Who do you want the Packers to draft? 2013

M

mayo44

Guest
I have to say, there isn't a single RB in this draft that "wows" me at all. There might be a gem out there, but they're all kind of a crap shoot, including Lacy. The best back of the draft will probably be some dark horse like Arian Foster.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Wilde made what I thought was an interesting point a few days ago. He said the Packers (like all other teams) set up their player rankings (and I assume early draft board) after all their work during and after the college season. Then comes the combine and pro days. What I found interesting is Wilde said after all that work the Packers draft board ends up looking very much as it did before the combine. I’m sure they eliminate a couple of players and do some shuffling of players but this makes sense to me as I would place much more importance on a players performance in college vs. combine numbers.
- - - - - - - -
ILB Arthur Brown - Hate to upgrade a deep position but AB is a talent that will make a big impact. Tough, athletic and good in coverage - this will create lots of options for Capers.
ILB Alec Ogletree - kinda the same as above but not as much - however - he brings extra attitude
My guess is they will be targeting what Thompson has called one of those rare talented big men to anchor the DL but of course that’s only a guess. But I’ve got to think if Thompson and staff had the idea one of these two would be possible first rounders for the Packers – both available and rated highly by them, Jones wouldn’t have gotten an extension. Or Hawk would have been released (I would have preferred one of those two things would have happened anyway.) But if they draft a starter at ILB, not only will they be paying three starters at ILB (not counting the draftee) but they would have 7 or 8 credible choices for two spots. While Thompson has said draft the best player because depth can evaporate quickly, that would seem excessive even for him. OTOH, wouldn’t it be foolish to pass up what could be a pro bowl type player even if you are deep at a position? That’s why I go back to the signing of Jones and keeping Hawk.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,270
Reaction score
2,387
Location
PENDING
My guess is they will be targeting what Thompson has called one of those rare talented big men to anchor the DL but of course that’s only a guess. But I’ve got to think if Thompson and staff had the idea one of these two would be possible first rounders for the Packers – both available and rated highly by them, Jones wouldn’t have gotten an extension. Or Hawk would have been released (I would have preferred one of those two things would have happened anyway.) But if they draft a starter at ILB, not only will they be paying three starters at ILB (not counting the draftee) but they would have 7 or 8 credible choices for two spots. While Thompson has said draft the best player because depth can evaporate quickly, that would seem excessive even for him. OTOH, wouldn’t it be foolish to pass up what could be a pro bowl type player even if you are deep at a position? That’s why I go back to the signing of Jones and keeping Hawk.
That would be my guess. TT, it seems to me, places a high value on DL and OL.

As far as Jones goes - I don't know that TT would make a FA decision based on who may or may not be available at their pick. Jones has extra value in that he can play all the LB positions.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
As far as Jones goes - I don't know that TT would make a FA decision based on who may or may not be available at their pick. Jones has extra value in that he can play all the LB positions.
That's true - it probably works the other way - now that Jones is back, the draft value of other ILBs is reduced: For example, if a DL, OT or safety were objectively graded very slightly below an ILB, the former would be the pick. Jones does have extra value but not much IMO because he wasn't very good outside and if he starts in the nickel at ILB he will get more snaps that the "starters".
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,270
Reaction score
2,387
Location
PENDING
That's true - it probably works the other way - now that Jones is back, the draft value of other ILBs is reduced: For example, if a DL, OT or safety were objectively graded very slightly below an ILB, the former would be the pick. Jones does have extra value but not much IMO because he wasn't very good outside and if he starts in the nickel at ILB he will get more snaps that the "starters".
I suppose. I just dont imagine that they are that precise in their analysis that there are players who are graded 'slightly' better at different positions. Any given draft situation if they took a poll in the Packer war room, you probably have 5 or 6 names that are being promoted by various scouts/coaches/ and TT. I have heard a story first hand from someone in the war room that there are discussions and talks up to the actual pick. And the scout's don't know exactly what TT is going to do for sure. They know he has it narrowed down to a few names - but their big board is in tiers and there may be 5 or 6 players to chose from.

But, if they had Brown in the 'elite tier' and he was available at 26 - and their were no other players in that tier, he would be the pick, I am certain.

Your point becomes more valid if the tier contains an OLB and an OT. Signing Jones would probably drive the Packers to take the OT.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I think they have their board nailed down more than that on draft day, particularly for the early rounds. I believe the scouts and coaches do the kind of lobbying you're talking about before their board is finalized. By posting "graded very slightly below" I did mean the players were on the same tier.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Wilde made what I thought was an interesting point a few days ago. He said the Packers (like all other teams) set up their player rankings (and I assume early draft board) after all their work during and after the college season. Then comes the combine and pro days. What I found interesting is Wilde said after all that work the Packers draft board ends up looking very much as it did before the combine. I’m sure they eliminate a couple of players and do some shuffling of players but this makes sense to me as I would place much more importance on a players performance in college vs. combine numbers.

It's a process. Surely the pre-Senior Bowl/pre-East West tape builds the foundation. Then adjustments are made, some quite dramatic and many incremental that in the aggregate have a major impact on the final outcome.

The all-star games can cause a significant change in how a player is viewed. Fisher is a good example in the current class. Nobody had Fisher higher than low first round pre-Senior Bowl because of the level-of-competition uncertainties. Then at the Senior Bowl he showed he could handle the top DE/OLB draftees and shot up the board. Other less dramatic adjustments are surely made up and down the board.

The Combine also helps to evaluate level-of-competition issues. It's difficult to tell if a guy is 4.45 or 4.60 looking at game tape. For example, if a WR has played against slow safeties, the tape could make him look like he has more long speed than he really has. The Combine gives teams a chance to evaluate both that guy and some of his college competitors for levels of athleticism. Athleticism is very important, regardless of college success. There is a step up in athletic competition in the NFL, and in the NFL a player will be asked to do things he was never asked to do in college. Is the capability present? Are minimum thresholds met? What do the athletic measureables say about the player's upside, which goes to draft value?

Mayock's take on the Combine is if a player underperforms or outperforms expectations established from college tape, then it will lead scouts to reconcile the disparity by going back and reviewing the tape again.

We talk a lot about FA signing failures. Many of these are scheme fit issues. That's from one NFL team to another. The question is more acute in the jump from college to the NFL. There is a record of the athletic characteristics of successful players at each position and in varying schemes in the NFL. The Combine provides perspective on the likelihood of success. There are no certainties, which is obvious from the numerous draft busts year after year, but athleticism weights the odds in your favor.

One should ask, had Clay Matthews not had an outstanding Combine, particularly the 4.6 speed and eye popping 10-yard slit, would we have taken him at #26? Perhaps not. Perry's Combine was perhaps more impressive for the balance of speed/vertical/strength at 270 lbs. Would we have taken him without those numbers? Probably not.

Pro Days provide a third look under professional direction. Most of the emphasis in the press is given to guys coming off injuries or guys who underperformed at the Combine...again, trying to suss out the potential upside. A less publicized aspect, probably because it is squishy and unmeasurable, is how well the player has absorbed the professional all-star game and Combine coaching and advice. Is there improvement in targeted areas?

Throughout the process, there is the added component of character evaluation. Tape doesn't tell you much about that. Besides issues of past transgressions, a team will want to get additional input on how coachable a guy might be and how he stands up in the squishy area of football intelligence.

If one adds up all of the incremental adjustments to player grades across 32 teams, and imagines a hypothetical draft done pre-Senior Bowl vs. the real thing in April, the difference would likely be dramatic.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I think they have their board nailed down more than that on draft day, particularly for the early rounds. I believe the scouts and coaches do the kind of lobbying you're talking about before their board is finalized. By posting "graded very slightly below" I did mean the players were on the same tier.

I can imagine a dynamic process on draft day. The process starts with a long list of players, a list of needs, and expectations about who will be available at what point. The expectations are bound to be confounded, reshuffling the deck.

In-process pick trades are just one indication. Or, for example, a perceived bargain pick in an upper round for a player at a lower need position could alter the calculus for the rest of draft.

It's a series of multi-variable equations. Whether the on-going recalculations occur in the turbid mind of an autocratic GM with a quiet draft room or in an animated collegial group, the recalculations occur.

We got a glimpse into how dynamic the process might be with TT's post-draft comments last year. He seemed genuinely surprised at himself for ending up all-D. To paraphrase, he said he may have lost his mind. While I don't believe he was all that impulsive (drafting straight-up for need is probably crazy in TT's book), I do think that draft ended up looking quite differently from what he imagined going in, especially when you consider the trades.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I agree with regard to trade-ups or trade-downs, but if they pick at #26, I would be surprised if they're discussing more than two players at that point.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I agree with regard to trade-ups or trade-downs, but if they pick at #26, I would be surprised if they're discussing more than two players at that point.

Well, perhaps for the 10 minutes between #25 and #26. More before, more after, constant re-figuring.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,270
Reaction score
2,387
Location
PENDING
Well, perhaps for the 10 minutes between #25 and #26. More before, more after, constant re-figuring.
I think the decision may be more fluid. Maybe the Pack has 5 guys on the same tier available at their pick. Maybe 2 are at areas needed to shore up - WR and RB. Then they are looking at their board and there are 7 more WRs on next lower tier (which 1 should be available at next pick). Maybe the staff thinks they see a hidden gem they can probably get 3 rounds later. Do they go for the RB now? Do they trade back 5 picks and still get a guy on their current tier?

There are lots of scenarios that could arise. Draft board didn't change. Draft strategy same. Just the circumstances are evolving with every pick.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I think the decision may be more fluid. Maybe the Pack has 5 guys on the same tier available at their pick. Maybe 2 are at areas needed to shore up - WR and RB. Then they are looking at their board and there are 7 more WRs on next lower tier (which 1 should be available at next pick). Maybe the staff thinks they see a hidden gem they can probably get 3 rounds later. Do they go for the RB now? Do they trade back 5 picks and still get a guy on their current tier?

There are lots of scenarios that could arise. Draft board didn't change. Draft strategy same. Just the circumstances are evolving with every pick.

I think we agree on that. You echoed what I said in post #34.
 

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
Giovani Bernard > Montee Ball


I've been wanting to see an explosive back in Green Bay for a while now and i wouldn't be mad at all if we took Bernard. Talk about a guy who can take it to the house at any given time. He would immediately improve our overall team speed on offense!
 

Shawnsta3

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
1,273
Reaction score
137
Location
Manawa & Shawano, WI
I've been wanting to see an explosive back in Green Bay for a while now and i wouldn't be mad at all if we took Bernard. Talk about a guy who can take it to the house at any given time. He would immediately improve our overall team speed on offense!
The vision this guy has is ridiculous too. You very rarely ever see him take a wrong cut and he's got the patience to wait for an opening and explode. This kid is the anti-Alex Green.
 

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
The vision this guy has is ridiculous too. You very rarely ever see him take a wrong cut and he's got the patience to wait for an opening and explode. This kid is the anti-Alex Green.



Lol i'm sorry but i just don't see the hype for Alex Green as some others do. like you said his vision is terrible and he never delivers a blow. Time for him and Starks to go. Bernard and Harris would be our version of thunder and lighting. I read one scouting report who said Bernard to Green Bay makes more sense than any other team. In fact, he said it made to much sense. Bernard is a 3 down back who can catch!! Getting a weapon like Bernard would take alot of pressure off #12. I hope TT drafts him.
 

NorthWestCheeseHead

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Messages
1,127
Reaction score
103
Lol i'm sorry but i just don't see the hype for Alex Green as some others do. like you said his vision is terrible and he never delivers a blow. Time for him and Starks to go. Bernard and Harris would be our version of thunder and lighting. I read one scouting report who said Bernard to Green Bay makes more sense than any other team. In fact, he said it made to much sense. Bernard is a 3 down back who can catch!! Getting a weapon like Bernard would take alot of pressure off #12. I hope TT drafts him.
I would love to see this all pan out the way you explain it.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
The one thing I find fascinating about this draft is that the Packers have been projected to pick anything from a tight end to an offensive lineman (OT/G/C) to a defensive lineman to a safety. I would love for the Packers to pick Eddie Lacey just because the running backs on the team are not anything special. With that said, there are a lot of defensive linemen I like in this draft. If the Packers could get Alabama DT Jesse Williams in the 2nd round, it would be a steal. With the 49er's picking at least twice between the Packers first and second round pick, he'll never make it. So, if I had to pick one player, it would be John Jenkins, DT, Georgia. The Packers still need defensive line depth. Pickett isn't getting any younger and Worthy might miss a large majority of the season.
 

profile_removed

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
608
Reaction score
20
Lacy is too slow to help, and there's no Adrian Peterson type that has both decent size and decent speed. I'd love to see Tyler Eifert as a TE, definite upgrade to the position, even IF you have him back up Finley for a year to learn the system, and use him in 2 or 3 TE formations only. Much better than any of the backups we have now.
 
OP
OP
Wood Chipper

Wood Chipper

Fantasy Football Guru
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
4,180
Reaction score
1,028
Location
Virginia
Another RB I would love.

Johnathan Franklin
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!

and maybe Latavius Murray in round 5 or later
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 
OP
OP
Wood Chipper

Wood Chipper

Fantasy Football Guru
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
4,180
Reaction score
1,028
Location
Virginia
Tyler Eifert (Long shot for us)
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!

DeAndre Hopkins
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 
M

mayo44

Guest
I've been wanting to see an explosive back in Green Bay for a while now and i wouldn't be mad at all if we took Bernard. Talk about a guy who can take it to the house at any given time. He would immediately improve our overall team speed on offense!

I just don't understand the interest in Bernard. He's basically a slightly slower version of DuJuan Harris. They're almost exactly the same size and DuJuan has already shown me everything I would want of a guy his size except maybe a little improvement on blitz pickups. We would be better served to compliment DuJuan with a bigger back like Bell, Michael, Davis or Ware. And no, I don't want Lacy because I don't think he's worth a 1st round pick. If we could trade down into the 2nd round and still get him, I might be comfortable with that depending on what we picked up in the trade.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top