Reporter from USA Today-gives Pack rank 28 for draft

[Deleted member 6794]

Nate Davis from USA Today has the Packers draft ranked 28th overall. While I'm well aware of the fact that an assessment like this is completely useless for at least some years I wanted to post it nevertheless as an introduction to my thoughts about the team's draft selections.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...illiams-jaguars-vikings-trae-waynes/26793997/

Thompson did a good job of adding talent in the secondary with Damarious Randall being able to play multiple positions and Quinten Rollins being an extremely raw prospect with a ton of upside. In addition I really like the selection of Christian Ringo in the sixth round as I expect him to be able to provide some pass rush in subpackages. Ripkowski seems to be a talented fullback but I'm not convinced the Packers had to spend a draft pick on the position.

I'm a little indecisive about what to think about picking Jake Ryan. He's capable of making an impact in defending the run but I would have rather preferred to get a ILB capable of playing all three downs.

Montgomery was a complete reach in the third round IMO as I don't expect him to either get snaps at receiver or as the third RB. He will immediately improve our kickoff return unit but I expect to get more production out of a third round pick.

I have a hard time understanding why Thompson traded up to draft Hundley, who will hopefully won't play a meaningful down for the team over the next four seasons.

Backman could turn into a nice receiving threat at TE but it's tough to evaluate him with UAB mostly not playing against elite competition.

Overall Thompson improved one position in need of an upgrade in cornerback while once again mostly inexplicably ignoring ILB. Ot seems like the team is OK with having Raji and Guion at NT for the 2015 season.

I'm intrigued by undrafted free agent signings Matt Rotheram and James Vaughters. But I really have a hard time understanding why Thompson decided to bring in four running backs at a position where the starter and backup are set whilenot bringing in a single ILB to at least compete with Barrington, Ryan, Bradford and all the other quality players at the position.

 

[yooperpackfan]

The rule of thumb seems to be that you have to wait 3 years to properly evaluate a draft class.
My feeling in the here and now is that this was a very underwhelming head scratcher of a draft.

 

[Luca]

I'm intrigued by undrafted free agent signings Matt Rotheram and James Vaughters. But I really have a hard time understanding why Thompson decided to bring in four running backs at a position where the starter and backup are set whilenot bringing in a single ILB to at least compete with Barrington, Ryan, Bradford and all the other quality players at the position.

We brought in Tavarus Dantzler for the ILB position. He is a very athletic player, that apparently ran a 4.60 at his pro-day. Although he is not listed in the top 1000 by CBS, 8 teams showed interest in him during the draft process. He visited the Steelers, worked-out for the Patriots, Rams and Dolphins and had draft interviews with the Packers, Bills, Redskins, Eagles and Rams.

Moreover, we have 15 linebackers at the moment, so the numbers should work.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

We brought in Tavarus Dantzler for the ILB position. He is a very athletic player, that apparently ran a 4.60 at his pro-day. Although he is not listed in the top 1000 by CBS, 8 teams showed interest in him during the draft process. He visited the Steelers, worked-out for the Patriots, Rams and Dolphins and had draft interviews with the Packers, Bills, Redskins, Eagles and Rams.

Moreover, we have 15 linebackers at the moment, so the numbers should work.

According to most reports Dantzler is an OLB although he's build like an inside linebacker. I don't expect a lot out of him though.

While the Packers have a lot of LBs on the roster there isn't a single one best suited to play WLB.

 

[ExpatPacker]

I can't argue with the assessment. IMO this wasn't a great draft for the Packers, especially when compared to last year, but the Packers had more holes to fill last year.

Demarious Randall rose up the charts in a hurry, although in hindsight I wish the Packers had taken Malcolm Brown. If he is in fact the best cover corner in the draft, then it's a great pick.
Quinten Rollins was a very good pick, and together with Randall our DB crew looks highly promising. He's not that fast at 4.57 but everyone likes his ball skills.
Ty Montgomery --i agree it seems a reach. IF he turns out to be a great kick returner he might be worth the pick.
Brett Hundley--I'm not so down on him because the Packers haven't had a decent backup QB in years.
Jake Ryan--Paul Dawson was there in the 3rd and the Packers didn't take him. Obviously TT didn't think very highly of Dawson. Ryan did grade out as one of the more athletic ILBs around. I'm reasonably pleased about this pick.
Christian Ringo--could be the Packers' steal in the draft.

I see maybe one guy who has a good chance of starting, either Randall or Rollins. If Montgomery turns in to a good returner, that would be a big plus since our STs were the suck last year.

 

[Luca]

According to most reports Dantzler is an OLB although he's build like an inside linebacker. I don't expect a lot out of him though.

While the Packers have a lot of LBs on the roster there isn't a single one best suited to play WLB.

Here is a interview with the guy from the Steelers site:
http://steelerswire.usatoday.com/20...spects-outside-linebackers-tarvarus-dantzler/

He want to be an inside linebacker in a 3-4. Moreover he said that Green Bay would play him there!

What position do you see yourself playing in the NFL?

In a 4-3 I would like to play outside. In the 3-4 inside, I feel like I’d be comfortable at that. I do feel comfortable rushing the pass like a rush end. I feel like I’m at the right weight but if it came to me bulking up I’d have no problem with that at all. Different teams want me to play different things. Most teams who are a 3-4 they want me to play the inside linebacker position well at least Green Bay would like me to play the inside linebacker position. For other teams they want me to play the WILL backer and other teams want me to play the SAM backer so wherever it falls.

So if no particular team is there a style of defense you would like to play in?

The defense that I would like to play in, I have actually never played in and that’s a 3-4 defense. We had a 3-4 package here but I’ve never played IN a 3-4 defense. That Pittsburgh, that Green Bay type defense, that whole scheme, just run around and hitting people. I think that just fits me best and at times just get after the quarterback. I think that 3-4 defense fits me.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Here is a interview if the guy with the Steelers site:
http://steelerswire.usatoday.com/20...spects-outside-linebackers-tarvarus-dantzler/

He want to be an inside linebacker in a 3-4. Moreover he said that Green Bay would play him there!

What position do you see yourself playing in the NFL?

In a 4-3 I would like to play outside. In the 3-4 inside, I feel like I’d be comfortable at that. I do feel comfortable rushing the pass like a rush end. I feel like I’m at the right weight but if it came to me bulking up I’d have no problem with that at all. Different teams want me to play different things. Most teams who are a 3-4 they want me to play the inside linebacker position well at least Green Bay would like me to play the inside linebacker position. For other teams they want me to play the WILL backer and other teams want me to play the SAM backer so wherever it falls.

So if no particular team is there a style of defense you would like to play in?

The defense that I would like to play in, I have actually never played in and that’s a 3-4 defense. We had a 3-4 package here but I’ve never played IN a 3-4 defense. That Pittsburgh, that Green Bay type defense, that whole scheme, just run around and hitting people. I think that just fits me best and at times just get after the quarterback. I think that 3-4 defense fits me.

Well, I'm sorry I don't get too excited about an undrafted free agent who wasn't ranked in the top 1,000 prospects and has never played in a 3-4 defense.

 

[Luca]

Well, I'm sorry I don't get too excited about an undrafted free agent who wasn't ranked in the top 1,000 prospects and has never played in a 3-4 defense.

Me neither. But I am rarely excited about UDFA's (Lyerla maybe, and we all know what happened next). But it seems like he should have been listed in the top 1000 according to some teams. At least eight teams met with him!

Having said that, I don't he will be more than practice squad guy year 1 and it remains to be seen whether he will ever make an NFL roster (but that is true for most UDFA's).

 

[Sanguine camper]

A draft and develop team puts almost all of its eggs in one basket. In the NFL there are 24 starters plus a nickel back and 3rd WR that get lots of snaps. Throw in a KR and you have 27 positions to fill plus depth. Most starters last 6-7 seasons so TT has to find 3-4 starters in every draft on average. If you want to win the SB one of those starters should be Pro Bowl quality since most SB winning teams have 6-8 pro Bowl players of which 3-4 are HOF quality. In every draft TT basically needs to find a Pro Bowl quality player plus 2-3 more good starters given the reliance on draft and develop. That is the standard upon which his drafting should be evaluated. Anything less than that and you are watching the SB on TV.

 

[Luca]

Here is what PFF had to say about five of our draft picks. Seems like they liked most of those guys. However some of the critique on Montgomery is pretty harsh.

Damarious Randall, Arizona State
>>> Top of the Crop

Randall looks and plays light but his quick feet and game speed set him apart. His over-eager, out-of-control style, however, needs some serious roping in. That’s a coachable issue, though, and one that’s much more appealing than dealing with a timid player at the position. While not the surest tackler, he’s certainly not afraid of contact and will stick his nose in at every chance.

He lands high on the list because he’s one of very few in the class with the range to seriously be seen as a single-high option, and though he’s relatively unreliable as a last-line run defender, covering as much ground as he can up top will always be coveted. Playing more than a quarter of his snaps down over a slot WR and, thanks to his quickness, performing well in those chances adds another plus to his résumé.

Signature Stat: Randall was one of six safeties in the class who saw at least 60 targets into their coverage in 2014. His 53.2 completion percentage allowed was lowest of that group.

Quinten Rollins, Miami (OH)
>>> Top of the Crop

If there’s a player with massive upside, it’s Quinten Rollins. Rollins was a basketball player before coming to football this season and played like he had been a football star all his life. His tape shows a player who is extremely raw but incredibly physically gifted with fluid movement skills and fantastic footwork.

Rollins was thrown at 65 times and though he allowed 35 catches for 436 yards and two touchdowns, he also picked off eight passes and showed some impressive ball skills. Only three draft-eligible players earned a higher CFF coverage grade over the season and only two corners a higher overall grade. Given this was his first serious year of football, the sky is the limit for what his potential can be with a little more fundamental technique to his name.

Signature Stat: Rollins either picked off (eight) or broke up (eight) 16 passes this season, or 24.6% of the targets sent his way.

Ty Montgomery, Stanford
>>> Something to Work With

Ty Montgomery is a poor receiver. You don’t want him playing wide out for your team. His hands are poor, featuring some extremely ugly drops over the year. His routes are labored, and he doesn’t seem comfortable with what he is doing at all. So what is there to work with? I think he’s a running back, and a pretty good one, masquerading at receiver. The other bonus with Montgomery is he will be a very useful return man into the bargain.

I have seen him compared to Cordarrelle Patterson, and while I think that’s a pretty good fit, the difference between the two is body type. Patterson is 6-foot-2 and is built and runs like a receiver, so any backfield carries he is given will be occasional. Montgomery is 6-foot at best and 220 pounds. He is built like a runner and does his best work with the ball in his hands, even running between the tackles.

Only four receivers notched more missed tackles forced than Montgomery’s 17, and the lowest number of receptions amongst them had 45 more than the Stanford Cardinal. He may not be viable as a receiver, but hand him the ball as a running back and you might just have something.

Signature Stat: Averaged 12.4 yards per carry on wide receiver runs (end arounds etc), but a respectable 4.8 yards per carry on conventional running back carries.

Jake Ryan, Michigan
>>> Something to Work With

With one of the highest overall grades in this class, there’s a lot to like about Ryan, especially in run defense. He has the requisite size for the position and is probably one of the better players at stacking linemen at the second level, flashing good strength in doing so. That was evident early in his game against Indiana (1Q, 14:35), when he put the center on the ground. His 14.5% Run Stop Percentage didn’t compare to Paul Dawson’s ridiculous mark, but still ranked in the Top 5 at the position, both among draft-eligible players and overall.

There are still some concerns with Ryan that have him projected as more of a middle round player. For one, he wasn’t quite as good against the best competition Michigan faced, including negative grades against Notre Dame, Michigan State, and Ohio State. Agility could be a question against more athletic NFL players as he had difficulty breaking down in space at times (Ohio State 2Q 0:17), though his 12 missed tackles show that it wasn’t a huge problem. He also occasionally locked onto the RB which led to getting faked by counters and misdirection or crushed by a blockers that he didn’t see coming (Ohio State 1Q 7:01).

Signature Stat: Ryan had at least two defensive stops in every game last season and nine games of five or more stops.

Christian Ringo, Louisiana Lafayette
>>> Sleeper

A player out of a small school has to answer at least three questions if they are going to be seen as more than just a big fish in a small pond… first, can they dominate in their conference as any possible NFL prospect should? Second, do they perform well against Power 5 teams when they get the chance? And third, do they have a skill set that can translate to the NFL (even in a specialized role)? Christian Ringo checked all three boxes this past season. When he won, he did so by using his quickness, exploding off the ball especially when lining up at nose tackle. In the pros, however, he’ll likely have to come from the 3-tech spot since he weighs in around 275 pounds.

Ringo will not be a high draft pick and might even go undrafted, but he could quickly become a third-down, 300-snap specialist. What he could provide in those snaps is an effective interior speed rusher who can cause trouble on passing downs.

Signature Stat: Of all interior and edge defenders who rushed the passer over 150 times, no player in this draft was as an efficient as Ringo with a 15.8 PRP score.

 

[sschind]

Here is what PFF had to say about five of our draft picks. Seems like they liked most of those guys. However some of the critique on Montgomery is pretty harsh.

Damarious Randall, Arizona State
>>> Top of the Crop

Randall looks and plays light but his quick feet and game speed set him apart. His over-eager, out-of-control style, however, needs some serious roping in. That’s a coachable issue, though, and one that’s much more appealing than dealing with a timid player at the position. While not the surest tackler, he’s certainly not afraid of contact and will stick his nose in at every chance.

He lands high on the list because he’s one of very few in the class with the range to seriously be seen as a single-high option, and though he’s relatively unreliable as a last-line run defender, covering as much ground as he can up top will always be coveted. Playing more than a quarter of his snaps down over a slot WR and, thanks to his quickness, performing well in those chances adds another plus to his résumé.

Signature Stat: Randall was one of six safeties in the class who saw at least 60 targets into their coverage in 2014. His 53.2 completion percentage allowed was lowest of that group.

Quinten Rollins, Miami (OH)
>>> Top of the Crop

If there’s a player with massive upside, it’s Quinten Rollins. Rollins was a basketball player before coming to football this season and played like he had been a football star all his life. His tape shows a player who is extremely raw but incredibly physically gifted with fluid movement skills and fantastic footwork.

Rollins was thrown at 65 times and though he allowed 35 catches for 436 yards and two touchdowns, he also picked off eight passes and showed some impressive ball skills. Only three draft-eligible players earned a higher CFF coverage grade over the season and only two corners a higher overall grade. Given this was his first serious year of football, the sky is the limit for what his potential can be with a little more fundamental technique to his name.

Signature Stat: Rollins either picked off (eight) or broke up (eight) 16 passes this season, or 24.6% of the targets sent his way.

Ty Montgomery, Stanford
>>> Something to Work With

Ty Montgomery is a poor receiver. You don’t want him playing wide out for your team. His hands are poor, featuring some extremely ugly drops over the year. His routes are labored, and he doesn’t seem comfortable with what he is doing at all. So what is there to work with? I think he’s a running back, and a pretty good one, masquerading at receiver. The other bonus with Montgomery is he will be a very useful return man into the bargain.

I have seen him compared to Cordarrelle Patterson, and while I think that’s a pretty good fit, the difference between the two is body type. Patterson is 6-foot-2 and is built and runs like a receiver, so any backfield carries he is given will be occasional. Montgomery is 6-foot at best and 220 pounds. He is built like a runner and does his best work with the ball in his hands, even running between the tackles.

Only four receivers notched more missed tackles forced than Montgomery’s 17, and the lowest number of receptions amongst them had 45 more than the Stanford Cardinal. He may not be viable as a receiver, but hand him the ball as a running back and you might just have something.

Signature Stat: Averaged 12.4 yards per carry on wide receiver runs (end arounds etc), but a respectable 4.8 yards per carry on conventional running back carries.

Jake Ryan, Michigan
>>> Something to Work With

With one of the highest overall grades in this class, there’s a lot to like about Ryan, especially in run defense. He has the requisite size for the position and is probably one of the better players at stacking linemen at the second level, flashing good strength in doing so. That was evident early in his game against Indiana (1Q, 14:35), when he put the center on the ground. His 14.5% Run Stop Percentage didn’t compare to Paul Dawson’s ridiculous mark, but still ranked in the Top 5 at the position, both among draft-eligible players and overall.

There are still some concerns with Ryan that have him projected as more of a middle round player. For one, he wasn’t quite as good against the best competition Michigan faced, including negative grades against Notre Dame, Michigan State, and Ohio State. Agility could be a question against more athletic NFL players as he had difficulty breaking down in space at times (Ohio State 2Q 0:17), though his 12 missed tackles show that it wasn’t a huge problem. He also occasionally locked onto the RB which led to getting faked by counters and misdirection or crushed by a blockers that he didn’t see coming (Ohio State 1Q 7:01).

Signature Stat: Ryan had at least two defensive stops in every game last season and nine games of five or more stops.

Christian Ringo, Louisiana Lafayette
>>> Sleeper

A player out of a small school has to answer at least three questions if they are going to be seen as more than just a big fish in a small pond… first, can they dominate in their conference as any possible NFL prospect should? Second, do they perform well against Power 5 teams when they get the chance? And third, do they have a skill set that can translate to the NFL (even in a specialized role)? Christian Ringo checked all three boxes this past season. When he won, he did so by using his quickness, exploding off the ball especially when lining up at nose tackle. In the pros, however, he’ll likely have to come from the 3-tech spot since he weighs in around 275 pounds.

Ringo will not be a high draft pick and might even go undrafted, but he could quickly become a third-down, 300-snap specialist. What he could provide in those snaps is an effective interior speed rusher who can cause trouble on passing downs.

Signature Stat: Of all interior and edge defenders who rushed the passer over 150 times, no player in this draft was as an efficient as Ringo with a 15.8 PRP score.

I've never been to the PFF website so I am not sure exactly what they do but lots of people seem to reference it. One thing I do sense from it is that they really study the players and it does seem that their grades are fairly objective. I also notice that most of the Packers picks have some pretty high grades. Grades that are much higher than their name recognition in many cases. I'd rather have higher grades on my players than more name recognition. The only thing I question about PFF is how much do they take into account the level of competition.

I'd rather see good remarks from PFF than a good draft grade from some individual who may feel personally slighted because he thinks a particular GM (or lots of GMs in some cases) screwed up by not taking a guy he thought was better. I think NFL.com has the Packers draft rated a B so that would be far from 28th unless pretty much everyone else got an A.

Everyone pretty much knows that you can't properly grade a draft for 3 years but everyone throws out immediate draft grades anyway. I don't think it is necessary to point that out every single time you read a grade. Funny thing is it seems when a grade is not what a person agrees with or if it shows their team negatively they feel it necessary to throw out that little caveat. If the grade is positive or if they agree with it they ignore the warning. Its kind of like those who feel they have to add "if Rodgers doesn't get injured" after they make any kind of prediction. Everyone knows that a serious injury to your star player could have a negative impact a teams record. I don't think it is necessary to point it out. Its a CYA thing that is pretty much not needed, but I digress.

Anyway, as far as the draft grade goes I would have no idea whatsoever since I have never heard of any of these guys or seen them play so I won't give a grade. I do know, or at least it is my opinion, that Ted does some excellent research on the players he likes and if he chooses one over another he must have a good reason. That doesn't mean you have to agree with his picks. If you feel you have done equally exhaustive research on the players and that Ted should have taken your guy instead then fine but if you are basing your opinion on the fact that we NEEDED an ILB in the first round so he should have taken the guy everyone else thinks we should have taken then I don't put much stock in your assessment. We did that once with AJ hawk and most are not too happy with the way that turned out.

 

[HardRightEdge]

C+

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If you feel you have done equally exhaustive research on the players and that Ted should have taken your guy instead then fine but if you are basing your opinion on the fact that we NEEDED an ILB in the first round so he should have taken the guy everyone else thinks we should have taken then I don't put much stock in your assessment. We did that once with AJ hawk and most are not too happy with the way that turned out.

I'm not saying Thompson should have taken an ILB in the first round of this year's draft (although I would have liked to get Kendricks). But it has been pretty obvious to anyone closely following the team that the position has been in need of an upgrade for at least two offseasons now. The only thing TT has done (aside of bringing in some UDFA) is to draft Jake Ryan in the fourth round who probably will turn into a reliable run defender but probably isn't a great fit at WLB opposite Barrington. IMO the team still is in dire need of adding a linebacker capable of playing on the weak side and Thompson has to be questioned for his approach of not adding any talent there.

 

[adambr2]

Yeah, I have to wait and see with any UDFA. It's very rare to get longtime contributions from one. For every Shields and Williams (though Williams wasn't our UDFA), there are dozens of guys who never make a roster, or maybe give you some minor contributions for a year (Zombo, Moses, Mulumba) and then fizzle out.

If you can find a future star UDFA, great, but they're needles in a haystack.

 

[Sky King]

The Randall pick took me completely by surprise same as everybody else. Nobody on the planet saw that one coming. On faith, anyway, I have to accept that our team's experts feel the picks may satisfy the BAP theory.

Faith because I do not make a living scouting games live nor watching video of players performing in all their games all season long. Nor do I sit in a room with others who also do the same thing for a living and who congregate for the purpose of having detailed discussions regarding the many hundreds of potential picks. Finally, I do not get to hear the players' private interviews nor review the data regarding any player's off-the-field persona. All of the above has to be weighed carefully by the real experts who shape the draft board. It's both art and science.

That said, I tried to sift through the picks to see if they managed to meet my perception of some of what the Packers needed:

1. Replace two DBs lost to free agency. Check
2. Replace an ineffective kick returner. Check
3. Add an ILB. Check
4. Replace a backup QB. Check
5. Add competition and depth at the TE position. Check
6. Add competition and depth to the DL. Check

Personally, I cannot be down on the picks because it's far to early to know where the hits and misses will be found. Case in point: Nobody figured Corey Linsley to start last year, and certainly nobody predicted he would be that good. Plus, there were not enough total draft choices, let alone high choices, to fill every perceived need.

Thus, my 2015 plan is to enjoy the ride by observing the development phase of the "draft and develop" process, and also to try not to be too impatient with certain players' progression short-term. That's the hard part. I have hope that there's a diamond or two in the making from this latest group and probably expect a lump or two of coal, as well, same as from every draft class.

And I also have guarded optimism that we will finally see some late bloomers emerge from the immediate past drafts -- players that will show significant progress this season, including Thornton. I mention him especially because, right or wrong, he has struck me as the most disappointing of all the recent upper-half picks. Some may say Sherrod but in all fairness to him his failure was mostly due to that horrific leg injury and less-than 100% recovery, not to being fat, dumb and lazy. Thornton is alleged to have shown nothing much in TC last year, and was also presumed to have been stashed on IR for a year so that he may come to camp this year in-shape on both sides of his neck. I truly want to be wrong about him, however, and I genuinely hope that I will have to eat my words.

 

[TomBrownFan40]

You guys have done an excellent job of analysis here. Not too much to add except some general opinions:

What I like the most about this draft: I really love the late FB/TE/HBack type picks. I've been screaming for a few years about the need for lead blocker/check down receiver types in this offense. Think: William Henderson in the Favre years. Unlike Favre, Rodgers has had basically only three options when they're covered downfield: force it in, throw it away, or run. This could add that fourth dimension to the passing game. Lacy and Starks will also take less punishment and these guys are really what make up the special teams.
I love the Hundley pick. I never want to go through that Graham Harrell, Vince Young, etc. nightmare again. Flynn has been a great Packer citizen but, hit his ceiling years ago. Tolzien might have the tools to develop; Hundley definitely does. It should be a good competition.

What I'm most concerned about this draft: I have a hunch we're going to regret, perhaps real soon, leaving Kendricks on the board. Obviously, we needed corners but, I'm suspicious when I hear ballhawking skills touted over coverage ability.
Also, I'm surprised no Offensive Linemen taken. Similar to the QB nightmares, I also have nightmares of what happened when Bulaga went down and Tretter had to kick out to Tackle. I would feel less nervous with a better alternative than Don Barclay.

Overall: I feel much better about the second half of the draft than the first.

 

[thisisnate]

commas go before the conjunction, not after. sorry to sound like a smartass, but that's a legit useful thing to know in life.

 

[Half Empty]

That said, I tried to sift through the picks to see if they managed to meet my perception of some of what the Packers needed:

1. Replace two DBs lost to free agency. Check
2. Replace an ineffective kick returner. Check
3. Add an ILB. Check
4. Replace a backup QB. Check
5. Add competition and depth at the TE position. Check
6. Add competition and depth to the DL. Check

I understand that definitions and assessments vary, but the flip side of your perception of needs and the meeting of those through the draft can be:

1. We lost two CBs. Both of those drafted are questionable as to what/where they can play. (Admittedly the least effective comeback, but still more or less valid )
2. Nice to find a KR, but not in the third round (you were talking about Montgomery, right?)
3. I don't think the idea was to ADD someone, but to find someone who can upgrade the position. Not sufficiently confident in his ability to do so after reading the evaluations.
4. Pretty much the same as #3, except that using a fifth round pick softens the blow a bit.
5. Here's where definitions come into play. Reading about this guy makes be questions whether he'll actually compete with anybody or be good enough to even be there for depth.
6. More or less like #5, but at least there are some real positives, and 'depth' is a real possibility.

Mostly just commenting that drafting someone in a position doesn't rate a "check" from me.

 

[thisisnate]

I understand that definitions and assessments vary, but the flip side of your perception of needs and the meeting of those through the draft can be:

1. We lost two CBs. Both of those drafted are questionable as to what/where they can play. (Admittedly the least effective comeback, but still more or less valid )
2. Nice to find a KR, but not in the third round (you were talking about Montgomery, right?)
3. I don't think the idea was to ADD someone, but to find someone who can upgrade the position. Not sufficiently confident in his ability to do so after reading the evaluations.
4. Pretty much the same as #3, except that using a fifth round pick softens the blow a bit.
5. Here's where definitions come into play. Reading about this guy makes be questions whether he'll actually compete with anybody or be good enough to even be there for depth.
6. More or less like #5, but at least there are some real positives, and 'depth' is a real possibility.

Mostly just commenting that drafting someone in a position doesn't rate a "check" from me.

Agreed. I really hope these guys are good, but I'm just not excited about a single one of them. I'm actually more excited still to see what last year's rookies can do to improve this year.

 

[adambr2]

Honestly, if we had taken Dawson instead of Montgomery in the 3rd, I'd be pretty thrilled with our draft overall.

I'm shocked we took a WR. I can't see how it makes sense unless he was the slam dunk BPA at that point, which it's hard to see how he was. We're at a point with our WR's where our #1-#3 are pretty much locked in for the next 3 years, so while I'd like to see some offensive contributions from Montgomery I can see why people will think they will be minimal for awhile. It's hard for me to justify spending a 3rd on a ST player unless he turns out to be a world class returner.

 

[TJV]

Many of us were looking for a difference maker at ILB so disappointment with this draft is understandable. I wonder if the Eagles had taken Randall at #20 if Anthony would have been the pick at #30 and if that happened how different the perceptions of this draft would be here?

Regarding the ILB position, IMO one of two situations exist: 1) When McCarthy said Matthews would continue to play inside he meant it and they didn’t go out of their way to avoid it, or 2) They wanted to avoid having Matthews play inside but didn’t see the solution to achieve that in this draft – or just valued Randall more than Anthony and the other “3 down” ILBs at #30. My guess at this point is one of the group of Bradford, Palmer, and Thomas have a better chance of getting snaps on D than Ryan, most likely Bradford. But that's just a guess. I’ll be happy if any of them grab the position by the throat.

The best thing about this draft is how young and talented the CB position is right now - the entire secondary in fact. Cover CBs are a very important asset in today’s NFL and this draft replenished that spot – as well as the safety spot: I expect Randall to begin and stay at CB and if he and others perform well, Hyde is more freed up to backup safety without risking the loss of his talent as the nickel. Shields at 27 and Burnett at 26 are now the oldest players in the secondary.

Montgomery was another surprise for me and if he’s a “bigger Cobb” as scout Sam Seale said, holy crap that was a great pick. One AFC scout was quoted by jsonline saying, “He just has to get with the right coach. He really hasn't improved there. When he was a freshman he played with (Andrew) Luck. You said, 'Wow, this guy is going to be the best receiver they ever had there.' This year the team went in a malaise. He's a mystery guy. If he's there in the third round I'd love to grab him. The one thing I know he can do is return kicks well.” Another scout called him the best returner in the draft, another said he’s a good blocker and a tough guy. Yet another scout said he was too heavy last season – and that’s certainly fixable. He’s probably first in line for the KOR job and he may very well earn snaps from scrimmage depending upon how well and quickly he learns the offense. If he is a dynamic KOR, that shouldn’t be diminished. But he better be contributing on offense by at least his second year.

I was disappointed in the Hundley pick. IMO he has virtually no chance to take Tolzien’s spot this season and IMO it’s too early to be looking for Rodgers’ replacement. If the rationale was insurance against a career-ending injury to Rodgers over the next 2-3 seasons, or invest time and money in him and trade him for decent draft pick in the future, I don’t agree with either. I think Dougherty had it right when he said the trade up would have made more sense to bolster the defense. Or TE or OL IMO. Apparently the Pats called the Packers to offer the trade up, I wish they hadn’t.

Regarding the 6th rounders: Will Ripkowski’s potential be enough for him to replace Kuhn on the roster? I don’t expect both to be on the roster so it could be the PS for Rip and he replaces Kuhn next year if he’s good enough. In spite of McCarthy’s comment that ‘Daniels name gets thrown around a lot’ of course Ringo won’t challenge Daniels. Challenging Thornton shouldn’t worry him too much but Luther Robinson should give him a run for his money. Backman may have the best shot of the three making the roster. He just has to convince them to keep three TEs on the active roster and beat out Perillo and any TE UDFAs acquired.

 

[Sky King]

I understand that definitions and assessments vary, but the flip side of your perception of needs and the meeting of those through the draft can be:

1. We lost two CBs. Both of those drafted are questionable as to what/where they can play. (Admittedly the least effective comeback, but still more or less valid )
2. Nice to find a KR, but not in the third round (you were talking about Montgomery, right?)
3. I don't think the idea was to ADD someone, but to find someone who can upgrade the position. Not sufficiently confident in his ability to do so after reading the evaluations.
4. Pretty much the same as #3, except that using a fifth round pick softens the blow a bit.
5. Here's where definitions come into play. Reading about this guy makes be questions whether he'll actually compete with anybody or be good enough to even be there for depth.
6. More or less like #5, but at least there are some real positives, and 'depth' is a real possibility.

Mostly just commenting that drafting someone in a position doesn't rate a "check" from me.

I think most of us had a good idea of what the needs were. Matching those to the players available when the pick is due is the trick. The thing about the mysterious TT that is fascinating is that he is so effective at holding his cards close to his vest. There is apparently no chance for a leak of information from the Packer camp because TT seemingly tells no one anything in advance. TT must be a heck of a poker player.

And, yes, I was referring to Montgomery. The fact that some draft pundits felt he was a potential star returning kicks got my attention, particularly since Harris flopped at it. He had no knack for finding and hitting the hole like Hyde does returning punts. Harris was a RB, period. *** for tat, Montgomery for Harris, I'd call it a gain on paper in the return game. Add that to other projections about Montgomery that he may have been a first-rounder if not for sub-standard QB play on his team's part, and it only adds to the intrigue. The comparisons of him have been to the more contemporary Cobb. But he reminds me more of Sterling Sharpe when he has the ball in his hands. DBs used to bounce off of him with regularity he was just so strong. The Montgomery highlights show some of the same attributes. He even looks impressive standing still. It will be interesting to watch MM's staff refine his skills all the way around.

Did the players make my checklist for addressing some (not all) perceived needs? Yes. Will they live up to hopes or expectations that go hand in hand with those needs? Too early to tell, and that could be said regardless of who the Packers had drafted. Tony Mandarich taught me that bit of measured enthusiasm and resulting humility. Conversely, so has Corey Linsley in the much better way.

 

[dbain21]

In regards to the article, it's quite interesting that 7 of the bottom 10 teams that were ranked as having the weakest drafts were playoff teams (including the patriots, packers and seawahwks who are all known for developing talent). In a draft where (at least from what i've heard) there wasn't much 1st round talent, I'm not surprised if the Packers have a weaker draft in the eyes of some of the experts who do day 1 draft grades. That being said I think experts/fans pretty much acknowledge that we won't know how good this draft is until we can see some on the field action.

Everyones done a great job analyzing the picks and talking about their potential floors/ceilings so I won't ramble about that stuff...i'll just say, its gonna be really fun to see how these picks work into the plans for the 2015/2016 Packers.

 

[ivo610]

Draft grades reflect only an outsiders perspective. I remember the Vikings were thought of as nailing the draft that year they drafted 3 1st rounders. Unfortunately for them it's not really a slam dunk.

During the lacy draft, Ted probably had a best draft of any gm that year.

Was this draft exactly how we wanted it to be based on our perceived needs? No, but the packers staff may think so.

 

[Luca]

Regarding the 6th rounders: Will Ripkowski’s potential be enough for him to replace Kuhn on the roster? I don’t expect both to be on the roster so it could be the PS for Rip and he replaces Kuhn next year if he’s good enough. In spite of McCarthy’s comment that ‘Daniels name gets thrown around a lot’ of course Ringo won’t challenge Daniels. Challenging Thornton shouldn’t worry him too much but Luther Robinson should give him a run for his money. Backman may have the best shot of the three making the roster. He just has to convince them to keep three TEs on the active roster and beat out Perillo and any TE UDFAs acquired.

Ripkowski played on all special teams, and he is pretty good at it. I think he has a good shot to make the roster as back-up fullback/special teams ace (and gameday 45). Remember, we kept Ryan Taylor on the roster for three and half years as special teams ace, while he rarely played from scrimmage. Ripkowski could have a similar role year 1. Moreover Ripkowski could get some snaps as lead blocker in short yardage situations.

I expect us to keep 5 TE/FB's (might be 4 or 6, but 5 makes sense). R.Rodgers and Quarless are locks. So I expect to keep 3 guys out of Kuhn, Ripkowski, Perillo and Backman.