Thoughts on the Packers 2021 Draft Class

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,550
1.29: Eric Stokes, CB, LSU

2.62: Josh Myers, OC, Ohio State

3.85: Amari Rodgers, WR, Clemson

4.142: Royce Newman, OL, Ole Miss

5.173: Tedarrell Slaton, iDL, Florida

5.178: Shemar Jean-Charles, CB, App. State

6.214: Cole Van Lanen, OL, Wisconsin

6.220: Isaiah McDuffie, LB, Boston College

7.256: Kylin Hill, RB, Mississippi State

***

Favorite Pick:
Amari Rodgers; he has the skill-set to bring a new dynamic/wrinkle to the offense.

Least Favorite Pick: Royce Newman; None of these guys are problematic for me. But I think they had an opportunity at #142 to draft someone with more true tackle ability than Royce Newman. He might be able to play tackle, but I think even Jon-Eric Sullivan admitted that he's more of a guard body type. And he's also going to be a 24 year old rookie. So with Tommy Doyle and Jaylon Moore still on the board there, I think he maybe could have gone a different direction.

Thoughts:
  • Gutekunst moved off his usual tendency regarding RAS scores. In three drafts prior to this weekend, the Packers had taken three total players with an RAS below 8.0. He took five such players in this class on its own. Jean-Charles (4.17), Rodgers (5.37), Hill (7.31), McDuffie (7.33), and Slaton (7.96) were all non-qualifiers for this perceived threshold (so three of them were relatively close). One has to wonder if this is the beginning of a new trend for the FO, or if this is an anomaly in a season without reliable/consistent metrics (no combine). They may have not trusted the data, or they might have had their own numbers that were different from what the public had. One other possibility is that teams are increasing their use of GPS data, which will probably make combine metrics obsolete in time.
  • I enjoyed being surprised with players who were off my radar. Largely because of the big break with the RAS tendencies, I didn't focus on many of these guys and it was fun to be surprised and do some homework on them.
  • One such surprise was Josh Myers-- a guy who didn't get much buzz during the process because he was rehabbing a toe injury. I liked that the Packers didn't force a tackle, and instead turned to center, where they had their pick of guys not named ****erson. So rather than take a lesser guy at a position that had been picked over, they took their guy at the pivot, choosing Myers over the much ballyhooed Creed Humphrey and Quinn Meinerz.
  • All three of the OL drafted possess some versatility. I mentioned before the draft that it was hard to know what position(s) on the OL would be emphasized without knowing where they prefer to play guys already on the roster (esp. Jenkins and Turner). The guys they took will give them lots of options.
  • The first three picks offer the possibility of a lot of impact in year one. Expectations should be tempered-- most rookies are bad. But Stokes will likely be a top 3 corner, Myers could easily be the starting center, and Rodgers should have a role in the offense.
 
Last edited:

GreenReign

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
Not sold on the Myers pick. I would have preferred a trade up for JOK or Marshall, then draft someone later on. Myers was a reach in R2 regardless.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,550
Not sold on the Myers pick. I would have preferred a trade up for JOK or Marshall, then draft someone later on. Myers was a reach in R2 regardless.

There's nothing dumber during a draft than calling a pick a "reach" or a "steal."

We have no idea where the actual teams valued these players. Literally the only data we have is where the drafting team picked said player. If you've watched Myers and don't think he's good, that's fine. But saying the pick is bad because some mock draft had him available later is useless analysis.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
6,583
Reaction score
1,308
My comment is more philosophy directed.

I’m not thrilled we’ve drafted a total 6 OL in two consecutive seasons.
I get the whole “Best Available” argument. But we got redundant.

Great recap Dante’s
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
6,371
Reaction score
1,025
My comment is more philosophy directed.

I’m not thrilled we’ve drafted a total 6 OL in two consecutive seasons.
I get the whole “Best Available” argument. But we got redundant.

Great recap Dante’s

well when you lose 3 guys from the OL room and a LT presently injured... it seems to follow logic you need to add to that group
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,550
My comment is more philosophy directed.

I’m not thrilled we’ve drafted a total 6 OL in two consecutive seasons.
I get the whole “Best Available” argument. But we got redundant.

Great recap Dante’s

I kind of love it. I also don't think any of those picks will necessarily be wasted. If they carry 9 OL:

1. Bakhtiari
2. Jenkins
3. Turner
4. Patrick
5. Runyan Jr.
6. Myers
7. Newman
8. Stepaniak
9. Van Lanen

PS: Hanson


5/6 of those selections were day 3, where you're mostly drafting backups.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,550
You just hit the 10D nail square on the head and made my point eloquently. Better than I could’ve actually.

I don’t think we’re saying the same thing.

I believe your point is that they’ve already draft OL recently so they should try to draft starters elsewhere.

I’m saying that on day 3, you’re mostly drafting backups so it doesn’t matter if you go really deep with a position group as long as you can roster them.
 

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,424
Reaction score
127
O-line was a question mark with questionable depth going into the season. I'm liking that they DID bolster this position the way they did. You gotta think they have Tampa on the brain, and how to stop that defense from hitting the QB.
 

hasamikun

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 25, 2017
Messages
124
Reaction score
23
TBH I thought the depth was pretty good after the Newman pick. So van Lanen seemed like a luxury pick to me. They also signed two UDFA OL. The battle will be interesting.

To the rest of the class:
I love what Gutey did. Nearly all of the picks fill a need on the roster. The offense really got better with the versaility of Rodgers, Hill as a perfect pass catching RB 3 and the Ol depth is top notch.

It was kinda obvious but Gutey picked two CBs, one of them a nickel, so the depth there is immediatly better too. Jaire, King, Stokes, SJC, Sullivan and probably JJ reads like a good depth at CB.
ILB got some depth too. I cant say much about McDuffie but it seems like he is a coverage ILB most of all and that was a whole in the defense.

Also I like that day 3 had many good special teams players. Packers will get production out of these players no matter what and I like it. Hopefully this helps turning STs around this season.
 

DoURant

Go Pack Go!
Joined
Mar 25, 2017
Messages
375
Reaction score
52
Location
Michigan
There's nothing dumber during a draft than calling a pick a "reach" or a "steal."

We have no idea where the actual teams valued these players. Literally the only data we have is where the drafting team picked said player. If you've watched Myers and don't think he's good, that's fine. But saying the pick is bad because some mock draft had him available later is useless analysis.

Wash, rinse, repeat... lazy analysis when people say reach, because they wanted someone else, at a different position no less. Not to mention we would have needed to trade up to get the guys mentioned, as they went before pick 62, so the GM is probably bad for not doing that also.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
6,371
Reaction score
1,025
Not sold on the Myers pick. I would have preferred a trade up for JOK or Marshall, then draft someone later on. Myers was a reach in R2 regardless.

Did you even watch the draft? Neither of those players were available to choose when Meyers was. And you think trading up for Rodgers cost us a decent amount (3rd and 4th) to move up less than 10 spots in the 3rd....moving up for either Marshall or JoK would have been insane and not worth it for either of them most likely and in general.
 

thisisnate

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2012
Messages
1,618
Reaction score
170
Location
Maine
Very happy with the draft overall. Checked almost all the boxes for me. The one thing I am not entirely pleased with is our D-line. I have no issues with adding Slaton, but Lowry and Keke are both underwhelming, and Slaton doesn't help with that really. But who knows, maybe Kenny can be an even more proactive rusher with Slaton in the middle on some downs, and that could be pretty interesting.

Obviously I'm just a fan with the typical know-nothing perspective from watching a few youtubes and reading a few big boards, but on paper, I'd have preferred to see Jaylen Twyman picked up instead of Shemar Jean-Charles in round 5 and then maybe Charles Snowden, Darius Stills, Israel Mukuamu, Cary Vincent etc. over Cole Van Lanen in the 6th.

Still, I think most years I'm a little more "wtf was that..." after the draft, but this year I'm just generally pleased.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
6,371
Reaction score
1,025
Very happy with the draft overall. Checked almost all the boxes for me. The one thing I am not entirely pleased with is our D-line. I have no issues with adding Slaton, but Lowry and Keke are both underwhelming, and Slaton doesn't help with that really. But who knows, maybe Kenny can be an even more proactive rusher with Slaton in the middle on some downs, and that could be pretty interesting.

Obviously I'm just a fan with the typical know-nothing perspective from watching a few youtubes and reading a few big boards, but on paper, I'd have preferred to see Jaylen Twyman picked up instead of Shemar Jean-Charles in round 5 and then maybe Charles Snowden, Darius Stills, Israel Mukuamu, Cary Vincent etc. over Cole Van Lanen in the 6th.

Still, I think most years I'm a little more "wtf was that..." after the draft, but this year I'm just generally pleased.

keke has been growing and performing better each year. Lancaster is merely a serviceable plug for depth, which hopefully young ones make him expendable. Slaton when motivated is a beast of an athlete at his weight, even if he never clicks early downs he can plug holes
 

DoURant

Go Pack Go!
Joined
Mar 25, 2017
Messages
375
Reaction score
52
Location
Michigan
Very happy with the draft overall. Checked almost all the boxes for me. The one thing I am not entirely pleased with is our D-line. I have no issues with adding Slaton, but Lowry and Keke are both underwhelming, and Slaton doesn't help with that really. But who knows, maybe Kenny can be an even more proactive rusher with Slaton in the middle on some downs, and that could be pretty interesting.

Obviously I'm just a fan with the typical know-nothing perspective from watching a few youtubes and reading a few big boards, but on paper, I'd have preferred to see Jaylen Twyman picked up instead of Shemar Jean-Charles in round 5 and then maybe Charles Snowden, Darius Stills, Israel Mukuamu, Cary Vincent etc. over Cole Van Lanen in the 6th.

Still, I think most years I'm a little more "wtf was that..." after the draft, but this year I'm just generally pleased.

I was hoping for 2 DL, or a DL and a pass rusher, but all in all, one of the better all around drafts in awhile. Basically all positions of need were addressed, and on paper, I think over half can or will contribute this season in some form.
 

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
10,572
Reaction score
1,550
I'm going to change my answer for least favorite pick.

Like I said, none of these guys are problematic for me. But I think they had an opportunity at #142 to draft someone with more true tackle ability than Royce Newman. He might be able to play tackle, but I think even Jon-Eric Sullivan admitted that he's more of a guard body type. And he's also going to be a 24 year old rookie.

So with Tommy Doyle and Jaylon Moore still on the board there, I think he maybe could have gone a different direction.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,655
Reaction score
150
Favorite pick is easy for me with Amari Rodgers. We have just been lacking a true slot receiver for so long and Amari fits the bill perfectly. I am very confident LeFluer will know how to maximize his talents.

Least favorite is probably Newman as well. This is where I would have gone DT and as said above I would have wanted more of a true OT. If Newman can play RT well then I will quickly change this!

Overall I actually really liked this draft. I think both cbs will play this year and we will see an upgrade at the defensive position that I felt was the biggest need. McDuffie is an interesting ILB prospect and could earn some playing time. Slaton fits the exact type of DL i wanted us to draft now it is up to the staff to light a fire under him. Hill was an absolute steal in the 7th.

One way I also look at the draft is how many holes do I feel like we have after. I could see an argument made for a OT until Bahk gets back. One more DT and maybe an ILB. Outside of that I feel very confident at Qb (obviously with the Rodgers question there), RB, TE, WR, interior OL, OLB, and Safety. I would say CB too but very confident is too strong but I like what we have.
 

GreenNGold_81

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
1,424
Reaction score
127
Favorite pick is easy for me with Amari Rodgers. We have just been lacking a true slot receiver for so long and Amari fits the bill perfectly. I am very confident LeFluer will know how to maximize his talents.

Least favorite is probably Newman as well. This is where I would have gone DT and as said above I would have wanted more of a true OT. If Newman can play RT well then I will quickly change this!

Overall I actually really liked this draft. I think both cbs will play this year and we will see an upgrade at the defensive position that I felt was the biggest need. McDuffie is an interesting ILB prospect and could earn some playing time. Slaton fits the exact type of DL i wanted us to draft now it is up to the staff to light a fire under him. Hill was an absolute steal in the 7th.

One way I also look at the draft is how many holes do I feel like we have after. I could see an argument made for a OT until Bahk gets back. One more DT and maybe an ILB. Outside of that I feel very confident at Qb (obviously with the Rodgers question there), RB, TE, WR, interior OL, OLB, and Safety. I would say CB too but very confident is too strong but I like what we have.

My only gripe is Amari didn't choose #2 instead of #8. That way if Aaron leaves I can just remove the 1 from my jersey.
 

GreenReign

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
There's nothing dumber during a draft than calling a pick a "reach" or a "steal."

We have no idea where the actual teams valued these players. Literally the only data we have is where the drafting team picked said player. If you've watched Myers and don't think he's good, that's fine. But saying the pick is bad because some mock draft had him available later is useless analysis.

I don't know i have a pretty damn good track record of these sorts of things. I remember wanting us to trade up for Justin Jefferson last year. I remember wanting to trade back and take DK Metcalf in round 1 a couple years ago. I wanted Landon Collins or Benardrick McKinney over Demarius Randall, I absolutely hated the Datone Jones pick, I wanted us to draft DeAndre Hopkins that year BAD, he was my #1 rated WR, and well, we all know how that one turned out. Switching it over to another sport, way back in 2009 I wanted my Seattle Mariners to draft Mike Trout over Dustin Ackley, as he was my 2nd rated player in that draft behind only Strasburg. Yet Trout didn't go until pick 24 if I recall. So I tend to think I know what I'm talking about when it comes to these kinds of things. Feel free to screenshot and revisit in a couple years.
 
Last edited:

GreenReign

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
Did you even watch the draft? Neither of those players were available to choose when Meyers was. And you think trading up for Rodgers cost us a decent amount (3rd and 4th) to move up less than 10 spots in the 3rd....moving up for either Marshall or JoK would have been insane and not worth it for either of them most likely and in general.

Did you not read what I said? I said TRADE UP for JOK or Marshall. Reading comprehension goes a long way. And it would've cost us a 3rd and a 5th. And JOK would have been more than worth it. Almost every elite defense the last 20 years has had a very good to elite off ball LB. And JOK is a 1st round talent.
 
Last edited:

906Fan

Former Dancer
Joined
Sep 12, 2017
Messages
240
Reaction score
36
I really liked the schools that these draft picks came from. I'm glad to not see another PAC-12 cornerback. Not many question marks due to the competition these guys had in college.
 

GreenReign

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
70
Reaction score
4
I'm going to change my answer for least favorite pick.

Like I said, none of these guys are problematic for me. But I think they had an opportunity at #142 to draft someone with more true tackle ability than Royce Newman. He might be able to play tackle, but I think even Jon-Eric Sullivan admitted that he's more of a guard body type. And he's also going to be a 24 year old rookie.

So with Tommy Doyle and Jaylon Moore still on the board there, I think he maybe could have gone a different direction.

I would have preferred Stone Forsythe as opposed to Newman.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
4,568
Reaction score
359
Overall, I'm very happy with this draft. Rock solid pics throughout, and I believe that the top three picks can be day one starters and solid contributors.
 
Top