True. As I posted last night, when our turn came up my entire top 6 on my overall / regardless of position picks was available.
Packers pick #1---Kenny Clark UCLA DL
- Thread starter longtimefan
- Start date
True. As I posted last night, when our turn came up my entire top 6 on my overall / regardless of position picks was available.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
I'll make one additional observation which might excuse Thompson a bit.
The shot of the draft room showed McCarthy grinning ear to ear, while Thompson was huddled over his computer even though the day's work was done. Asked where Clark will play, Thompson responded, "I don't know, I just draft them." His tone was not exactly enthusiastic, not uncommon for Thompson in any case, but perhaps a tad defensive.
While the head coach may not have the final decision, it would be idiocy to think he does not have input. Perhaps this pick was the outcome of McCarthy having particular enthusiasm for the kid.
The shot of the draft room showed McCarthy grinning ear to ear, while Thompson was huddled over his computer even though the day's work was done. Asked where Clark will play, Thompson responded, "I don't know, I just draft them." His tone was not exactly enthusiastic, not uncommon for Thompson in any case, but perhaps a tad defensive.
While the head coach may not have the final decision, it would be idiocy to think he does not have input. Perhaps this pick was the outcome of McCarthy having particular enthusiasm for the kid.
Vrill
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,803
- Reaction score
- 137
Maybe this was a McCarthy pick then....
mradtke66
Cheesehead
Well i think daniels is a perfect 3-4 de. I call them the bowling ball types. Shorter and over 300 pounds. The ones with burst are very destructive. They get push. They are burners who get a decent rush from the position... Solid against the run. Just like a 4-3 dt??? Yep.
Clark is a slightly bigger daniels who has great leverage... Boom. Done deal.
The wrestling thing. I see the leverage comparison thing. Its good technical stuff... But i see a guy who beat every other guys his size in his state. 1 on 1.... That means lts wont be able to handle him 1 on 1. He will make plays until they give the tackle help. And thats huge!!## opens up everyone else...big time...
Add that to daniels and our hall of fame olbs... Its going to be dominating.
*Sigh*
You're getting your linemen confused again.
3-tech DTs from a 4-3 are not necessarily good run defenders. They are more pass rushers, though it's pretty close to an even split, maybe 60/40. The setup in most modern 4-3s is to have the 1-tech NT hold the center and one guard. This is done more by positioning, though he has to be strong enough so that the play-side offensive lineman cannot handle him too easily. The basic premise is that you need two guys for the one defensive lineman because if you don't, he has positional leverage to make the tackle.
This in turn sets up the 3-technique to have a 1-on-1 with the other guard's outside shoulder. In pass sets, he's slightly more outside and can use quickness and speed. In the run game, the same basic ideal applies as the one technique. He's positioned such that we dictate who has to block him, because if you don't, he's in fine position to make the tackle.
0-tech NTs work a little bit by position (completely occupying the center) but more by being good. It's not enough to just occupy the center--if this is the case, the offense is happy, because now the guards can pick off the ILBs easily. You want the NT to be strong and laterally quick enough to again force both the center and playside guard to account for him, else have him in perfect position to make the tackle.
Which is the setup of the lineman's example of "they pay the other guys too." The biggest thing offensive linemen are taught in the run game is "your man does not cross your face." Defensive linemen are taught to "cross you man's face." And the collisions happen.
Now regarding length/height.
The reason you want to longer and taller as an edge defender is because tackle are long and tall. Yes, players can succeed without length (Daniels as a 5-tech end in base, James Harrison as OLB) but these guys are more exception than rule.
If you are short, those long arms that are coveted in OTs get to you first. You are now at a disadvantage. Now comes the swim/rip/other counter-move. Again, if you are short, you're at a disadvantage, because you have to counter sooner and it gives the OT more time to recover and counter your counter.
At the inside, it's less about speed and more about quick. DTs/NTs are close to the centers and guards. The pass protection sets are close to the line of scrimmage. It's more of a wrestling match and less of a boxing match like it is on the edge. This is why bowling-ball guys (typically) thrive inside and struggle on the outside.
Also, if you're short, it's harder to bat balls at the line of scrimmage ala JJ Watt. This is actually an important, if underrated job of ends in the 3-4. That height is was is suppose to help take away short-middle passing. If there is a giant man in the way, quarterbacks will either not throw it or have to lob it up and over them. This gives your linebackers and safeties more time to come up and make a play on the ball/man.
Sunshinepacker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2013
- Messages
- 5,766
- Reaction score
- 896
I'm still surprised that the Packers took Clark over Butler. Seriously doubt there's any chance of this happening but I would love for the Packers to put themselves into position to draft Chris Jones, Jonathan Bullard or Sheldon Day tonight. If the Packers stay put then I'd love to see them draft Jerell Adams in the second.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
And Maybe McCarthy has been given more authority. He's been pretty adamant about picking up some free agents before the day is done. You would not have heard those kinds of "we will" statements in the past as pertains to personnel.
Vrill
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,803
- Reaction score
- 137
With an outside chance of it being a WR too I bet (maybe even a TE?) - aka another pass catcher either way.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I would be shocked if the #2 pick is used on a DL. Have to guess its on a linebacker or OL. I like Jerell, but again, a #2 on him and on the TE position, would not be where I would want to see the #2 pick used.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I am not as comfortable with our "bottom 4" WR's as most, so a WR would't be a bad pick in my mind.
Sunshinepacker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2013
- Messages
- 5,766
- Reaction score
- 896
Why? Dline is deep and if a better prospect at dline is available then you should take the better player. Doesn't make sense to take a linebacker or OL just because, especially when you think about the fact that the Packers really only have ONE good, proven dlineman in Daniels.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
On the subject of ILBs, it's worth noting that technically the only ILBs on the roster are Ryan and Barrington. Officially, there's also Joe Thomas who I would not consider even an adequate dime backer and Bradford (where it is not clear what he is if anything).
My own opinion is that an ILB needs to be drafted at least for depth, even if a position upgrade is not seen as necessary by the brain trust. There are a few decent candidates in the middle to low rounds, even tweener SS types though that would be a shift off the defensive evolution glacier. Failure to draft at least one or pick up a vet in the post draft cut downs I would regard as a dereliction of duty, whereas that outcome would not surprise me in the least, with a handful of UDFAs brought into camp instead.
My own opinion is that an ILB needs to be drafted at least for depth, even if a position upgrade is not seen as necessary by the brain trust. There are a few decent candidates in the middle to low rounds, even tweener SS types though that would be a shift off the defensive evolution glacier. Failure to draft at least one or pick up a vet in the post draft cut downs I would regard as a dereliction of duty, whereas that outcome would not surprise me in the least, with a handful of UDFAs brought into camp instead.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vrill
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2011
- Messages
- 1,803
- Reaction score
- 137
I think if Chris Jones were there when we pick in the 2nd, it might be hard to pass him up.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Why not? Clark was a "just because" pick. A NT who doesn't rush the passer quits on you on short notice, the next best option is suspended, so you go get a NT who holds the point and doesn't rush the passer, good for 20% of your snaps. It's not like Clark is going provide any scheme flexibility at DE or in nickel. That's not to say it won't be tried.
tynimiller
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 14,001
- Reaction score
- 4,920
If that happens I say gamble on Jaylon Smith in the 3rd and holy crap if both heal up, could have Clay, Smith and Jack lining up in 2017....
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
The more I think about it, the more this looks like a "stop Adrian Peterson" pick. They did win the division, and their management and coaching upgrades are showing. Actually more like "redirect Adrian Peterson", but lets try to stay optimistic. 
Packers907
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 115
- Reaction score
- 8
Along with athletics it seems that Ted was looking at his personality and character as well. Seems he will work well in the locker room and doesn't come in with a big ego.
El Guapo
Cheesehead
I thought that I'd wait 12hrs and 9 pages of posts before chiming in. Some of the crazies have already moved to Canada and lit their last TT posters on fire.
DL was a legitimate need so I'm happy with the pick. I still think there is a chance for a trade up for an ILB. Let's not forget that a strong DL makes every other position on the defense look better. You can cover a lot of deficiencies at LB and CB/S when the line does it's job.
DL was a legitimate need so I'm happy with the pick. I still think there is a chance for a trade up for an ILB. Let's not forget that a strong DL makes every other position on the defense look better. You can cover a lot of deficiencies at LB and CB/S when the line does it's job.
tynimiller
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 14,001
- Reaction score
- 4,920
This is true. If we don't grab a sure starter in Ragland or Jack at ILB (if healthy) somewhere you know Jake Ryan is smiling so big right now....a chance is laid out in front of him, how he handles it could change his entire career.
The biggest thing with him is can his heart and high motor overcome some skill deficiencies he just natural has....
bigbubbatd
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,679
- Reaction score
- 166
A just because pick? What does that even mean? Reports say Clark is really good at stopping the run - maybe the best in the draft. He actually does get pressure on the qb and maybe just maybe the scouts think a 20 year old could get better there. This is a guy who mocked in the first or early second. This is a young guy with upside and high character - captain as a true junior.
Maybe not Ryan's more of a Buck linebacker whereas the team needs a scrape and pursue roving mack linebacker. I like Ryan as a Buck has a nose for the gaps and good size looked natural in zone drops as well. We probably are ok there between Sam Bar and Ryan but we need someone not named Joe Thomas at the mack. Someone who can cover backs and occasionally line up in the slot and contend with pass catching TEs/WRs. Getting an ILB who can compete in that circumstance would help us play more with 3 down linemen and probably free up our outside pass rushers more.
A lack of a good man cover backer is one reason we run the nickel so much even against run sets.
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2013
- Messages
- 6,404
- Reaction score
- 1,770
Agree completely. Work the rookies in slowly. Especially when you draft in the 27th position. NFL rookies get picked on ruthlessly. Use that first year to get them limited time on the field and hopefully get them ready to be starters in their second and third year.
AmishMafia
Cheesehead
Maybe that is what he meant. They took him 'just because' he is a very good player with lots of upside and represents BPA.
tynimiller
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 14,001
- Reaction score
- 4,920
I get that! Trust me, but if we don't draft that Ryan will be forced into a chance is all I'm saying.
The Horn-Dog
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2016
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 1
move up and get chris jones...or move down and get more pics, including a t.e.
RepStar15
"We're going to relentlessly chase perfection."
A'shawn Robinson - bigger, more agressive play style that proved himself against some of the better offensive lineman in college football
Jarren reed- hands are quick off the block, continues to fight through the entire down
Reggie Ragland- because the Inside linebackers in this draft are few and far between. The packers inside linebaking core of Sam barrington and Jake Ryan will pose a serious hole in the packers defense
Kevin Dodd - We have no productive D ends
Most importantly though, is that if Kenny Clark was really their guy, he most likely would have been available tonight.
