Packers Pre-Draft Visits Thread

[MaximusGluteus]

I actually rewatched Thornhill's highlights and I don't know if I saw a different video the first time or if I was half asleep, but he looks a lot better than I remember, and I was trying to still not like him.  I don't think he'd be a bad pickup, although Adderly is still my absolute #1 safety in this draft.  I'm no longer sure what I'd prefer at 12, but I wouldn't mind seeing Adderly and Butler at #30 and #44 if possible.

[cannondale]

24 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Maybe Burns AND Sweat!

Shhhhh ! There will be seventeen Hock / Metcalf mocks before you know it

[JaireAlex]

4 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Go check out some stats on Campbell.  I don't think he was used at all as a deep threat.  And when I say "deep threat" I mean used like Desean Jackson, running go-routes and catching the ball 35-50 yards downfield.  I can't remember it exactly, but I think Campbell caught one ball last year deeper than 25 yards, or something like that.

I think his value is catching a 7 yard pass and turning it into an electric 25 yard play due to his speed, quickness and agility.

But again, I'm going from memory here.....

 

EDIT: and there Cadmus goes....guess my memory wasn't too far off.

Same place as AJ Brown. It's projection. Obviously both are lower grades if they don't project, but neither were asked to do it. He's no more than a round two (and Brown as well) if they don't test out or project and that's where Isabella has a definite edge because he did it. And that's what a good scouting department is for. I can see why GB would go with the guy with the tape all day.

[tredpack]

10 hours ago, MaximusGluteus said:

I actually rewatched Thornhill's highlights and I don't know if I saw a different video the first time or if I was half asleep, but he looks a lot better than I remember, and I was trying to still not like him.  I don't think he'd be a bad pickup, although Adderly is still my absolute #1 safety in this draft.  I'm no longer sure what I'd prefer at 12, but I wouldn't mind seeing Adderly and Butler at #30 and #44 if possible.

Thoughts on Darnell Savage? He's been my guy for a month or two now. 

 

 

[vegas492]

13 hours ago, JaireAlex said:

Same place as AJ Brown. It's projection. Obviously both are lower grades if they don't project, but neither were asked to do it. He's no more than a round two (and Brown as well) if they don't test out or project and that's where Isabella has a definite edge because he did it. And that's what a good scouting department is for. I can see why GB would go with the guy with the tape all day.

I didn't like how Campbell ran routes.  To say he was "disinterested" would be a compliment.  Obviously that is correctable, but that knocks his down a bunch for me.  As a rookie, Campbell is a gimmick player.  Sweeps, returns, screens...pre-determined stuff. 

I think that Isabella is farther advanced as a receiver.  And Brown is better than Isabella, though maybe not by much.

I still don't see a lot of value in a WR prior to the third round.  Not with our holes and how the draft is shaping up.  I think you will get good WR's a little later, say round 4.  And we have two picks there.

[JaireAlex]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

I didn't like how Campbell ran routes.  To say he was "disinterested" would be a compliment.  Obviously that is correctable, but that knocks his down a bunch for me.  As a rookie, Campbell is a gimmick player.  Sweeps, returns, screens...pre-determined stuff. 

I think that Isabella is farther advanced as a receiver.  And Brown is better than Isabella, though maybe not by much.

I still don't see a lot of value in a WR prior to the third round.  Not with our holes and how the draft is shaping up.  I think you will get good WR's a little later, say round 4.  And we have two picks there.

Could be. And it may be wishful thinking on my part. I see a bit more in Campbell. That's one for scouts. All three of those guys are similar grade and with questions. Truth is how much they "want it" is really all that separates them. Campbell has the highest ceiling.

Where this forum is dead off for the most part is that we have to upgrade this offense.

And my main disagreement is a lot on the evaluation of some of these edge players, not on the pick itself. I've gone back over Polite now and see he's getting the shaft. Someone will get a steal there. He has far fewer questions for me than Burns or Sweat. I don't mind a 20 pick on him at all.

"with all our holes" -- not seeing that at all tbh. They are filled except safety. A bare cupboard is the problem and that's where you grab a bunch of guys to develop.

You STACK the receiver room in this draft, however that works out in the draft because these are the guys AR will have for the next four years. Could be round 1,2,3, or 6, and there is no clear pick there, having gone over it many times now. Perhaps some gems day three are the plan. But they got it figured out by now and there are way too many prospects for them not to have several really good targets. Should be a very fun draft.

[Cadmus]

To be clear... 

In the last two weeks @JaireAlex has stated. 

He expects them to double up at DL because this is the deepest class he's ever seen 

You expect them to double up at S because the cupboard is bare 

You expect them to double up at TE because the class has so much depth 

You expect them to double up at EDGE because AT LEAST 5 players outside Round 1 have higher ceilings than ALL of the EDGE prospects that will be drafted in the Top 32. 

You expect them to double up at the OL position because the mid-rounders are so good and they need to grab at least 2 rookies. 

Green Bay needs to (and will based on your claims) STACK the WR room. (I'm sure you'll tell me that STACK means they only draft 1 WR). 

Alright, so in the last 2 weeks we're up to 12 players at 6 positions, and we have 10 Draft Picks. 

I guess we won't address the QB, RB, ILB or CB positions either. 

Honestly, you're one of the most erratic posters I've ever seen. 

 

[vegas492]

21 minutes ago, JaireAlex said:

"with all our holes" -- not seeing that at all tbh. They are filled except safety. A bare cupboard is the problem and that's where you grab a bunch of guys to develop.

Look at next year.  You should draft with an eye on the future.  Bulaga and Spriggs on the last year of their deals.  Daniels and Lowry on their last year.  Graham is signed for 2 more years, but next year is the "easy" out.  Fackrell is in the last year of his deal.

Those are the holes I see, along with safety.

I don't see holes at WR.  I see promising talent from MVS and ESB.  I see a lot of potential in Moore.  What I don't see is a true slot guy.  I think ESB can function in there, maybe even Moore, obviously Adams will see snaps there, but I'd like a true slot kid.  I'd like him to get a few "planned" targets while he develops...as he returns kicks/punts.

I'd also love a better RB to compliment Jones, but I really don't like this draft class at RB.

Edited April 12, 2019 by vegas492

[Fl0nkerton]

2 minutes ago, Cadmus said:

To be clear... 

In the last two weeks @JaireAlex has stated. 

He expects them to double up at DL because this is the deepest class he's ever seen 

You expect them to double up at S because the cupboard is bare 

You expect them to double up at TE because the class has so much depth 

You expect them to double up at EDGE because AT LEAST 5 players outside Round 1 have higher ceilings than ALL of the EDGE prospects that will be drafted in the Top 32. 

You expect them to double up at the OL position because the mid-rounders are so good and they need to grab at least 2 rookies. 

Green Bay needs to (and will based on your claims) STACK the WR room. (I'm sure you'll tell me that STACK means they only draft 1 WR). 

Alright, so in the last 2 weeks we're up to 12 players at 6 positions, and we have 10 Draft Picks. 

I guess we won't address the QB, RB, ILB or CB positions either. 

Honestly, you're one of the most erratic posters I've ever seen. 

 

Covering all his bases tbh.

[Cadmus]

5 minutes ago, Fl0nkerton said:

Covering all his bases tbh.

He can't be wrong if he says ALL of it. 

[JaireAlex]

15 minutes ago, Fl0nkerton said:

Covering all his bases tbh.

 

18 minutes ago, Cadmus said:

To be clear... 

In the last two weeks @JaireAlex has stated. 

He expects them to double up at DL because this is the deepest class he's ever seen 

You expect them to double up at S because the cupboard is bare 

You expect them to double up at TE because the class has so much depth 

You expect them to double up at EDGE because AT LEAST 5 players outside Round 1 have higher ceilings than ALL of the EDGE prospects that will be drafted in the Top 32. 

You expect them to double up at the OL position because the mid-rounders are so good and they need to grab at least 2 rookies. 

Green Bay needs to (and will based on your claims) STACK the WR room. (I'm sure you'll tell me that STACK means they only draft 1 WR). 

Alright, so in the last 2 weeks we're up to 12 players at 6 positions, and we have 10 Draft Picks. 

I guess we won't address the QB, RB, ILB or CB positions either. 

Honestly, you're one of the most erratic posters I've ever seen. 

 

And I want a double move down.......stated about ten times.

But never said a double up on TE. And we have ten picks. CB is a terrible class and we have two green first rounders and a second rounder, all better than the top pick in this class,  on the roster.

STACK would be two picks at WR.

Again. You exaggerate. Three picks on DL and OL would be ideal.

1-2 DL

2 edge

2 safeties

OL

TE

RB

1-2 wR

9-11 picks. We have 10. Sorry it seems erratic. Just think rounds 2-3 offer a ton more value than 12 or 30.

[packfanfb]

 

 

[Packerraymond]

9 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

 

 

He was the guy who reported the Greg Little one too and no one else. Where does he get the stuff? I know he has no sources. Howard and Little aren't even on my Packers board, I just don't see why they'd be fits here.

[packfanfb]

Just now, Packerraymond said:

He was the guy who reported the Greg Little one too and no one else. Where does he get the stuff? I know he has no sources. Howard and Little aren't even on my Packers board, I just don't see why they'd be fits here.

idk man, Kruse has always been decently reliable for Packers info though in my experience. 

[Arthur Penske]

5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

He was the guy who reported the Greg Little one too and no one else. Where does he get the stuff? I know he has no sources. Howard and Little aren't even on my Packers board, I just don't see why they'd be fits here.

I think Little came from Little's personal snapchat/Instagram showing he was in GB.