What do we need going forward?

[ExpatPacker]

Im a HUGE Paul Dawson fan. I'd be happy as hell if we draft him.

I'd be happy with him or Perryman.

And honestly, this maybe the draft we don't go BPA in round 1 and draft whatever best ILB is left with our first rounder. I wont be mad at Thompson for doing that.

Unless McKinney is there in the 1st round, I think there will be someone there at ILB when we pick in the 2nd--Dawson, Perryman, or Kendricks. If the Packers are really high on one of those guys after the Combine and Pro Days, then go for it: trade up in the 2nd or trade the 1st pick down a couple. I also find Stephone Anthony intriguing as a 3rd rounder.

So basically, if there's a stud DT on the board at #30, McKinney's been taken already, and those 3 guys are still on the board, then take the stud DT in the hopes that someone will be there at #62.

 

[ExpatPacker]

While it would be nice to upgrade the NT and TE position the Packers focus has to be at ILB. I would be fine with bringing Guion and/or Raji back and I'm optimistic that Richard Rodgers develops into a reliable pass catcher the Packers totally lack talent at middle linebacker.

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them bring Raji back on a 1-year contract. The guy was playing pretty well before he got hurt.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree 100%. ILB is our absolute worst position right now.

I wont be mad at Thompson if he doesn't go BPA in round 1 and instead, drafts whatever best ILB is left (whether its McKinney, Perryman, or whoever)

We are damn near in dire need of a stud ILB.

Even if we address ILB in FA, I STILL want to see us come out of this draft with an ILB in the early rounds.

We are a good ILB away from having a really good defense folks.

There's no denying that the ILB position has to be addressed this offseason but reaching for a guy in the draft because of positional needs isn't a good idea.

 

[TJV]

Michael Rodney who operates the Packer Update site reminds us that’s there’s more talent available at ILB than just Barrington. This is from Packer Update’s, Don’t Forget About Palmer:

Palmer, who tore his MCL and spent the entire season on IR, was a pedestrian outside linebacker in 2013 before being moved inside last August. My guys at training camp immediately raved about his work, and I was equally impressed during the preseason finale. … he has the ideal size and athletic ability to be productive inside. He’s 245 pounds and ran a 4.6 at the Combine. He also can deliver a hit – something A.J. Hawk and Brad Jones rarely did in over 1,000 combined snaps this season.

http://packerupdate.net/?p=37093

The paragraph/blurp/article above references what Rodney wrote about Carl Bradford in May of last year:

… And while I didn’t study Arizona State’s hard-charging hybrid DE/OLB at the time, I remember being impressed by his play and thinking that he might make a pretty good inside linebacker at the next level. … The Packers plan is to start Bradford on the outside. “[He] played hardly any inside, said director of college scouting Brian Gutekunst. “That would be a transition. He’s a pass rusher. That’s what he does best.” It’s that kind of in-the-box thinking that will keep journeymen A.J. Hawk and Brad Jones in the starting lineup for yet another season. … What I do still see is a guy with the perfect body, athleticism and temperament to be a force in the middle.

http://packerupdate.net/?p=33807

I too thought Bradford was selected to compete at ILB based mostly on his size which seems much more suited for an inside spot. Thankfully Rodney was wrong about the status quo and while I wish Bradford was going into this TC with one full TC at ILB, better late than never. I realize this is the Draft Talk forum and IMO neither of these players should be counted upon, but the “existing” cupboard is not completely bare.

 

[7thFloorRA]

I thought off all the guys on the back burner that they really liked Joe Thomas who spent all year on the PS. They still have to draft 1 guy to start next to Barrington and have someone who can backup on the spot when needed.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

Michael Rodney who operates the Packer Update site reminds us that’s there’s more talent available at ILB than just Barrington. This is from Packer Update’s, Don’t Forget About Palmer: http://packerupdate.net/?p=37093

The paragraph/blurp/article above references what Rodney wrote about Carl Bradford in May of last year: http://packerupdate.net/?p=33807

I too thought Bradford was selected to compete at ILB based mostly on his size which seems much more suited for an inside spot. Thankfully Rodney was wrong about the status quo and while I wish Bradford was going into this TC with one full TC at ILB, better late than never. I realize this is the Draft Talk forum and IMO neither of these players should be counted upon, but the “existing” cupboard is not completely bare.

See I absolutely agree with this, but these guys hit me more as run stoppers. I'm not exactly sure who we have that has the speed and length to be a good coverage linebacker.

I do however, hope that we make a push for one of these stud DTs now that Guion is done.

 

[Ace]

There's no denying that the ILB position has to be addressed this offseason but reaching for a guy in the draft because of positional needs isn't a good idea.

Seahawks did it with Irvin didn't they and it worked out pretty well I'd say

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Seahawks did it with Irvin didn't they and it worked out pretty well I'd say

That's one example of it working out. Most of the time it doesn't though.

 

[Ace]

That's one example of it working out. Most of the time it doesn't though.

Sure I would agree but I think if you like a guy you take him regardless of whether it's a reach or not.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Sure I would agree but I think if you like a guy you take him regardless of whether it's a reach or not.

Agreed, but it doesn't make any sense to draft a player who fills a position of need in the first round if that guy would mostly likely still be on the board in the second round.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

That's one example of it working out. Most of the time it doesn't though.

This is true. The Hawks have amazing scouts and moved up because they weren't sure he'd be there. It's one time that it worked out. Plenty of players have busted after being reached for.

It's insane that most of that "fast and amazing" defense were third round or higher. That takes some great scouting on their part.

 

[TeamTundra]

Just heard on NFL Network that the Ravens NT Haloti Ngata has been told he will be cut if
He doesn't renegotiate his contract. He is on the downside of his career and I wouldn't expect
The Packers to show interest unless the price is right, but if he is available it would be another
Option in the NT pool.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

What do you guys think about Jermaine Gresham? I mean he's still young and he could help this team out. I don't think he would demand a huge contract.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

What do you guys think about Jermaine Gresham? I mean he's still young and he could help this team out. I don't think he would demand a huge contract.

Never mind, this guy drops passes more than Finley ever did.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Looking at current Packers roster, biggest need is NT. Packers probably should have won a Super Bowl this year with terrible ILB play. It would be nice to improve that position but it's one of the less important positions on the defense. NT on the other hand is extremely important and the Packers have a replacement level guy in Guion (who may not come back) and a guy in Raji that's never been a good NT.

A good/great NT can make mediocre ILBs look terrific. One of the main reasons our ILBs look so terrible is because the NT playing in front of them isn't very good.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Now that Guion is on the way towArds the Big House the Packers need a NT as well as a TE, ILB and likely. CB if they lose either House or Tramon. Another o lineman would make sense. You can never have too much quality depth on the o line.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Looking at current Packers roster, biggest need is NT. Packers probably should have won a Super Bowl this year with terrible ILB play. It would be nice to improve that position but it's one of the less important positions on the defense. NT on the other hand is extremely important and the Packers have a replacement level guy in Guion (who may not come back) and a guy in Raji that's never been a good NT.

A good/great NT can make mediocre ILBs look terrific. One of the main reasons our ILBs look so terrible is because the NT playing in front of them isn't very good.

Well, this works the other way around as well. Great ILBs can make a mediocre NT look pretty good. I want the Packers to improve both positions this offseason though.

 

[TJV]

... and a guy in Raji that's never been a good NT.

As I noted on another thread, this is just wrong. Worrying about Raji recovering from injury and getting - and staying - motivated is legit; posting he's never been a good NT when his play at the position helped the Packers win a title is nonsense.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

As I noted on another thread, this is just wrong. Worrying about Raji recovering from injury and getting - and staying - motivated is legit; posting he's never been a good NT when his play at the position helped the Packers win a title is nonsense.

Nope. Raji was poor against the run in 2010 and his job as NT isn't to rush the passer. He doesn't help stop teams from running up the middle.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Well, this works the other way around as well. Great ILBs can make a mediocre NT look pretty good. I want the Packers to improve both positions this offseason though.

Yeah, but NT is far more impactful position on the football field than ILB. People can say that Willis or Bowman show how important an ILB can be but I think most teams would rather have Ngata than one of those two solely because that position is more important. Btw, I only used that example because I wanted to head off the crowd of people saying that Willis shows how important an ILB can be. An elite NT will generally do more to help the defense than an elite ILB.

 

[Mondio]

I'm hoping for an upgrade at both positions

 

[TJV]

Raji was a disruptive force in the middle of the DL in 2010. He led the DL in TFL with 4.5 and had a tackles per snap rate of one every 13.7 plays. He led the DL in batted balls and he tied Jenkins for sacks. He had 33.5 pressures. He was not an immoveable fat guy at NT but if the Packers had the 2010 Raji at NT we wouldn’t be talking about it as a position of need.

 

[Mondio]

i would take 2010 Raji on this team every single year

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Raji was a disruptive force in the middle of the DL in 2010. He led the DL in TFL with 4.5 and had a tackles per snap rate of one every 13.7 plays. He led the DL in batted balls and he tied Jenkins for sacks. He had 33.5 pressures. He was not an immoveable fat guy at NT but if the Packers had the 2010 Raji at NT we wouldn’t be talking about it as a position of need.

Agreed. However, 2010 was five years ago. Are the Packers really going to base their defensive hopes on a player recapturing a form he hasn't shown in five years? Keeping in mind that he hasn't just declined a little from 2010.

 

[TJV]

However, 2010 was five years ago. Are the Packers really going to base their defensive hopes on a player recapturing a form he hasn't shown in five years? Keeping in mind that he hasn't just declined a little from 2010.

I completely agree with this. Not only his having to return from injury but also what looked like his lack of motivation in a contract year. (What was amazing was his reportedly turning down an $8M/year multi-year deal in the midst of that mediocre season – thank goodness for greedy agents and foolish players!) I have no problem with Raji getting another 1-year deal but they definitely shouldn't count on him. I would really like Thompson to sign a Guion-like UFA at NT because finding them in the draft is not his strength and I’d rather have a veteran.