Datone Jones

[Favre>Rodgers259]

First of all the Packers only used their base defense on 17.7% of the snaps. While some positions in a 3-4 defense require a lot of athleticism that's not true for all of it.

But your base package determines how you you draft and sign FAs. So your base package is going to have a direct link to who you have out there on Nickel, Dime, Quarter/Prevent, etc. There is no realistic way you can have a complete set of role players for each formation. Again this goes back to my previous statement in a 3-4 you need to have pure athletes all over the field.

No love for Peppers? Or is it Daniels? Or Matthews?

Peppers and Matthews are exactly who I'm speaking of.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But your base package determines how you you draft and sign FAs. So your base package is going to have a direct link to who you have out there on Nickel, Dime, Quarter/Prevent, etc. There is no realistic way you can have a complete set of role players for each formation. Again this goes back to my previous statement in a 3-4 you need to have pure athletes all over the field.

The Packers don't draft defensive players solely to play in their base defense. While having athletic players all over the field is of advantage teams need to have talented football players, no matter if they play a 3-4 or a 4-3 defense.

Peppers and Matthews are exactly who I'm speaking of.

Daniels is one of the best defensive linemen in the league, so he should for sure be included in your list. While I would love to have an All- Pro playing for the Packers at every single position it's completely unrealistic to expect it.

 

[tynimiller]

In the end I think Jones is slowly going the route of Hawk. Because he is a 1st rounder we expect amazing things and stud quality when compared to others on team and across the league.

I just don't see that happening...I do however see him continuing to contribute and find a place for himself that makes the team better.

In the rear view mirror...was he worth a 1st....most would agree no...

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In the end I think Jones is slowly going the route of Hawk. Because he is a 1st rounder we expect amazing things and stud quality when compared to others on team and across the league.

I just don't see that happening...I do however see him continuing to contribute and find a place for himself that makes the team better.

In the rear view mirror...was he worth a 1st....most would agree no...

There's a huge difference between the fifth and the 26th pick though. Jones has been a better pass rusher than run defender playing defensive end, so with his move to outside linebacker to primarily go after the QB I still have hope we might get an impact player out of Datone.

I agree that his performance during the first three seasons in the league doesn't justify the Packers spending a first-round pick on him.

 

[PackerDNA]

There's a huge difference between the fifth and the 26th pick though. Jones has been a better pass rusher than run defender playing defensive end, so with his move to outside linebacker to primarily go after the QB I still have hope we might get an impact player out of Datone.

I agree that his performance during the first three seasons in the league doesn't justify the Packers spending a first-round pick on him.

Big difference from 5 to 26. Unfortunately, you need to hit on 1st rounders.

 

[tynimiller]

Big difference from 5 to 26. Unfortunately, you need to hit on 1st rounders.

Hit is subjective. To me 1st rounders should be your best situational type player or a starter by their 3rd year....I don't expect nor do I think anyone should expect all 1st rounders to be studs and HUGE contributors like Clay or Rodgers...that is delusional in my personal opinion.

 

[HardRightEdge]

...I still have hope we might get an impact player out of Datone.

I see you're catching the new-season-optimism bug.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Hit is subjective. To me 1st rounders should be your best situational type player or a starter by their 3rd year....I don't expect nor do I think anyone should expect all 1st rounders to be studs and HUGE contributors like Clay or Rodgers...that is delusional in my personal opinion.

It's true that it's unrealistic to expect to get an elite player out of every first-round pick but two out of 11 isn't good enough either. The jury's still out on Clinton-Dix and Randall though.

 

[tynimiller]

It's true that it's unrealistic to expect to get an elite player out of every first-round pick but two out of 11 isn't good enough either. The jury's still out on Clinton-Dix and Randall though.

I'd agree to an extent. I'd want over say a 10 year window 5 bonafide starters...they don't have to be all pro or anything but they need to be sure fire starters that don't need reviewed or replaced till aging.....TT does better with that out of 2nd and 3rd rounders it seems of late.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'd agree to an extent. I'd want over say a 10 year window 5 bonafide starters...they don't have to be all pro or anything but they need to be sure fire starters that don't need reviewed or replaced till aging.....TT does better with that out of 2nd and 3rd rounders it seems of late.

I agree that Thompson overall has done a better job in the second round than the first one. It's not true for the third round though as those picks have only resulted in Burnett and Finley as above average players.

 

[tynimiller]

I agree that Thompson overall has done a better job in the second round than the first one. It's not true for the third round though as those picks have only resulted in Burnett and Finley as above average players.

What I mean is the 3rd you should have a diminishing rate of expected above average and yet TT has the same one could argue...I'd argue he's done better in 1st than some like to think.

 

[PackerDNA]

Hit is subjective. To me 1st rounders should be your best situational type player or a starter by their 3rd year....I don't expect nor do I think anyone should expect all 1st rounders to be studs and HUGE contributors like Clay or Rodgers...that is delusional in my personal opinion.

Doesn't need to be a big star- I agree that not all 1st rounders will be- but the pressure is always on in today's NFL for 1st rounders to be immediate contributors.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Doesn't need to be a big star- I agree that not all 1st rounders will be- but the pressure is always on in today's NFL for 1st rounders to be immediate contributors.

Especially with a team mostly relying on the draft to upgrade the roster.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I's argue he's done better in 1st than some like to think.

Well, he drafted two truly elite players in the first round, got another five starters and had four misses. I get that drafting late in the first round makes it tougher and have to admit that I don't know how that compares to other teams.

 

[tynimiller]

Well, he drafted two truly elite players in the first round, got another five starters and had four misses. I get that drafting late in the first round makes it tougher and have to admit that I don't know how that compares to other teams.

What you just described to me is why I think he does well. I would assume (I know assuming...) that is better than most counterparts. 7 starters out of what 11 1st rounders (or was it 10 1st rounders) seems pretty solid.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What you just described to me is why I think he does well. I would assume (I know assuming...) that is better than most counterparts. 7 starters out of what 11 1st rounders (or was it 10 1st rounders) seems pretty solid.

Maybe I'll have time at some point later in the week to compare his record to all other teams over his tenure.

 

[tynimiller]

Maybe I'll have time at some point later in the week to compare his record to all other teams over his tenure.

Perhaps just start with similar teams that have drafted typically 15th or 25th and back like we have in his time as GM more apples to apples.

 

[PackerDNA]

What you just described to me is why I think he does well. I would assume (I know assuming...) that is better than most counterparts. 7 starters out of what 11 1st rounders (or was it 10 1st rounders) seems pretty solid.

Depends on the quality of the starters. Good enough in Green Bay doesn't always mean good enough.

 

[tynimiller]

Depends on the quality of the starters. Good enough in Green Bay doesn't always mean good enough.

Sorry but gotta whole heartedly disagree there. For a playoff contender year in and out in his time here...a starter here to me is a successful 1st round pick.

 

[PackerDNA]

If he's a guy plugged in because you have no one better, and said guy doesn't rank in the top 50 at his position by any rankings, that's what I mean.

 

[tynimiller]

If he's a guy plugged in because you have no one better, and said guy doesn't rank in the top 50 at his position by any rankings, that's what I mean.

I'll play who you thinking of specifically?

 

[tynimiller]

Here are the 1st round picks:

Aaron Rodgers - Top 50 or better
A.J. Hawk - Depending on statline he was Top 50...not Top 30 I give you that obviously. Starter though.
Justin Harrell - Truest form of bust TT has had.
Raji - Top 50 player at his position.
Clay - Top 50 player
Bulaga - Top 50 player
Sherrod - Absolutely no way to argue either way
Perry - Not a Top 50 player I give you that...could form into a decent piece though
Jones - See Perry
Ha Ha - Too early to tell but many say already qualifies as Top 50 Safety...whether he stays there we will see.
Randall - WAY too early to tell either way.

 

[easyk83]

So no then.

Or facts were simply not applicable there. Call it an opinion based on the players taken in the first round by this team over the last 20+ years. Whether the player appeared to be more of a need and whether or not the player appeared to be more of a "Luxury" pick.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'll play who you thinking of specifically?

Adams, Quarless, Thomas, Barrington, Guion, Palmer...I think you get the point I made originally just fine.
And I was speaking of starters/regulars, not first rounders specifically.

 

[tynimiller]

Adams, Quarless, Thomas, Barrington, Guion, Palmer...I think you get the point I made originally just fine.

What do they have to do with the first rounders? I'm slightly confused.