Overall Graft Grades, PF "experts"

[Deleted member 6794]

I could be wrong, but you might have to also include Javon Walker and Bubba Franks as first round picks that Rodgers "lined up with". They were both Packers during Rodgers time, just not sure if they had any snaps with Rodgers in a regular season game.

Walker never played a snap with Rodgers but Franks even caught a ball from #12 on three targets.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Walker never played a snap with Rodgers but Franks even caught a ball from #12 on three targets.

Thanks Captain, I knew if there was one person who could dig up those stats, it would be you!

 

[GleefulGary]

Haven't had time to listen to the whole thing but my initial thought is that the 12th overall pick in the NFL draft's value shouldn't be that a guy can line up at end, slant into a guard, not get pressure, and open a hole for a blitzing linebacker. The 12th pick should be a guy that can rush the passer, demand a double team (while still pressuring the QB) and open a hole in the oline for the blitzing linebacker solely by being so dominant that there isn't anyone left to block the linebacker.

And the "F up the play" stat is always brought up for guys trying to defend lack of production. The problem with that is that ALL of the first round edge rushers accomplished that same thing but with the added value of pressuring the QB. You don't think Jerry Tillery F'd up a lot of plays? Or Montez Sweat? Brian Burns? Jeffrey Simmons?

The Packers drafted Gary based on his ceiling which is really, really high. I'm not personally a fan of drafting based on physical ability (at least that high in the draft), I can at least understand their reasoning. Much of the recent analysis smacks of mental gymnastics as people try to justify the pick with other reasons; just admit it's a bet that the team thinks their coaches can finally teach Gary to better use his physical skills.

As for the rest of the draft, I love the Savage pick and the Jace pick, the rest all seem to address needs or add overall talent. Overall I thought it was a good draft, I just think Gary was a bit of a reach.

I would've loved Simmons, but I get not going that direction.

I just don't think there were that many high caliber players left at 12. They all have question marks to their games. Take Briam Burns, he played as a twig, couldn't handle double teams, and would've been a 3rd down pass rusher for a couple years. Is that good value for 12? I don't think so.

 

[longtimefan]

Oh my bad! Thought it was starting.

I've pretty much blocked Sherrod's career from my memory.

Most of us did..

 

[Stanger37]

Based on recent history of the NFL, rookie WR's typically don't contribute *that* much. They really start to develop in years 2 and 3. Just like what we saw from Jordy, Cobb, Adams, Jennings, Jones, etc.

We will see it with one of the 3 rooks from last year too.

I am late to this, but the Colts GM was on Colin today and basically said the same. Most WRs take some time to get used to the pros because it is a very different game between college and the NFL. Said the position is one of the hardest to scout and draft because WRs will have inflated stats due to the offense being pass heavy, but also may be solid guys that don't get stats because they are run heavy.

Was interesting to hear.

 

[Dantés]

I am late to this, but the Colts GM was on Colin today and basically said the same. Most WRs take some time to get used to the pros because it is a very different game between college and the NFL. Said the position is one of the hardest to scout and draft because WRs will have inflated stats due to the offense being pass heavy, but also may be solid guys that don't get stats because they are run heavy.

Was interesting to hear.

Another reason that it's tough to scout WR's in the college game is how rarely some of them every face press coverage. If a guy can't get off press, it really limits what you can do with him in the pro game. And some guys just never face it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I would've loved Simmons, but I get not going that direction.

I just don't think there were that many high caliber players left at 12. They all have question marks to their games. Take Briam Burns, he played as a twig, couldn't handle double teams, and would've been a 3rd down pass rusher for a couple years. Is that good value for 12? I don't think so.

My personal feeling is that Jeffrey Simmons would have been an excellent pick. I know he's hurt but I have no problem letting a guy sit for a year if that player is expected to be the better player in years 2-9. I can understand when there are concerns that an injury may affect long-term athleticism but that's not really the case with Simmons. I think Winovich and Sweat would have been better picks as well. I also think that Tillery from Notre Dame was criminally underrated in this draft. Also, why did the Packers sign Za'Darius Smith to a massive contract if they were just going to draft a younger, cheaper player with his same strengths and weaknesses? I mean, I don't see a defense with both Smiths AND Gary on the field at the same time (along with Daniels and Clark), unless we expect the team to move Gary to DT to replace Daniels in a year; in which case it would make more sense to just have Gary learn DT as a rookie.


Again, I hope Gary lights the league on fire and I'm writing "I was SOOOO wrong" by week 12 of next season. You just don't often see the low-production, elite athlete, first round pick work out that well.

 

[Stanger37]

My personal feeling is that Jeffrey Simmons would have been an excellent pick. I know he's hurt but I have no problem letting a guy sit for a year if that player is expected to be the better player in years 2-9. I can understand when there are concerns that an injury may affect long-term athleticism but that's not really the case with Simmons. I think Winovich and Sweat would have been better picks as well. I also think that Tillery from Notre Dame was criminally underrated in this draft. Also, why did the Packers sign Za'Darius Smith to a massive contract if they were just going to draft a younger, cheaper player with his same strengths and weaknesses? I mean, I don't see a defense with both Smiths AND Gary on the field at the same time (along with Daniels and Clark), unless we expect the team to move Gary to DT to replace Daniels in a year; in which case it would make more sense to just have Gary learn DT as a rookie.


Again, I hope Gary lights the league on fire and I'm writing "I was SOOOO wrong" by week 12 of next season. You just don't often see the low-production, elite athlete, first round pick work out that well.

I share the same sentiment that you and JanisJubilee in that... I think they were a little 'caught with their pants down' at 12 with what was left vs what they thought was going to be left. and I hope we are all writing "we were wrong!" in 6 months.

I don't watch a lot of college so I cannot say for certain that Gary is this or that. I kind of wish if they were going to stretch at 12 go with Wilkins who then went 13 so maybe not that much of a stretch. But Wilkins is already a DT to your point, won just about every big game he has been in, where as Michigan lost every big game they were in last year. Not that it means much in terms of all falling on Gary but when it is time to step up as a defense Michigan wasn't to be found. I hope that doesn't spill over into his performance.

I also feel if they were that caught off guard, they may have been able to entice a trade with Washington, because they've been known to do some silly things on draft day, to move up a few picks and move down a few to gather up a few more minutes to think about what direction to go ALSO, get some more capital.

 

[Dantés]

I share the same sentiment that you and JanisJubilee in that... I think they were a little 'caught with their pants down' at 12 with what was left vs what they thought was going to be left. and I hope we are all writing "we were wrong!" in 6 months.

I don't watch a lot of college so I cannot say for certain that Gary is this or that. I kind of wish if they were going to stretch at 12 go with Wilkins who then went 13 so maybe not that much of a stretch. But Wilkins is already a DT to your point, won just about every big game he has been in, where as Michigan lost every big game they were in last year. Not that it means much in terms of all falling on Gary but when it is time to step up as a defense Michigan wasn't to be found. I hope that doesn't spill over into his performance.

I also feel if they were that caught off guard, they may have been able to entice a trade with Washington, because they've been known to do some silly things on draft day, to move up a few picks and move down a few to gather up a few more minutes to think about what direction to go ALSO, get some more capital.

From what I know and have read about any NFL team's draft prep, that was certainly not the case. Teams have ample time to prepare and they use it to run through their plans in countless scenarios. It's possible that they thought someone would likely be there who turned out to be gone, but there's no way that they had no contingency for the way that the board fell in reality. You can feel free to dismiss this, since I'm a nobody on a fan forum, but for whatever it's worth I absolutely guarantee you that they had considered the possibility that the board would break the way that it did in reality and had already decided that in that scenario they would draft Gary. Shoot, for all we know they might have taken Gary over any number of guys who went earlier as well.

 

[Mondio]

GB didn't hesitate for a second handing that pick in. I was following online and every team was "on the clock" and 10 minutes would go by and "pick is in" would pop up. and 3 minutes later you'd get a name. GB was "on the clock" for about 30 seconds it seemed before the "pick was in". I don't think it was because they were scrambling or anything other than they weren't interested in trades, moving back or anything other than making sure Gary was a GB Packer with that pick.

 

[Stanger37]

From what I know and have read about any NFL team's draft prep, that was certainly not the case. Teams have ample time to prepare and they use it to run through their plans in countless scenarios. It's possible that they thought someone would likely be there who turned out to be gone, but there's no way that they had no contingency for the way that the board fell in reality. You can feel free to dismiss this, since I'm a nobody on a fan forum, but for whatever it's worth I absolutely guarantee you that they had considered the possibility that the board would break the way that it did in reality and had already decided that in that scenario they would draft Gary. Shoot, for all we know they might have taken Gary over any number of guys who went earlier as well.

I dismiss things Brandon says, not much of anyone else because much like you, I am just a random person on a fan forum as well. I come here to read, spew out some thoughts and wonder if they hold any water and try and predict the unknown future.

 

[longtimefan]

My personal feeling is that Jeffrey Simmons would have been an excellent pick. I know he's hurt but I have no problem letting a guy sit for a year if that player is expected to be the better player in years 2-9. I can understand when there are concerns that an injury may affect long-term athleticism but that's not really the case with Simmons. I think Winovich and Sweat would have been better picks as well. I also think that Tillery from Notre Dame was criminally underrated in this draft. Also, why did the Packers sign Za'Darius Smith to a massive contract if they were just going to draft a younger, cheaper player with his same strengths and weaknesses? I mean, I don't see a defense with both Smiths AND Gary on the field at the same time (along with Daniels and Clark), unless we expect the team to move Gary to DT to replace Daniels in a year; in which case it would make more sense to just have Gary learn DT as a rookie.


Again, I hope Gary lights the league on fire and I'm writing "I was SOOOO wrong" by week 12 of next season. You just don't often see the low-production, elite athlete, first round pick work out that well.

Gary was hurt too.. Snap count was almost half from 18 to 17

 

[rmontro]

From what I know and have read about any NFL team's draft prep, that was certainly not the case.

Yeah, I can't believe that they didn't have at LEAST 12 names in that spot, and were ready for any eventuality. If they got caught with their pants down at #12, somebody needs to be fired.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yeah, I can't believe that they didn't have at LEAST 12 names in that spot, and were ready for any eventuality. If they got caught with their pants down at #12, somebody needs to be fired.

I really was under the impression from everything that came out after the draft, Gary was a high value target for the Packers. I missed the first half of the draft due to traveling, but now reading what Mondio wrote "GB didn't hesitate for a second handing that pick in...." deepens that belief that Gute and the Packers were all in on Gary.

 

[rmontro]

reading what Mondio wrote "GB didn't hesitate for a second handing that pick in...." deepens that belief that Gute and the Packers were all in on Gary.

I'm sure they were, and they damn well better be at #12. Now we just have to wait and see if they were right. He looks like part of a plan to get bigger upfront, and I'm okay with that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Personally, I think too many people are making too much out of Moore's hands. If memory serves me correct Freeman, Jones and Adams all had times where their ability to catch the ball was brought into question. Get him a lot of work early in preseason and boost that confidence, he will be fine.

It's true that a lot of receivers had issues with drops entering the league but Moore's were on a way different level as he couldn't even catch a cold in a Wisconsin winter.

 

[GreenReign]

For all you hating on this draft, I'll check back in on this thread in 3 years and have a good laugh, like I did the 2005 draft thread a while ago.

 

[PackerDNA]

Bigger and faster. Which I think is sort of Gute's plan in regards to a lot of positions.

To bigger and faster, I would add athletic and versatile.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To bigger and faster, I would add athletic and versatile.

We are building the list!

Can I add.....more humble and smarter or is that just wishful thinking?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

For all you hating on this draft, I'll check back in on this thread in 3 years and have a good laugh, like I did the 2005 draft thread a while ago.

Agree, we are still trying to get all the tears and vomit off the floor from the recent party we threw for the 2015 draft class.

 

[Half Empty]

For all you hating on this draft, I'll check back in on this thread in 3 years and have a good laugh, like I did the 2005 draft thread a while ago.

I'll leave it up to you to file this and bring it up in three years.

Might be a generational thing, but I would consider the 2005 draft more that a while ago.

Also, don't remember how long it took the 2005 #2 choice to really shine, but the #1 after three years hadn't done anything.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'll leave it up to you to file this and bring it up in three years.

Might be a generational thing, but I would consider the 2005 draft more that a while ago.

Also, don't remember how long it took the 2005 #2 choice to really shine, but the #1 after three years hadn't done anything.

I think you start to get a good idea on how a draft class is shaping up in 3 years, but yeah, full evaluation doesn't come until much later. I still look back at TT's draft classes and while Rodgers was his best pick, I would rate 2008 (Nelson, Finley, Sitton and Flynn) and 2009 (Raji, Matthews and Lang) possibly his best overall draft classes.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Also, don't remember how long it took the 2005 #2 choice to really shine, but the #1 after three years hadn't done anything.

It took Collins until his fourth season to develop into an elite safety.

 

[Half Empty]

Thanks. I knew it was a while. So, using the three-year rule, 2005 was really a wash-out.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So, using the three-year rule, 2005 was really a wash-out.

True, the Packers 2005 draft class was unique though. It's possible to make a pretty fair evaluation of one after three years in most cases.