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

[InGuteWeTrust]

The best feature of this forum is the ignore button. Believe me, it's awesome.

@ Topic: Gute adressed the weak points of the roster. So I would go with the best player available. For me it's between Oliver and Hockenson at this point, but I don't believe Oliver will make it to #12. So I would be fine with another weapon for Aaron. There is no safety worth the #12 overall. I really like Darnell Savage. He should be available in the 2nd/3rd round.

We agree that Oliver and Hock are the only 2 players elite enough to be guaranteed day 1 impact players for the Pack if chosen at 12. The problem is that there is about a 90% chance both of them will go in the top 11.

That's where it get's sticky. The above 2 are my only bust proof players at 12.

Sure you could go with a number of players at 12 if the 2 studs are gone:

Devin White, Jonah Williams, Clelin Ferrell, Jawaan Taylor, D.K. Metcalf, Brian Burns. Rashan Gary, Cody Ford.

None of those are safe picks. They all scare the crap out of me. You can't miss at 12. You just can't. Not this year.

I am going to be shatting bricks while Gute makes our first 3 picks in this draft. That much I know.

 

[scotscheese]

YOU DON'T DRAFT TE'S IN THE FIRST ROUND! PERIOD!

You also don't draft a safety in the 1st round unless your pretty certain he is a GAME CHANGER. There are zero safeties IMO worth pick no. 12.

End of another FANTASY LAND THREAD.

in the last two drafts, 4TE's have been drafted in the first round

2018
1 25 Hayden Hurst TE South Carolina Baltimore Ravens

2017
1 19 O.J. Howard TE Alabama Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 23 Evan Engram TE Mississippi New York Giants
1 29 David Njoku TE Miami (Fla.) Cleveland Browns

 

[Deleted member 6794]

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.

I agree the Packers shouldn't draft for need but you're fooling yourself when you believe that positions of need don't factor into a decision.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

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

The most receptions Dez Bryant ever had in one season was 93, in 2013.

last year Adams had 111 receptions.....So, yes, you could make a pretty strong argument Adams has surpassed Bryant.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The most receptions Dez Bryant ever had in one season was 93, in 2013.

last year Adams had 111 receptions.....So, yes, you could make a pretty strong argument Adams has surpassed Bryant.

Bryant had three season with more than 1,200 receiving yards and double digit touchdowns though. Adams is on a good way to surpass him but has to repeat last year's performance before that happens though.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

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

Agree. While safety may be the Packer's most glaring need right now, drafting one at #12 would be a reach.

Ed Oliver and T. J. Hockenson are intriguing prospects, but we've still got nearly four weeks before the draft and a lot can change....A month ago the names were Polite and Burns, and that talk is just a memory now.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I never said it doesn't ever factor in. I was talking about picking at #12 and I said I WANT Gute to take his the best player available on his board. I trust in his scouting and I sure as hell hope he trusts in himself and his staff. I don't know what for sure is in his head when he picks nor do you, but I do know that every good GM I've ever heard speak on the subject including Gute...has said "99 percent of the time, if you take the best player available you'll get the best bang for the buck for the long haul. You never have enough good football players."

Do they factor in need at later points in the draft? Of course they do. To do it with a Top 20 is setting yourself up for failure though.

NFL teams grade prospects in different tiers resulting in it being extremely rare than only one player within the top tier being still available with a team on the clock (Rodgers being one of those exceptions). Therefore position of need factors into a pick nearly every time with it most likely being the case at #12 this year once again.

 

[InGuteWeTrust]

in the last two drafts, 4TE's have been drafted in the first round

2018
1 25 Hayden Hurst TE South Carolina Baltimore Ravens

2017
1 19 O.J. Howard TE Alabama Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 23 Evan Engram TE Mississippi New York Giants
1 29 David Njoku TE Miami (Fla.) Cleveland Browns

And none of those players were T.J. Hockenson. Nor did I feel any of those players were going to be a once in every 20 year talent like Hock is. Didn't like any of those players. And you can say everyone loved O.J. Howard. I didn't.

I've followed the draft closely since 1980 and I can't tell you one TE I thought more highly of coming out than T.J. Hockenson. He is that good.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You are a little confused, but I am not going to argue with someone that thinks every NFL team runs their draft board exactly the same. We can agree to disagree. Have a great day!

You should read Andrew Brandt's story about the selection of Rodgers to get a clue.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/7840048/nfl-draft-war-room

 

[tynimiller]

You should read Andrew Brandt's story about the selection of Rodgers to get a clue.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/7840048/nfl-draft-war-room

I have always loved the story of "no response" on Romo back during undrafted signings....crazy to think.

 

[Dantés]

in the last two drafts, 4TE's have been drafted in the first round

2018
1 25 Hayden Hurst TE South Carolina Baltimore Ravens

2017
1 19 O.J. Howard TE Alabama Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1 23 Evan Engram TE Mississippi New York Giants
1 29 David Njoku TE Miami (Fla.) Cleveland Browns

O.J. Howard is the only guy in that group who compared with Hockenson coming out. I can envision Hock going in a similar range.

 

[Dantés]

We can have a gentlemens bet.

I will guarantee and would put my house up that Hock goes before #19.

Why would I do that? I love Hockenson. I've already said that it wouldn't shock me if he goes before our pick. But he's also a TE, and TE's have a tendency to slide.

Stand down man. We don't need another @brandon2348 shoving a pet prospect down everyone's throat.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

We haven't taken a TE with our first pick in "the last ten years" to know if any would have been elite. If you are trying to compare Hock to TE's that we have taken later in recent drafts and say that their failure proves that Hock isn't worthy of a #12 is ridiculous at best. Hock is light years ahead of the talent of those like Richard Rodgers.

I know typically in a draft you can find similar TE talent in later rounds as those in the first. That isn't the case with Hock.

A.J. Hockenson isn't typical in any way. This is a RARE TE talent. This is a ELITE talent that will most likely go down as the best TE ever to play in Green Bay. As with any player we draft with our first few picks this year there is also a chance that the player will be a bust. Hock is as close to a bust proof lock as you can have.

The fact you are implying we can't take a TE at 12 because OL and ILB are more important positions is frankly laughable. You aren't even naming players more worthy of #12, you are just claiming Hock isn't worthy because he plays a position you feel isn't as important. Matt LaFleur would disagree on the importance of TE's in his offense.

The "we" I referred to was the royal we, as in all us fans. Not we as just packer fans. I think it's fair to say that the first round selections, outside of a healthy OJ Howard have been a bit disappointing. Engram flashed, but did so with considerable volume from injuries. OJ can't stay healthy it seems and did not do much his first season. Njoku is woefully inconsistent. I could go on.

Every other year it seems there is a "can't miss prospect at TE". I remember people touting Vernon Davis as the next great TE (took 4 years to develop into a major threat) Eric Ebron (took until last year on a different team) and OJ Howard (seemed to be breaking out this year - injured). Yes, Gronk went off his first year - but that's outside the argument as he was not a first round TE. We're in win now, TJ maybe becomes a consistent threat in 2-4 seasons - again, on average.

I'd take Oliver, Sweat, White, Dillard, Bush, Williams and maybe Metcalf over TJ (that's a wash to me). I'd personally wait for Fant or Irv Smith to drop to us. Like I said before though I wouldn't be pissed if we took TJ. I'd just be a bit disappointed.

We have ranked in the top ten in the league for the last two years in QB hits - I think you'd agree that keeping our best asset upright would be a better priority than a luxury pick. Therefore I lean solidifying the oline if one of the above players is at our pick.

 

[scotscheese]

And none of those players were T.J. Hockenson. Nor did I feel any of those players were going to be a once in every 20 year talent like Hock is. Didn't like any of those players. And you can say everyone loved O.J. Howard. I didn't.

I've followed the draft closely since 1980 and I can't tell you one TE I thought more highly of coming out than T.J. Hockenson. He is that good.

O.J. Howard is the only guy in that group who compared with Hockenson coming out. I can envision Hock going in a similar range.

my reply was more because Brandon stated that you DO NOT draft a TE in the first round, so had a quick look myself.

i know the square root of F all about college players really, as i only just started getting any coverage last year, and even when it come to the nfl i only really watch the pack games

 

[Dantés]

The "we" I referred to was the royal we, as in all us fans. Not we as just packer fans. I think it's fair to say that the first round selections, outside of a healthy OJ Howard have been a bit disappointing. Engram flashed, but did so with considerable volume from injuries. OJ can't stay healthy it seems and did not do much his first season. Njoku is woefully inconsistent. I could go on.

Every other year it seems there is a "can't miss prospect at TE". I remember people touting Vernon Davis as the next great TE (took 4 years to develop into a major threat) Eric Ebron (took until last year on a different team) and OJ Howard (seemed to be breaking out this year - injured). Yes, Gronk went off his first year - but that's outside the argument as he was not a first round TE. We're in win now, TJ maybe becomes a consistent threat in 2-4 seasons - again, on average.

I'd take Oliver, Sweat, White, Dillard, Bush, Williams and maybe Metcalf over TJ (that's a wash to me). I'd personally wait for Fant or Irv Smith to drop to us. Like I said before though I wouldn't be pissed if we took TJ. I'd just be a bit disappointed.

We have ranked in the top ten in the league for the last two years in QB hits - I think you'd agree that keeping our best asset upright would be a better priority than a luxury pick. Therefore I lean solidifying the oline if one of the above players is at our pick.

The tendency of TE's to take extra time to develop is a legit argument. Though I would counter that a big factor in that tendency is that TE prospects rarely come out of pro style systems that require them to do the same things they'll do in the NFL. That's not true of Hockenson (or Fant or Smith, for that matter). There are valid reasons why he, like Howard, could make impacts a lot faster than your typical TE prospect.

 

[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.

So I just went back and watched some more film and I’m convinced that Rapp is exactly what we need. He’s more versatile than you give him credit for. There isn’t a better combo safety in this class and He would thrive in Pettine’s D. There’s nothing this kid can’t do on the football field. He is solid in coverage and saying he’d be a liability in a FS role is silly. I respect your opinion on not wanting to call him a playmaker but the skill set to play him off ball or in the box is there. You won’t find another safety in this class that can play a combination of both better than Rapp.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Agree. While safety may be the Packer's most glaring need right now, drafting one at #12 would be a reach.

Ed Oliver and T. J. Hockenson are intriguing prospects, but we've still got nearly four weeks before the draft and a lot can change....A month ago the names were Polite and Burns, and that talk is just a memory now.

Would prefer Oliver over Hockenson though I seriously doubt Oliver falls to the Packers after yesterday's Pro Day. While I like Hockenson, first round TEs just work out so rarely that I would be leery of taking one that high in the draft. The learning curve in the NFL for tight ends is so steep it almost makes sense to just draft projects in later rounds each year since no matter what round you take a TE in, it's going to take time to learn the position.

 

[Dantés]

Would prefer Oliver over Hockenson though I seriously doubt Oliver falls to the Packers after yesterday's Pro Day. While I like Hockenson, first round TEs just work out so rarely that I would be leery of taking one that high in the draft. The learning curve in the NFL for tight ends is so steep it almost makes sense to just draft projects in later rounds each year since no matter what round you take a TE in, it's going to take time to learn the position.

If they want one later, I think Dawson Knox and Kahale Warring are super interesting.

 

[Dantés]

So I just went back and watched some more film and I’m convinced that Rapp is exactly what we need. He’s more versatile than you give him credit for. There isn’t a better combo safety in this class and He would thrive in Pettine’s D. There’s nothing this kid can’t do on the football field. He is solid in coverage and saying he’d be a liability in a FS role is silly. I respect your opinion on not wanting to call him a playmaker but the skill set to play him off ball or in the box is there. You won’t find another safety in this class that can play a combination of both better than Rapp.

We just don't see him the same way, Fat Dogs. I don't think he will ever be better than average playing back half in coverage. I definitely see CGJ and Thornhill as better combo guys. Adderley and Savage are the photo negative versions of him, IMO, where they can play both high and low but are better in high than low.

But if you love him, tout him. I'm certainly a fan of his. We just see his strengths and fit differently.

 

[sschind]

A good player is a good player. I don't care if we got a 10 year stud at RT, a twitchy edge rusher that can come from anywhere on the field and get 12+ regularly for 10 years. a stud in the middle, another Kenny Clark, a nick collins, Sterling Sharpe or any other position. If the guy is good, he's good.

Plenty of game changing edge guys have not brought championships to their teams. HOF QB's are ringless, Speedy WR's that can jump out of stadium and have glue for hands have won nothing other than some TD titles. All the positions are important. I do think some are more premium, but nothing is black and white or set in stone.

If Hock is the man, i'm fine taking him.

I'm still trying to flesh out my feelings towards drafting Hock at 12 so please bear with me if this is confusing.


I like the idea of a stud TE and if Hock is the man at 12 I am fine with it too but part of me hopes he is gone. First of all if he is there and we pass and he is as good as so many think he is we will all be saying I told you so. If we take him and he doesn't live up to the hype there will always be a huge feeling of disappointment in who we could have had. I know that is the case with pretty much anyone we pick but I think Hock has more elite comparisons than maybe anyone in the draft. I hate can't miss guys because sometimes they miss.

So why do I hope he is gone by the time we pick at 12. I almost get the feeling that he is too good to be true so I am kind of hoping someone else makes takes him and takes the decision out of our hands. If it is a mistake then we can thank our lucky stars and if he is all that ...well, we would have taken him but he was gone. Again, you can say that about pretty much anyone but me wanting the Packers to finally have a stud TE, that one that Finley never quite turned out to be, kind of worries me with a prospect like this.

I wish I could simply say take him he will be an elite TE but I just can't shake this feeling I have. Its not really anything against Hockenson that has me feeling this way it just that the Packers finally drafting this high and getting a stud player has me wondering of we can get that lucky.

I just don't feel that way with any of the other players that people have been proposing. Maybe its because although I do think TE is a need its not as big a need as some other positions so I feel if we do take him there is even more pressure for the pick top be a home run so its not deemed a wasted pick.

 

[sschind]

No safety worth the #12 slot IMO. Hock is no doubt a starter for years in the NFL..never a bad thing out of a 1st rounder.

However, other needs are a stud ILB to pair with Blake...perhaps nab a TOPS offensive lineman...I do agree with the sentiment that this DL pool is DEEP enough to not have to do that at 12 unless truly someone on our board falls to us we had as the best.

I truly for the first time haven't entirely "disliked" any rumored picks for us except folks calling for us to draft the DK hulk wide receiver. Literally the ONLY pick I've heard rumored I feel is a catastrophic roll of the dice!

This is the way I feel. Of course I don't follow college football so any information I have is from people suggesting we take this guy or that guy and of course they are going to make him sound great. So what makes me feel this way is that no one, or at least no one that has an opinion that I care about , is completely hating most of these guys. If you say "we should take player A because..." and someone else comes in and says "I like player A but I have concerns about ... I think player B is a better choice" it doesn't completely sour me on player A.

Most players rumored to us don't have a lot of haters. They may not be the favorites but most still think they are pretty good choices.

 

[Dantés]

I'm still trying to flesh out my feelings towards drafting Hock at 12 so please bear with me if this is confusing.


I like the idea of a stud TE and if Hock is the man at 12 I am fine with it too but part of me hopes he is gone. First of all if he is there and we pass and he is as good as so many think he is we will all be saying I told you so. If we take him and he doesn't live up to the hype there will always be a huge feeling of disappointment in who we could have had. I know that is the case with pretty much anyone we pick but I think Hock has more elite comparisons than maybe anyone in the draft. I hate can't miss guys because sometimes they miss.

So why do I hope he is gone by the time we pick at 12. I almost get the feeling that he is too good to be true so I am kind of hoping someone else makes takes him and takes the decision out of our hands. If it is a mistake then we can thank our lucky stars and if he is all that ...well, we would have taken him but he was gone. Again, you can say that about pretty much anyone but me wanting the Packers to finally have a stud TE, that one that Finley never quite turned out to be, kind of worries me with a prospect like this.

I wish I could simply say take him he will be an elite TE but I just can't shake this feeling I have. Its not really anything against Hockenson that has me feeling this way it just that the Packers finally drafting this high and getting a stud player has me wondering of we can get that lucky.

I just don't feel that way with any of the other players that people have been proposing. Maybe its because although I do think TE is a need its not as big a need as some other positions so I feel if we do take him there is even more pressure for the pick top be a home run so its not deemed a wasted pick.

I can resonate with some of this. A few thoughts:

Ignore the "I told you so crowd." People like Brandon that try to thump their chests about how right they were are just trying to distract people from how often they're wrong. The draft is an incredibly unpredictable exercise.

Secondly, if you're listening to the "he's the next Gronk crowd" then I do think that characterization of Hockenson is too good to be true. Gronkowski was the best TE to ever play football. That's really not even a stretch to say. So comparing any TE prospect to him is not fair. As I've said other places, it would be like comparing a running back to Barry Sanders or a wide receiver to Jerry Rice. Peak Gronk was that caliber of player.

That said, I do think it's accurate to say that Hockenson is an elite TE prospect. He does just about everything well and most things exceptionally well. He comes out of a pro style system. He was really productive despite sharing targets with another great TE prospect. He's durable. He's a high character guy by all accounts. He's a borderline elite athlete. It's all there.

My personal take is that Hockenson belongs in a cluster of players who should be in consideration at #12, and if they can move down a few picks and take him, even better. He's not *the* slam dunk pick, nor should he be discounted over positional value.

 

[Fat Dogs]

We just don't see him the same way, Fat Dogs. I don't think he will ever be better than average playing back half in coverage. I definitely see CGJ and Thornhill as better combo guys. Adderley and Savage are the photo negative versions of him, IMO, where they can play both high and low but are better in high than low.

But if you love him, tout him. I'm certainly a fan of his. We just see his strengths and fit differently.

I can appreciate our difference of opinions and I’m very open to other options. Rapp is my favorite but I do like others. I see Thornhill more as a FS. He has a lot of love on this board because of his incredible cover skills but I worry about his tackling. He isn’t a physical tackler. He’d rather drag you down than deliver a hit and that’s a red flag for me. Adderly is another great cover guy and has no problem laying the wood but who knows if he can do it against better competition. I’ve seen enough tape to convince me that he can so he’s my second choice. I also share your opinion on CGJ. I view him like a Rapp. Good combo safety that has the skill set to play both. CGJ and Adderly are my 2a. And 2b. I’d be more than happy with any of the three.

 

[Dantés]

I can appreciate our difference of opinions and I’m very open to other options. Rapp is my favorite but I do like others. I see Thornhill more as a FS. He has a lot of love on this board because of his incredible cover skills but I worry about his tackling. He isn’t a physical tackler. He’d rather drag you down than deliver a hit and that’s a red flag for me. Adderly is another great cover guy and has no problem laying the wood but who knows if he can do it against better competition. I’ve seen enough tape to convince me that he can so he’s my second choice. I also share your opinion on CGJ. I view him like a Rapp. Good combo safety that has the skill set to play both. CGJ and Adderly are my 2a. And 2b. I’d be more than happy with any of the three.

I prefer Adderley and CGJ to Thornhill (who I still like), but I am assuming that the latter would be the choice of the three because the Packers' FO values athletic traits so much.

 

[Fat Dogs]

gone

I prefer Adderley and CGJ to Thornhill (who I still like), but I am assuming that the latter would be the choice of the three because the Packers' FO values athletic traits so much.

I’ve tried to like Thornhill because he does have amazing coverage skills but I can’t get over his tackling. It’s almost like he avoids contact. He’d rather dive at players feet or drag them to the ground than deliver a clean hit. IMO we need a more physical safety that loves to hit.