight end available just because we need one. I'd rather get a good player at another position who will upgrade our team and try to get a free agent tight end after the draft or maybe trade for one if possible. Ginn is too short, bottom line. We have short guys in Driver & Jennings already. Lets get someone with good size next time.

    If only we could somehow manage to get Calvin Johnson. I think with Johnson on our team, our need for a game breaking tight end would go down significantly since he could play the slot on third down and make some of those plays usually designated for tight ends down the middle. Then again, i wouldnt exactly want to cut that 55 million dollar check to a guy who never played an NFL down. Probably rather have Moss :)
     
  16. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good point, but I really only stated that fact in order to point out that starpass is far from the first one to predict Ginn at #16 for the Pack. Basically it takes a lot more to earn a :packbeer: in my book.
     
  17. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is the weakest class of Tight Ends maybe in this decade. There is only one elite guy. After Olsen there is pretty much nobody in this class that would even peak at Day 1 last year.
     
  18. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah, but that doesn't mean there are not some guys out there. I really like Patrick from Deleware.
     
  19. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    In my opinion, there are about 4 to 6 decent TE in this draft, and in my opinion, Olsen is not elite. He only scored one touchdown last year, Miami was down and their offense was struggling, but I think he workout numbers don't match his production. The two stouter defenses he faced, he had 4 catches for 21 yards against FSU and Va Tech.
     
  20. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    I also really like Patrick. I would take him in round 2.

    Who are the four to six guys? Just about every scout has stated that it's a weak class. Last years was much stronger with guys like Leonard Pope, Marcedes Lewis, Vernon Davis, Anthony Fasano, Dominique Byrd, and Joel Klopfenstein...

    This years has really three and maybe four that will go on Day 1. Olsen is definitely the elite TE of this years class. How can you not say he is head and shoulders the top TE in the Draft?

    I don't consider him one of the 10 best players in the Draft overall but he's clearly the best TE prospect.
     
  21. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    Don't disagree that his is the top of the TE class, but to call him an elite TE prospect is a stretch.

    Guys that should come off the board by 3rd or early 4th.
    Greg Olsen Miami (Fla.)
    Zach Miller Arizona State
    Ben Patrick Delaware
    Scott Chandler Iowa
    Matt Spaeth Minnesota

    Edit * Forgot one. Martrez Milner, Georgia
     
  22. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0
    Not trying to sugarcoat the negatives of Olsen mentioned in Packer93z post above, but it seems like a lot of them could be corrected through proper coaching, conditioning and motivation. I think the Packers coaches could hold up their end of the bargain, the question is would Olsen?
     
  23. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    Agreed that they are correctable, other than the burst, but that is why I don't like him at 16. If we target him, move down and try and grab him. Otherwise Miller, Patrick or Chandler is a better value than Olsen at 16.

    Everyone had Miller rated top of the class until he ran his 40, then all of a sudden Olsen goes screaming up the charts because he ran a 4.5x 40. Not based on production, to me Olsen has Kiperitis.
     
  24. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Miller and Olsen were graded very similar before the combine. It was kind of split. Olsen is by no means a perfect prospect but I think he's better than Bubba Franks coming out and the Pack took him fairly high and Bubba was regarded as a top 20 pick.

    I also don't think you can look at numbers in college football. If so Ken Dorsey would've been the #1 pick in the Draft instead of a 7th rounder. You have to have all the physical tools plus the production. Also Miami wasn’t exactly the greatest of situations to be in last year either.

    I think Olsen is a top 20 pick. If he falls out of that top 20 range I will be very shocked. If the Pack can trade down and get him I am all for it but I think they’ll take him at #16 as Cincy is in need for a TE as well and they pick right behind us. It’s more of just a hunch really. I want Lynch but my gut is telling me Olsen if he’s there.
     
  25. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    There's no doubt we NEED a decent TE. If Bubba would get his you know what together, we would be OK. But we sure can't depend on that happening. Look how big the TE's were in 96! Chumura and Jackson were always there to take the dump off if Favre was in trouble. They were a VERY important part of their game.
    But i don't think we should use our first round pick on one, as i don't see anyone "great" out there.
     

Share This Page