Arthur Penske Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Packerraymond said: While Hock is the better fit for LaFleur, Fant is night and day the better fit for Aaron Rodgers. Really hope LaFleur can meld his offense around Rodgers' strengths and preferences or this is going to blow up in our face. Rodgers needs a Finley or a Cook. I agree, but I do get a kick out of those people who say they watch Hock and just don't see an athlete that can stretch the field a bit, be a playmaker, etc. Hock isn't Fant athletically, but It's become apparent to me that those people haven't actually watched Hock and just took a glance at a white Iowa guy and decided he's not athletic. I don't know how you could watch even his highlights while considering his combine #s and come to the conclusion he's not an athletic TE. Shoot, he beat Gronk in almost every athletic category and a very similar size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgwingman Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 23 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: Dude, if the TE is open/a freak athlete Rodgers can throw open, he isn't going to *not throw to him* because he's a TE. Since Finley, TE hasn't been good in GB and that is why he hasn't thrown it there all that much compared to having a Gronk or Kelce to throw to. I'm probably alone, but I do think Jimmy will be better in year 2 out of MM's scheme. Here's a question: What do you see at Jimmy's ceiling this year? What is Hock ceiling over the next 3 years? I think what they're getting at is that a TE, even on their best day, is the No.2 receiver on the team. Is that worth the No. 12 overall pick? Is it worth the No. 30 pick? Obviously TEs contribute in other ways to, so it's not an easy question. I'm just questioning how great a TE has to be to justify a first round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathstar Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 14 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: I agree, but I do get a kick out of those people who say they watch Hock and just don't see an athlete that can stretch the field a bit, be a playmaker, etc. Hock isn't Fant athletically, but It's become apparent to me that those people haven't actually watched Hock and just took a glance at a white Iowa guy and decided he's not athletic. I don't know how you could watch even his highlights while considering his combine #s and come to the conclusion he's not an athletic TE. Shoot, he beat Gronk in almost every athletic category and a very similar size. IMO Hock is more Finley, Fant is more Cook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcon14 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 16 minutes ago, pgwingman said: Here's a question: What do you see at Jimmy's ceiling this year? What is Hock ceiling over the next 3 years? I think what they're getting at is that a TE, even on their best day, is the No.2 receiver on the team. Is that worth the No. 12 overall pick? Is it worth the No. 30 pick? Obviously TEs contribute in other ways to, so it's not an easy question. I'm just questioning how great a TE has to be to justify a first round pick. This is the important question. And I think it's probably like a top 4 TE in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 13 minutes ago, rcon14 said: This is the important question. And I think it's probably like a top 4 TE in the league. IMO, it has to be a combination of "enormous upside and high floor" as well as "later on, the tight end position is pretty dire". It's a lot easier to pass on guys like Hockenson and Fant when you know that guys like Jace Sternberger, Isaac Nauta, Josh Oliver, Dax Raymond, Dawson Knox, and Foster Moreau are going to be available later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 55 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: I agree, but I do get a kick out of those people who say they watch Hock and just don't see an athlete that can stretch the field a bit, be a playmaker, etc. Hock isn't Fant athletically, but It's become apparent to me that those people haven't actually watched Hock and just took a glance at a white Iowa guy and decided he's not athletic. I don't know how you could watch even his highlights while considering his combine #s and come to the conclusion he's not an athletic TE. Shoot, he beat Gronk in almost every athletic category and a very similar size. And if we can get him at pick #42 where Gronk went I'd be all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcon14 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 24 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: IMO, it has to be a combination of "enormous upside and high floor" as well as "later on, the tight end position is pretty dire". It's a lot easier to pass on guys like Hockenson and Fant when you know that guys like Jace Sternberger, Isaac Nauta, Josh Oliver, Dax Raymond, Dawson Knox, and Foster Moreau are going to be available later. I'm out on Isaac Nauta. 4.91 40 is unacceptable at TE. Combine that with a 7.45 3C and 4.43 shuttle, AND he's small. He's off the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 24 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: IMO, it has to be a combination of "enormous upside and high floor" as well as "later on, the tight end position is pretty dire". It's a lot easier to pass on guys like Hockenson and Fant when you know that guys like Jace Sternberger, Isaac Nauta, Josh Oliver, Dax Raymond, Dawson Knox, and Foster Moreau are going to be available later. Yeah, passing on Fank/Hock is a lot easier knowing you have a slower, less athletic Rochard Rodgers waiting in Nauta. This isn't a deep class at TE. Again, I'm not advocating for a TE at 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 47 minutes ago, cannondale said: And if we can get him at pick #42 where Gronk went I'd be all for it. Ha. I'm not advocating for Hock or any TE at #12 or saying any 2019 TE will be Gronk. But basically any team would kill to get Gronk's career out of the #12 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcon14 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: Ha. I'm not advocating for Hock or any TE at #12 or saying any 2019 TE will be Gronk. But basically any team would kill to get Gronk's career out of the #12 pick. 100%. If you could guarantee me Hock would be Gronk, I'm taking him at 12, no doubt. The thing is, the expected value of Hock is probably like a slightly above average TE, which is just not worth anything close to 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Arthur Penske said: I'm probably alone, but I do think Jimmy will be better in year 2 out of MM's scheme. Lol. Alone? Have you not seen the massive amounts of arguments in which I've said this? I've literally been saying this since the day we signed him. Whatever you think of tight ends and Rodgers, you have to admit it takes him time to trust them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 4 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said: Ha. I'm not advocating for Hock or any TE at #12 or saying any 2019 TE will be Gronk. But basically any team would kill to get Gronk's career out of the #12 pick. That's the heart of the discussion. The argument for him at #12 will be met with every argument why he shouldn't. If you want a TE at #12 he better be perfect. He isn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 1 hour ago, Arthur Penske said: Yeah, passing on Fank/Hock is a lot easier knowing you have a slower, less athletic Rochard Rodgers waiting in Nauta. This isn't a deep class at TE. Again, I'm not advocating for a TE at 12. If the Packers trade back into the 15-20 range, I think Hock at least becomes part of the discussion (assuming someone hasn't overvalued him and taken him already). I'm really not interested in Fant unless he's there at 30. After those 2, there's probably not another TE in this class I would draft before the 4th round except Sternberger (that includes Irv). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 17 hours ago, jetskid007 said: Wanted to get your pulse on something I had been toying in a mock I'm working on; given how aggressive the new regime is I wouldn't put it past you guys to consider... ARI - QB Murray SF - DE Bosa NYJ trade 1(3) to GB for 1(12), 1(30) and 2020 3rd... GB selects: DL Quinnen Williams Thoughts? I think there's about a 1% chance that trade would even be offered by Green Bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 6 hours ago, BrettFavre004 said: I think the biggest reason in keeping Graham, is that releasing him would have required Gute to admit his biggest move in his first year as a GM didn't work out. Probably should have been roughly a 50/50 decision on keeping him in a vacuum, but I think that had to play into it. I REALLY don't think that's the case. You really think his pride is going to come before the franchise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.