Pick #30, Who are your favorite prospects?

[Favre>Rodgers259]

How do you think that your list illustrates that point?

That list, by definition, cherry picks the best performers at cornerback last year who were taken outside of the top 2 rounds. So it selects for what you want to see twice over.

That list illustrates that half the league has found quality CBs outside of the first two rounds in the last decade. We are not one of them. Like I said I understand in the later rounds the odd of success are low, but I don't think it's unrealistic to find 1-2 decent players in the secondary who primarily play as the #3 or #4 CB but can step up in a pinch if needed without blowing the game away.

 

[Dantés]

Besides Williams, what has changed as far as Packer CB's from 2019? I'm still counting on Alexander to continue to get better. That was really King's first relatively healthy season and if we learned anything from Casey Hayward, good health can make a difference. So I expect a healthy King to improve as well. Sullivan and Hollman are still developing and one could step up. Williams is out there if the Packers want him, otherwise I am guessing between now and Sept. they will either draft, develop or sign a decent 3rd CB. Again, I am not opposed to finding CB's in the draft, I am just not as concerned that this could be Kings last season or that the current situation necessarily calls for once again investing a high pick in one and thus not investing in positions that appear to be in worse shape. This was how I felt about the Gary pick, I actually liked Gary, until we signed the Smiths and so when he was selected, I felt it was a total luxury pick that we couldn't afford. I will feel that same way if Gute grabs a CB in any of the first 3 rounds.

Nothing yet, and that's the problem. To this point, relative health has been the outlier for King. And even last year, considered a healthy season by his standards, was one in which he only played 77% of the snaps-- about 20% (200+) fewer snaps than you'd want out of him. And he hasn't played all that well on balance.

Based on last year's snap counts, you're talking right now about Chandon Sullivan playing 750 snaps and Josh Jackson playing 350. That's a recipe for total disaster.

I could quite easily take another position and make the exact case you just made.

We have Adams just like we have Alexander. We have Lazard and Funchess who, like King, aren't lighting the world on fire but have showed us some things and we should assume they'll improve and be healthy, right? And behind them, Valdes-Scantling, St. Brown, and Kumerow are developing and one of them could step up.

Wide receivers can't produce without protection-- a good offensive line allows them to flourish just like a good front seven allows corners to flourish.

So therefore WR would be a total luxury pick, and I hope we don't see one in the first three rounds. Right?

 

[Dantés]

That list illustrates that half the league has found quality CBs outside of the first two rounds in the last decade. We are not one of them. Like I said I understand in the later rounds the odd of success are low, but I don't think it's unrealistic to find 1-2 decent players in the secondary who primarily play as the #3 or #4 CB but can step up in a pinch if needed without blowing the game away.

There's like 12 teams represented on that list, and the Packers are actually one of them, but you excluded them with your time parameter.

But more to the point- we could do this with literally any position. If I wanted to try and make the case that we should find starters later in the draft, or undrafted, for any position, I could pluck the many examples of good starters at that position who were taken #65 and later and then state my case.

In other words, the case you're making there can be made equally strongly to suit all of our various preferences.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I could quite easily take another position and make the exact case you just made.

So therefore WR would be a total luxury pick, and I hope we don't see one in the first three rounds. Right?

You could take that position, but considering that when we finished 2019 CB was in my opinion a strength, whereas WR, TE, ILB and DL were glaring short comings of the team. Therefore, I consider CB less of a problem for the immediate future. Again, I think you are glossing over the fact that I do think CB can be considered a position that deserves close attention in the near future, same with RB and even more so OT. Lots of needs, Gute will just need to prioritize them and try to improve upon them with his limited resources. Now if you view 2020 as a rebuilding year, maybe you roll with the short comings at WR, TE, ILB and DL and make CB and OT your priorities in the draft.

Several years ago, when the Packers were struggling to find solid starters at CB, a good friend of mine, Mondio, kept reminding me that I can't expect a team to be 3 or 4 solid players deep at one position, especially at CB, it just wasn't that feasible given the overall needs of a team he told me. It took him some time to convince me, but I think I bought into it and the state of the roster today, proved him to be correct.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

In other words, the case you're making there can be made equally strongly to suit all of our various preferences.

But when you're considering the Packers, what other position group? The only other position that you could closely justify is the DL and to a lesser degree, WR.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Nothing yet, and that's the problem. To this point, relative health has been the outlier for King. And even last year, considered a healthy season by his standards, was one in which he only played 77% of the snaps-- about 20% (200+) fewer snaps than you'd want out of him.

Thought I better comment on this. So should we apply this same logic to Davante, who missed exactly 400 possible snaps on offense in 2019? It's obvious that you are worried about King and rightfully so, but should we then worry about the only WR that we are very sure of because in 6 seasons, there isn't one season that he started all 16 games?

 

[Dantés]

Thought I better comment on this. So should we apply this same logic to Davante, who missed exactly 400 possible snaps on offense in 2019? It's obvious that you are worried about King and rightfully so, but should we then worry about the only WR that we are very sure of because in 6 seasons, there isn't one season that he started all 16 games?

That's a fair question, and the answer is no, and I will tell you why not.

1) While Adams has not been the model of health, he's averaged over 14 games/season. So he's missed less than two games on average. King has averaged 10, missing 6 on average.

2) When he's healthy, Adams is one of the best players in the league at his position. King is inconsistent even when he's healthy.

3) Adams has been signed long term. King's health issues makes it less likely that they will be true of him, making it a stronger likelihood that he's only a one year proposition.

4) I fully admit that WR is in need of a talent infusion and am not saying that they should pass at WR with their first three picks the way that you are about CB.

 

[Dantés]

You could take that position, but considering that when we finished 2019 CB was in my opinion a strength, whereas WR, TE, ILB and DL were glaring short comings of the team. Therefore, I consider CB less of a problem for the immediate future. Again, I think you are glossing over the fact that I do think CB can be considered a position that deserves close attention in the near future, same with RB and even more so OT. Lots of needs, Gute will just need to prioritize them and try to improve upon them with his limited resources. Now if you view 2020 as a rebuilding year, maybe you roll with the short comings at WR, TE, ILB and DL and make CB and OT your priorities in the draft.

Several years ago, when the Packers were struggling to find solid starters at CB, a good friend of mine, Mondio, kept reminding me that I can't expect a team to be 3 or 4 solid players deep at one position, especially at CB, it just wasn't that feasible given the overall needs of a team he told me. It took him some time to convince me, but I think I bought into it and the state of the roster today, proved him to be correct.

There's no way to the look at the depth chart at CB, especially looking with an eye to 2021 (which the draft always does), and consider it to be a strength.

This is the fundamental difference here. You look at the roster and see WR, TE, DL, and LB in a state of need that's beyond corner. I see CB being as pressing as everything on the roster with the possible exception of WR.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There's no way to the look at the depth chart at CB, especially looking with an eye to 2021 (which the draft always does), and consider it to be a strength.

If the rest of the roster was in good shape for 2020, I would be fully on board with possibly trying to find a capable CB in this years first three rounds. However that isn't the case and where we differ in our view of the roster. You keep bringing up 2021, but I guess I put 2020 first, 2021 second with my planning, unless as I said, you feel 2020 is a rebuild year, I don't. If at the end of 2020, King leaves and none of the younger guys have developed into starters, well you put CB as high priority in Free Agency and the draft. This year, you put it as grab a guy or two in mid to later rounds and see what happens.

Given the current state of the roster and what I think would be a legit chance at a Super Bowl run, we have some serious needs at other positions to fill. Right now, it looks like the draft will be our next crack at doing so. With an eye on both 2020 and 2021, WR, DL and OT and to some extent ILB and TE, are more immediate needs in my mind. Now maybe Gute has a CB fall to him that he can't resist and he decides that he has to have him and its worth rolling the dice on trying to fill another need later in the draft or via Free Agency. If that player was considered great value and he actually was able to address the other needs elsewhere, then awesome.

We could keep going around and around and you won't change my opinion, nor do I plan on changing yours.

 

[Dantés]

If the rest of the roster was in good shape for 2020, I would be fully on board with possibly trying to find a capable CB in this years first three rounds. However that isn't the case and where we differ in our view of the roster. You keep bringing up 2021, but I guess I put 2020 first, 2021 second with my planning, unless as I said, you feel 2020 is a rebuild year, I don't. If at the end of 2020, King leaves and none of the younger guys have developed into starters, well you put CB as high priority in Free Agency and the draft. This year, you put it as grab a guy or two in mid to later rounds and see what happens.

Given the current state of the roster and what I think would be a legit chance at a Super Bowl run, we have some serious needs at other positions to fill. Right now, it looks like the draft will be our next crack at doing so. With an eye on both 2020 and 2021, WR, DL and OT and to some extent ILB and TE, are more immediate needs in my mind. Now maybe Gute has a CB fall to him that he can't resist and he decides that he has to have him and its worth rolling the dice on trying to fill another need later in the draft or via Free Agency. If that player was considered great value and he actually was able to address the other needs elsewhere, then awesome.

We could keep going around and around and you won't change my opinion, nor do I plan on changing yours.

You always have to have an eye to the future in the draft. But this isn't only a 2021 and beyond concern. I bring it up because the status of the position beyond this year adds to what is already a need.

Here's how I see those positions you mentioned relative to this draft:

WR: Absolutely a need, and arguably the top need over CB (though as stated, I don't think they're that far off). Given the depth of the class, I think there is a chance that talent level available at #30 and at #62 is comparable, so I could see them waiting. However, it would 100% make sense to draft one at #30 or even trade down and still take one with the first pick.

CB: As the roster currently stands, there is a 75% snap position that would currently be housed by Josh Jackson or Chandon Sullivan. On top of that, King is inconsistent, oft-injured, and in a contract year. If Williams is brought back, he'll be 37 and almost certainly a one year option. There is a cluster of good corners with the size you'd want to replace King and who have man skills at the top of this class. I see a pretty big drop off in the caliber of options after the 2nd round.

LB: The 2nd true linebacker on defense last year played 25% of the snaps. Now I would like to see that come up, but it's probably not going to be a spot that accounts for more than 50% of the snaps, even if it does increase. Similar to the King situation, Kirksey hasn't been very reliable, health-wise, and you may be needing to draft a guy who can replace him next year or the year after. If someone were to put this spot at #2, then I would understand. However, I don't see the value in taking a LB at #30. I think that Queen will be gone. Murray probably will be as well, and even if he wasn't, I don't know that he's superior enough compared to the next tier for it to be worth it.

OT: The addition of Wagner has bought the Packers a year. Thus while I would be OK with the right player at OT at any point in the draft, they can afford to take a guy who needs a RS year, which opens their options up quite a bit. This is a very strong, deep OT class, so I think they should be able to capitalize.

DL: This is one where I am probably not anywhere close to a lot of others. For starters, I don't really like this DL class. If the right guy happened to fall, that's fine, but generally I don't see value compared to other positions. Secondly, I think the design of drafting Gary after signing the Smiths, in addition to depth, was to feature a lot of passing downs where Za'Darius is the 3T. So I don't think they're going to invest a high pick in a player that they plan to leave on the bench while Z plays. I can see the need for better help on early downs, but that doesn't require a premium pick (in fact, it's bad team building to spend early picks on run down players). I think a middle rounder on a guy with run down skills, or even just signing a remaining veteran (e.g. Damon Harrison) would be sufficient.

TE: This TE class sucks, rookie TE's rarely make impacts, and they spent a relatively high pick on Sternberger and then opted to bring back Lewis. So I'm not against them drafting someone, but it's really hard for me to imagine how a TE in this class could offer good enough value in the top 100.

I know that we're unlikely to change each other's mind, but this is still pretty diverting.

 

[GleefulGary]

There's no way to the look at the depth chart at CB, especially looking with an eye to 2021 (which the draft always does), and consider it to be a strength.

This is the fundamental difference here. You look at the roster and see WR, TE, DL, and LB in a state of need that's beyond corner. I see CB being as pressing as everything on the roster with the possible exception of WR.

I think the core difference is that you can win with positions like TE and LB being average, or even below average. It's really hard to win if your secondary is below average.

The Patriots are a fine example. For years they've actually devalued pass rushing for a strong secondary. Worked pretty well for them. Obviously every team can't do that, but they really don't pay pass rushers. I do think there's something to take from that.

 

[GleefulGary]

I'm agreeing with you btw @Dantes.

 

[Dantés]

I think the core difference is that you can win with positions like TE and LB being average, or even below average. It's really hard to win if your secondary is below average.

The Patriots are a fine example. For years they've actually devalued pass rushing for a strong secondary. Worked pretty well for them. Obviously every team can't do that, but they really don't pay pass rushers. I do think there's something to take from that.

Yep-- positional value is a big piece of this. And the Packers' defense is one that places a premium on the position. This isn't Ron Rivera or Pete Carroll's defense.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You always have to have an eye to the future in the draft. But this isn't only a 2021 and beyond concern. I bring it up because the status of the position beyond this year adds to what is already a need.

Here's how I see those positions you mentioned relative to this draft:

WR: Absolutely a need, and arguably the top need over CB (though as stated, I don't think they're that far off). Given the depth of the class, I think there is a chance that talent level available at #30 and at #62 is comparable, so I could see them waiting. However, it would 100% make sense to draft one at #30 or even trade down and still take one with the first pick.

CB: As the roster currently stands, there is a 75% snap position that would currently be housed by Josh Jackson or Chandon Sullivan. On top of that, King is inconsistent, oft-injured, and in a contract year. If Williams is brought back, he'll be 37 and almost certainly a one year option. There is a cluster of good corners with the size you'd want to replace King and who have man skills at the top of this class. I see a pretty big drop off in the caliber of options after the 2nd round.

LB: The 2nd true linebacker on defense last year played 25% of the snaps. Now I would like to see that come up, but it's probably not going to be a spot that accounts for more than 50% of the snaps, even if it does increase. Similar to the King situation, Kirksey hasn't been very reliable, health-wise, and you may be needing to draft a guy who can replace him next year or the year after. If someone were to put this spot at #2, then I would understand. However, I don't see the value in taking a LB at #30. I think that Queen will be gone. Murray probably will be as well, and even if he wasn't, I don't know that he's superior enough compared to the next tier for it to be worth it.

OT: The addition of Wagner has bought the Packers a year. Thus while I would be OK with the right player at OT at any point in the draft, they can afford to take a guy who needs a RS year, which opens their options up quite a bit. This is a very strong, deep OT class, so I think they should be able to capitalize.

DL: This is one where I am probably not anywhere close to a lot of others. For starters, I don't really like this DL class. If the right guy happened to fall, that's fine, but generally I don't see value compared to other positions. Secondly, I think the design of drafting Gary after signing the Smiths, in addition to depth, was to feature a lot of passing downs where Za'Darius is the 3T. So I don't think they're going to invest a high pick in a player that they plan to leave on the bench while Z plays. I can see the need for better help on early downs, but that doesn't require a premium pick (in fact, it's bad team building to spend early picks on run down players). I think a middle rounder on a guy with run down skills, or even just signing a remaining veteran (e.g. Damon Harrison) would be sufficient.

TE: This TE class sucks, rookie TE's rarely make impacts, and they spent a relatively high pick on Sternberger and then opted to bring back Lewis. So I'm not against them drafting someone, but it's really hard for me to imagine how a TE in this class could offer good enough value in the top 100.

I know that we're unlikely to change each other's mind, but this is still pretty diverting.

Good break down and we really don't disagree that much on the needs, I think we just differ a bit on priority and approach. I don' necessarily think that either of our "visions" are better or worse than the others and as far as the draft goes, will be guided a lot by what the other 31 teams do. Gute has a very full list of needs going into the draft and I expect him to be leaving it with a few of those needs hopefully filled and a new list of what he may want to do in free agency.

As far as CB goes in the draft, if there is a huge value at the position at #30 and Gute grabs him, I am fine with that, but I think he would only do that if he is comfortable with being able to address the other needs via subsequent picks.

The wild card(s) in all of this is we really don't know what the Packers feel about some of their current players. For all we know, they are viewing one of the young CB's as a solid #3. Lazard and Funchess may be viewed as their answer to the WR position, etc.

 

[OldSchool101]

Wirfs is at least projected to go about 18-20 spots before the Packers pick. So I'm asking you if you would pay the price to go get him that high.

I never expected to get Wirfs at #30, particularly after he killed it at the Combine. I als didn't see any disclaimer saying we couldn't use #30 to package and move to get a player. Nobody expected us to get Savage at pick #21 and it essentially cost us 2-4th rounders and the exact #30 spot we have this draft again, so we know that it's conceivable if he slips a bit. I don't see Wirfs going top 10 anymore than I see him going 20 something overall. He's highly likely going to fall in the teens overall and it wouldn't take but a few WR or LB or QB's to go early to push him into that 20 range. If he's there he could be had and at nowhere near that cost of that 1st. 2nd, 2nd, 3rd combined assertion you made. You don't need to like my idea or even agree to it, but he's a player that I think would dramatically improve our OL. I wouldn't be afraid to trade a 2021 day 2 selection to move up to get a starting caliber talent

On the contrary, if I had to stay at #30 I'd consider Shenault or Mim's. I'd like us to do something to improve our Offense for once (in the draft). I think we could put the Aaron Rodgers decline to bed if we gave him a chance. Even Brandon had it somewhat right.. he just went about it the wrong way is all. It's very possible if we had a dominant OL we could match up better with SF and the like and give Rodgers, Jones and a new weapon a chance to work their magic. We're only as good as our trench warfare and I'm fully aware that's not as "****" a philosophy as getting the fastest WR etc..

 

[Dantés]

I never expected to get Wirfs at #30, particularly after he killed it at the Combine. I als didn't see any disclaimer saying we couldn't use #30 to package and move to get a player. Nobody expected us to get Savage at pick #21 and it essentially cost us 2-4th rounders and the exact #30 spot we have this draft again, so we know that it's conceivable if he slips a bit. I don't see Wirfs going top 10 anymore than I see him going 20 something overall. He's highly likely going to fall in the teens overall and it wouldn't take but a few WR or LB or QB's to go early to push him into that 20 range. If he's there he could be had and at nowhere near that cost of that 1st. 2nd, 2nd, 3rd combined assertion you made. You don't need to like my idea or even agree to it, but he's a player that I think would dramatically improve our OL.

On the contrary, if I had to stay at #30 I'd consider Shenault or Mim's. I'd like us to do something to improve our Offense for once (in the draft). I think we could put the Aaron Rodgers decline to bed if we gave him a chance. Even Brandon had it somewhat right.. he just went about it the wrong way is all. It's very possible if we had a dominant OL we could match up better with SF and the like and give Rodgers, Jones and a new weapon a chance to work his magic

Again-- I simply asked if you liked him enough to be willing to pay the price to go get him.

 

[OldSchool101]

Again-- I simply asked if you liked him enough to be willing to pay the price to go get him.

np. The answer is yes.. but it's always about the price isn't it? no if he goes at #11 overall... yes if he's there at #21 or later. You don't go into a car dealer saying you'll pay any price for any vehicle just because you like the car or truck. You use do your research and use your gut (and ask the Lord in prayer) and negotiate on the fly and be prepared to walk away if necessary. I used to laugh at that "prayer" part.. I'm "one of those" now and proud of it because he works miracles for me on a daily basis, maybe he always did I just didn't have my ears and eyes open. I'm praying for you and your family also in these uncertain times, just so you know

 

[Heyjoe4]

To get back to the thread topic, I like Tee Higgins at #30. It’s been hard to find a consensus on where he’ll go - from the many mocks to the input from this thread. Now my research was not deep or wide, so feedback as always is welcome. I saw him going around #20 in a few mocks, so I looked at some Clemson tape and liked what I saw. A big, aggressive, athletic guy who wins more than his share of contested catches. Gary pointed out that his separation is not great, nor was his 10 yd split in the 40, and that may be why he’s had more than his share of contested catches...

The other thing I noticed about him from film were YAC. I admit I’m looking at highlight reels. So me liking him at #30 is a gut reaction.

Whomever Gluten takes at #30, that guy really needs to produce. There IS a learning curve for WRs that is, for example, a lot wider than for the top OLineman (another position of need). I wouldn’t be at all upset if one of the top T prospects falls and Gluten and nabs him at #30. This draft is rich enough in WR talent that there will be good choices in round 2, maybe even 3.

Anyway, feedback and thoughts welcome. (Gary’s already weighed in!)

 

[tynimiller]

To get back to the thread topic, I like Tee Higgins at #30. It’s been hard to find a consensus on where he’ll go - from the many mocks to the input from this thread. Now my research was not deep or wide, so feedback as always is welcome. I saw him going around #20 in a few mocks, so I looked at some Clemson tape and liked what I saw. A big, aggressive, athletic guy who wins more than his share of contested catches. Gary pointed out that his separation is not great, nor was his 10 yd split in the 40, and that may be why he’s had more than his share of contested catches...

The other thing I noticed about him from film were YAC. I admit I’m looking at highlight reels. So me liking him at #30 is a gut reaction.

Whomever Gluten takes at #30, that guy really needs to produce. There IS a learning curve for WRs that is, for example, a lot wider than for the top OLineman (another position of need). I wouldn’t be at all upset if one of the top T prospects falls and Gluten and nabs him at #30. This draft is rich enough in WR talent that there will be good choices in round 2, maybe even 3.

Anyway, feedback and thoughts welcome. (Gary’s already weighed in!)

I don't dislike Higgins, but it comes down to who most likely will be there with him as well:

The likely candidates to weigh him against at #30 are Mims, Reagor, Aiyuk, Shenault, Claypool, Hamler...to me personally the first three I won't even discuss against Higgins as I don't even have to think about it if up against them.

Hamler to me is clearly inferior to Higgins ALBEIT an entirely different type of WR.

Shenault and Claypool and Higgins are all quite different and I truly think deciding if just those three were there (and you HAD to pick a WR) it would be a mixture of preference and team need. Claypool and Higgins to me are more known commodities with obvious limitations and known ceilings somewhat...but Shenault illustrates a high ceiling with arguably a little less polish on him. I won't discuss particulars of each, because like I said to me they are 3 entirely different styles of WRs.

 

[OldSchool101]

Whomever Gluten takes at #30, that guy really needs to produce. There IS a learning curve for WRs that is, for example, a lot wider than for the top OLineman (another position of need). I wouldn’t be at all upset if one of the top T prospects falls and Gluten and nabs him at #30. This draft is rich enough in WR talent that there will be good choices in round 2, maybe even 3.

Higgins is a great prospect choice. He doesn't really have any major weakness. I mean, I see where he could improve at run blocking and his route tree was limited, but that covers the vast majority of players out there. His basketball background shows in his almost effortless moves and kinda reminds me of Davante. His NFL comparative is A.J. Greene and that's quite a compliment if he lives up to that. I'd love seeing him paired with Davante and Funchess with Lazard and EQ fighting for that #4 spot. WR would go from a relative weakness to a strength. It'll be interesting to see if GB finally breaks the long standing MO of shying away at WR round 1 (fingers crossed)

 

[Dantés]

np. The answer is yes.. but it's always about the price isn't it? no if he goes at #11 overall... yes if he's there at #21 or later. You don't go into a car dealer saying you'll pay any price for any vehicle just because you like the car or truck. You use do your research and use your gut (and ask the Lord in prayer) and negotiate on the fly and be prepared to walk away if necessary. I used to laugh at that "prayer" part.. I'm "one of those" now and proud of it because he works miracles for me on a daily basis, maybe he always did I just didn't have my ears and eyes open. I'm praying for you and your family also in these uncertain times, just so you know

Well that's very kind of you. I will pray for you as well.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Higgins is a great prospect choice. He doesn't really have any major weakness. I mean, I see where he could improve at run blocking and his route tree was limited, but that covers the vast majority of players out there. His basketball background shows in his almost effortless moves and kinda reminds me of Davante. His NFL comparative is A.J. Greene and that's quite a compliment if he lives up to that. I'd love seeing him paired with Davante and Funchess with Lazard and EQ fighting for that #4 spot. WR would go from a relative weakness to a strength. It'll be interesting to see if GB finally breaks the long standing MO of shying away at WR round 1 (fingers crossed)

Thanks OldShool, I was beginning to think I was the only guy on here who liked Higgins. His size would also help him endure as a Rookie, and I do like that he’s a fighter. He could be in worse company than A.J., but that’s a high standard.

And you’re right, \\TT was shy about taking a WR in the first round. This year kinda demands it (subject to how the board falls). As far as Higgins not getting separation and having a slow 10 yd split, he does win a lot of contested catches and then produces with YAC. He reminds me a little of last year’s DK Metcalf, who sank from top 10-15 to late 2nd round where the Hags grabbed him. He had a decent, if unremarkable season.

 

[GleefulGary]

Higgins is a great prospect choice. He doesn't really have any major weakness. I mean, I see where he could improve at run blocking and his route tree was limited, but that covers the vast majority of players out there. His basketball background shows in his almost effortless moves and kinda reminds me of Davante. His NFL comparative is A.J. Greene and that's quite a compliment if he lives up to that. I'd love seeing him paired with Davante and Funchess with Lazard and EQ fighting for that #4 spot. WR would go from a relative weakness to a strength. It'll be interesting to see if GB finally breaks the long standing MO of shying away at WR round 1 (fingers crossed)

Doesn't have any weakness except average speed, poor acceleration, poor agility, and far below average jumping.

There aren't many players in his athletic profile that have done well. He's also not near the athlete AJ Green is, not even close.

He's a fine WR, but I wouldn't even dream of taking him at 30 in this class.

 

[GleefulGary]

Thanks OldShool, I was beginning to think I was the only guy on here who liked Higgins. His size would also help him endure as a Rookie, and I do like that he’s a fighter. He could be in worse company than A.J., but that’s a high standard.

And you’re right, \\TT was shy about taking a WR in the first round. This year kinda demands it (subject to how the board falls). As far as Higgins not getting separation and having a slow 10 yd split, he does win a lot of contested catches and then produces with YAC. He reminds me a little of last year’s DK Metcalf, who sank from top 10-15 to late 2nd round where the Hags grabbed him. He had a decent, if unremarkable season.

Except DK was a freak athlete, and Higgins is on the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Except DK was a freak athlete, and Higgins is on the opposite end of that spectrum.

Most definitely DK was/is a freak athlete. I still don’t get why he fell so far.

As far as our preferences, they’re pretty well known and there’s not much left to debate. I like Higgins, period. Very unscientific. If Mims, Aiyuk, or Reagor were there at #30, I’d still take Higgins, but all four are great WRs. On to draft day!