What Safety is there at 12? Or Hockenson ~ the next Gronk

[PackinMSP]

That's worth it???

At this point I only like Hockenson right there who has upside to be the next Rob Gronkowski I think.

He's fast for a guy his size and can block and has soft hands w/ excellent body control that you don't expect of for a guy his size

Obviously comparing him to a future HOF is a lot of pressure... but i see the upside there

Otherwise, you go Safety or trade down??

I really don't like taking DL that high

 

[Dantés]

There isn't a safety in this draft I'd take at #12.

Hockenson is certainly in my cluster of players I'd be interested in there, but the Gronk comparison is unfair and unrealistic.

Prime Gronk was the best TE to ever play. Calling someone the next Gronk is like calling someone the next Jerry Rice or Barry Sanders. A prospect can be a home run selection and still not be on a level with the all time greats.

 

[PackinMSP]

I was just saying the upside ....

I remember calling Davante a "poor man's" Dez Bryant when he was drafted... you could argue he's surpassed him now

But player comparison is just the simplest way to project NFL prospects IMO

 

[Dantés]

I was just saying the upside ....

I remember calling Davante a "poor man's" Dez Bryant when he was drafted... you could argue he's surpassed him now

But player comparison is just the simplest way to project NFL prospects IMO

I'm not trying to be overly critical-- just giving my opinion.

I think saying a guy has the upside of Dez Bryant is one thing. He was very good, but never close to being consider an all time great.

Players of Gronk's caliber are in a completely different stratosphere.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's worth it???

At this point I only like Hockenson right there who has upside to be the next Rob Gronkowski I think.

He's fast for a guy his size and can block and has soft hands w/ excellent body control that you don't expect of for a guy his size

Obviously comparing him to a future HOF is a lot of pressure... but i see the upside there

Otherwise, you go Safety or trade down??

I really don't like taking DL that high

The Packers have several other needs aside of safety and tight end as well. Therefore there will most likely be other options than Hockenson available at #12 as well.

 

[Eduardo Valadares]

The only option not to pick Hockenson is if there's a top edge rusher still available.
There will be an OT available at #30, so I wouldn't pick one before that.

 

[Fat Dogs]

That's worth it???

At this point I only like Hockenson right there who has upside to be the next Rob Gronkowski I think.

He's fast for a guy his size and can block and has soft hands w/ excellent body control that you don't expect of for a guy his size

Obviously comparing him to a future HOF is a lot of pressure... but i see the upside there

Otherwise, you go Safety or trade down??

I really don't like taking DL that high

I like where your head is at with S because we do need one bad but unfortunately there’s no value there at #12. We’ll have plenty of options at #30. I love Taylor Rapp. He’s the perfect box safety. Loves to hit and plays with a nasty demeanor. Very high football IQ and great tackler. He can blitz and is top notch against the run. Not the fastest but can cover TE and He’ll be there at #30 and maybe even slip to #45.

 

[Dantés]

The only option not to pick Hockenson is if there's a top edge rusher still available.
There will be an OT available at #30, so I wouldn't pick one before that.

I loooooove Hockenson, but I don't agree with this at all.

It's possible that a good offensive lineman makes it to #30, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if that position gets cleaned out before the end of the round. 75% of the league desperately needs OL.

Additionally, I think Ed Oliver and Devin Bush should be in the mix.

 

[Dantés]

I like where your head is at with S because we do need one bad but unfortunately there’s no value there at #12. We’ll have plenty of options at #30. I love Taylor Rapp. He’s the perfect box safety. Loves to hit and plays with a nasty demeanor. Very high football IQ and great tackler. He can blitz and is top notch against the run. Not the fastest but can cover TE and He’ll be there at #30 and maybe even slip to #45.

Rapp is a super steady performer and an underrated athlete, but I'd hope for someone with more deep half skills. Amos is a multiple guy who can play low and high. Another guy in that mould would give Pettine lots of versatility.

Adderley, Gardner-Johnson, Thornhill, and Savage are the guys on my radar.

 

[InGuteWeTrust]

Well, if we do get Hock, let us hope he doesn't have a body that will break down after a couple years like Gronk. All indications are that he isn't injury prone like Gronk. That is just one reason of MANY that I think this young man is going to be a elite TE in this league for 10+ years. I know some don't agree, but if T.J. is there at #12 and passed on, it would be a colossal mistake.

I think DL/DT is the way to go at #12 only if Ed Oliver slides. He is special.

At safety I like Juan Thornhill a lot at #44. I don't like him as much at 30, but it wouldn't be a reach to take him there. Best FS in the draft and it's not close IMHO.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The only option not to pick Hockenson is if there's a top edge rusher still available.
There will be an OT available at #30, so I wouldn't pick one before that.

The Packers have needs on the offensive line, slot receiver, defensive line and inside linebacker as well.

 

[InGuteWeTrust]

The Packers have several other needs aside of safety and tight end as well. Therefore there will most likely be other options than Hockenson available at #12 as well.

Picking for "needs" at #12 is something you don't do. It is a for sure failure approach to the draft. We don't know the rankings on Gute's draft board, but I want him taking his top player available at #12 regardless of position or need.

What I would pay to get a chance to sneak in the Packers draft room and just sit in front of Gute's big board for a hour. Or imagine being able to sit in front of his board and discuss it for a hour or two with Gute himself. I'd talk way too much and probably annoy the crap out of him

 

[Fat Dogs]

Rapp is a super steady performer and an underrated athlete, but I'd hope for someone with more deep half skills. Amos is a multiple guy who can play low and high. Another guy in that mould would give Pettine lots of versatility.

Adderley, Gardner-Johnson, Thornhill, and Savage are the guys on my radar.

I think of Rapp as a Landon Collins. Not the best cover guy but definitely holds his own. 7/10 for cover skills and 10/10 in the box. They both get after the QB and force turnovers. These guys are legit playmakers. This board would have exploded If I told you a month ago that we could get Collins and Amos for the price we paid for Amos. There is some legit talent at safety And Gute will have plenty to think about. I do really like Adderley too.

 

[Dantés]

I think of Rapp as a Landon Collins. Not the best cover guy but definitely holds his own. 7/10 for cover skills and 10/10 in the box. They both get after the QB and force turnovers. These guys are legit playmakers. This board would have exploded If I told you a month ago that we could get Collins and Amos for the price we paid for Amos. There is some legit talent at safety And Gute will have plenty to think about. I do really like Adderley too.

I would argue that Rapp is more of a steady, reliable tackler who puts himself in good position to prevent big plays than he is a "playmaker." In the last two seasons, he has 5 pass breakups, 3 interceptions, 1 forced fumble, and 9.5 TFL. Here are those same numbers for some of the other safety options, just for comparison:

Rapp: 5/3/1/9.5
Adderley: 12/9/0*/5.5
Thornhill: 19/10/0/9
Savage: 10/7/0/5.5
Gardner-Johnson: 9/6/0/15

*I couldn't find FF stats for Adderley

But he's not a guy that I would want playing deep half with any regularity, which is why I would look in a different direction. The other players I mentioned have the versatility to maintain FS responsibilities, while also having some box skills.

The ideal outcome, in my opinion, would be to give Pettine two safeties that can play high or low on any given play. His defense thrives on being multiple and unpredictable. A guy like Rapp, while very good at what he does, is always going to be in a SS role. And that would therefore force Amos into almost always playing in a FS role, which limits his ability to play to his strength.

 

[Dantés]

Picking for "needs" at #12 is something you don't do. It is a for sure failure approach to the draft. We don't know the rankings on Gute's draft board, but I want him taking his top player available at #12 regardless of position or need.

What I would pay to get a chance to sneak in the Packers draft room and just sit in front of Gute's big board for a hour. Or imagine being able to sit in front of his board and discuss it for a hour or two with Gute himself. I'd talk way too much and probably annoy the crap out of him

That's true if we're talking about simply reaching way down the board to meet a need. However, there could easily be great talents, totally worthy of the selection that match up with a number of GB needs (esp. OL, DL, and LB) in addition to Hockenson, who is also a great prospect at a position that needs to be addressed at some point.

 

[Dantés]

Well, if we do get Hock, let us hope he doesn't have a body that will break down after a couple years like Gronk. All indications are that he isn't injury prone like Gronk. That is just one reason of MANY that I think this young man is going to be a elite TE in this league for 10+ years. I know some don't agree, but if T.J. is there at #12 and passed on, it would be a colossal mistake.

I think DL/DT is the way to go at #12 only if Ed Oliver slides. He is special.

At safety I like Juan Thornhill a lot at #44. I don't like him as much at 30, but it wouldn't be a reach to take him there. Best FS in the draft and it's not close IMHO.

Given the glaring hole at the position and what I perceive to be a drop off between the 2nd and 3rd round, I am pretty confident that Adderley, Gardner-Johnson, Thornhill, or Savage will be a Packer. It could happen at #30 if they have one guy rated for above the group (or if there's a run at the position), or it could happen at #44 if they have them ranked pretty tightly and would content with any of them. I think Thornhill and Savage are the smart money, given GB's penchant for elite athletes.

On the DL front, I agree with you in that Oliver is the only iDL player in my cluster for that 12th pick, but I wouldn't be shocked if the team considered Christian Wilkins as well. He's not one of my ideal choices, but he's a quality prospect.

 

[InGuteWeTrust]

That's true if we're talking about simply reaching way down the board to meet a need. However, there could easily be great talents, totally worthy of the selection that match up with a number of GB needs (esp. OL, DL, and LB) in addition to Hockenson, who is also a great prospect at a position that needs to be addressed at some point.

Yes, I am not saying you purposely don't take a player at #12 that is a position of perceived "need", but you want your draft board opened up and not having to worry as much about need. This is one reason Gute decided on doing the four signings this offseason to fill some holes pre-draft and thus to not have to be a slave as much to need early in the draft. He knows he has to hit gold on these first 3 picks regardless of position.

Also, what fans perceive as "needs" doesn't necessarily always match Gute's feelings on his roster. You seem to feel OL is a huge need and I assume you feel it should be addressed quite early in the draft. I believe Gute is more confident in the OL than you are. The signing of Billy Turner was huge in my opinion. I think Gute potentially got his plug and play RG for this season and Billy is a versatile player(excels at all OL spots except center) that can be in the mix in 2020 to replace Bulaga at RT. Injuries are always a concern. They happen, and depth at OL is never a bad thing and should be addressed in this draft. I though am ok with the starting five of Bakh, Lane Taylor, Linsley, Turner, Bulaga. Now, I know many feel Bulaga can't stay healthy for a season and as I said, depth DOES need to be addressed this draft, but I am not feeling the pressure of a OL having to be drafted with #12 or 30.

 

[GleefulGary]

At 12 there are 3 guys I think you have to draft if they're there.

- Ed Oliver
- Jonah Williams
- Andre Dillard

I would throw Hock in after that group with a few others.

I'm fairly convinced two of our Day 1/2 picks will be devoted to OL/S. That's probably our biggest need at the moment.

 

[Fat Dogs]

I would argue that Rapp is more of a steady, reliable tackler who puts himself in good position to prevent big plays than he is a "playmaker." In the last two seasons, he has 5 pass breakups, 3 interceptions, 1 forced fumble, and 9.5 TFL. Here are those same numbers for some of the other safety options, just for comparison:

Rapp: 5/3/1/9.5
Adderley: 12/9/0*/5.5
Thornhill: 19/10/0/9
Savage: 10/7/0/5.5
Gardner-Johnson: 9/6/0/15

*I couldn't find FF stats for Adderley

But he's not a guy that I would want playing deep half with any regularity, which is why I would look in a different direction. The other players I mentioned have the versatility to maintain FS responsibilities, while also having some box skills.

The ideal outcome, in my opinion, would be to give Pettine two safeties that can play high or low on any given play. His defense thrives on being multiple and unpredictable. A guy like Rapp, while very good at what he does, is always going to be in a SS role. And that would therefore force Amos into almost always playing in a FS role, which limits his ability to play to his strength.

You left out his 7 sacks, 3 fumble recoveries, and a whole lot of QB pressures. I get what your saying and I won’t be to upset if we go another route But watch his tape. This kid is good.

 

[Dantés]

Yes, I am not saying you purposely don't take a player at #12 that is a position of perceived "need", but you want your draft board opened up and not having to worry as much about need. This is one reason Gute decided on doing the four signings this offseason to fill some holes pre-draft and thus to not have to be a slave as much to need early in the draft. He knows he has to hit gold on these first 3 picks regardless of position.

Also, what fans perceive as "needs" doesn't necessarily always match Gute's feelings on his roster. You seem to feel OL is a huge need and I assume you feel it should be addressed quite early in the draft. I believe Gute is more confident in the OL than you are. The signing of Billy Turner was huge in my opinion. I think Gute potentially got his plug and play RG for this season and Billy is a versatile player(excels at all OL spots except center) that can be in the mix in 2020 to replace Bulaga at RT. Injuries are always a concern. They happen, and depth at OL is never a bad thing and should be addressed in this draft. I though am ok with the starting five of Bakh, Lane Taylor, Linsley, Turner, Bulaga. Now, I know many feel Bulaga can't stay healthy for a season and as I said, depth DOES need to be addressed this draft, but I am not feeling the pressure of a OL having to be drafted with #12 or 30.

Given what they paid Turner, I have no doubt that you're right and that they plan for him to start somewhere, most likely RG.

That said, there's no way that the front office doesn't view OL as a need. They literally only have four OL of any significance under contract beyond this season (Bakh, Taylor, Linsley, and Turner). Bulaga is brittle and on the decline, and Taylor regressed and isn't a very good fit for this new offense.

You're right that the 2019 starting five could be set at the moment. And thus they aren't forced to draft OL in the 1st round. However, it would make all the sense in the world if they did-- especially if a great OT prospect is there at #12. These guys are hard to find and even mediocre replacements are extremely expensive in free agency.

 

[Dantés]

You left out his 7 sacks, 3 fumble recoveries, and a whole lot of QB pressures. I get what your saying and I won’t be to upset if we go another route But watch his tape. This kid is good.

I didn't leave out the sacks. Those are included in the TFL's. I didn't include fumble recoveries, because those are more a function of happenstance then playmaking ability. I have watched his tape. He's good. He's just not what the Packers need.

 

[Fat Dogs]

I didn't leave out the sacks. Those are included in the TFL's. I didn't include fumble recoveries, because those are more a function of happenstance then playmaking ability. I have watched his tape. He's good. He's just not what the Packers need.

Sacks and tackles for losses are completely different. Call it what you want but he’s a playmaker at the line of scrimmage just like Collins and a lot of people on this board were pushing for that signing.

 

[Dantés]

Sacks and tackles for losses are completely different. Call it what you want but he’s a playmaker at the line of scrimmage just like Collins and a lot of people on this board were pushing for that signing.

Tackles for loss as a stat includes all tackles that take place behind the line of scrimmage, sacks and tackles of runners/receivers included. Rapp had 6 tackles for loss total in 2018 and 5 sacks, meaning that he only had one other tackle behind the line of scrimmage apart from his sacks.

His production just doesn't back up the idea that he's a "playmaker" if we are using that term in the sense of a game who produces a lot of negative/turnover plays. That hasn't been his game. His value is in his steady tackling and reliability, not in his "playmaking."

 

[InGuteWeTrust]

Given what they paid Turner, I have no doubt that you're right and that they plan for him to start somewhere, most likely RG.

That said, there's no way that the front office doesn't view OL as a need. They literally only have four OL of any significance under contract beyond this season (Bakh, Taylor, Linsley, and Turner). Bulaga is brittle and on the decline, and Taylor regressed and isn't a very good fit for this new offense.

You're right that the 2019 starting five could be set at the moment. And thus they aren't forced to draft OL in the 1st round. However, it would make all the sense in the world if they did-- especially if a great OT prospect is there at #12. These guys are hard to find and even mediocre replacements are extremely expensive in free agency.

I didn't say they don't view OL as a need at all. I said I think Gute feels better about his roster at OL than you do. I respect your opinion, but I have a much higher opinion of Lane Taylor at LG than you do. I have heard nothing that suggests the new coaching staff feels he isn't a fit in this offense. Actually, OL coach Adam Stenavich brought up Lane as a good fit in LaFleur's outside zone blocking scheme.

If Gute has a OL as the best player on his board at 12 or 30 I believe he will take him. But, he won't be taking him out of need.

Personally, if Gute passes on Oliver or Hock for a OL, I will be irate.

 

[Dantés]

I didn't say they don't view OL as a need at all. I said I think Gute feels better about his roster at OL than you do. I respect your opinion, but I have a much higher opinion of Lane Taylor at LG than you do. I have heard nothing that suggests the new coaching staff feels he isn't a fit in this offense. Actually, OL coach Adam Stenavich brought up Lane as a good fit in LaFleur's outside zone blocking scheme.

If Gute has a OL as the best player on his board at 12 or 30 I believe he will take him. But, he won't be taking him out of need.

Personally, if Gute passes on Oliver or Hock for a OL, I will be irate.

I think we basically agree, except for that last comment. If he takes an OT like Jonah Williams at #12, I won't mind at all, regardless of who else was there.