2019 Draft Thoughts

[Leader]

NFL Com: Draft Rankings/Grades:

RANK 18  -  PACKERS: B

» Round 1: (No. 12 overall) Rashan Gary, DE, Michigan; (No. 21) Darnell Savage, S, Maryland.
» Round 2: (No. 44) Elgton Jenkins, C/OG, Mississippi State.
» Round 3: (No. 75) Jace Sternberger, TE, Texas A&M.
» Round 5: (No. 150) Kingsley Keke, DE, Texas A&M.
» Round 6: (No. 185) Ka'Dar Hollman, CB, Toledo; (No. 194) Dexter Williams, RB, Notre Dame.
» Round 7: (No. 226) Ty Summers, LB, TCU.

Gary was one of the most polarizing prospects in this class. Some people saw a 277-pounder who ran a 4.58 40-yard dash, oozing elite traits and untapped potential. Others saw an edge rusher who logged 10 sacks in three college seasons and was consistently overshadowed on the Michigan defense by Devin Bush and Chase Winovich. Count this draft grader among those in the latter group. But alas, the report card got a major boost from the next four picks! Savage, a hyper-rangy playmaker who flies to the football and through the ball carrier, is the perfect complement at safety to the more box-friendly Adrian Amos. Jenkins played all across the offensive line at Mississippi State, but his professional home will be on the interior -- an area where Green Bay definitely needed some help. Sternberger, who led all FBS tight ends with 10 touchdowns last season while averaging a whopping 17.3 yards per catch, looks like the mismatch weapon the Pack thought they were getting in Jimmy Graham. And Keke, who showed flashes as a versatile D-lineman in College Station, is exactly the kind of raw, traitsy project that makes sense in Round 5.

Edited May 4, 2019 by Leader

[Gopher Trace]

 Excellent draft class. I'd give it a A-.

[AlexGreen#20]

16 hours ago, Gopher Trace said:

 Excellent draft class. I'd give it a A-.

Of course you would

[PACKRULE]

On 5/4/2019 at 5:14 PM, Gopher Trace said:

 Excellent draft class. I'd give it a A-.

I would support this on paper. Having the second first this year actually let us take that risk at 12. If it turns out wow, if not big deal as the next 3 will all be starters for years to come. Good draft that will produce a few starters and a couple roll players.

[Joe]

If you're going to grade our draft, we got a bunch of guys that will at least start as role players and the first three could become impact players immediately if they pan out the way we would want them to. If that means we had a B for this draft, I'll be more than happy to take it. I don't see anyone in this draft busting except for Gary and only because of his shoulder issue.

[Gopher Trace]

On 5/5/2019 at 10:26 AM, AlexGreen#20 said:

Of course you would

And, as always, I'd simply like to point out that the player you have chosen to name yourself after was a miserable failure of a draft pick (which undermines pretty much all your posts, but none more than the ones about anything draft-related).

Edited May 6, 2019 by Gopher Trace
syntax

[AlexGreen#20]

17 minutes ago, Gopher Trace said:

And, as always, I'd simply like to point out that the player you have chosen to name yourself after was a miserable failure of a draft pick (which undermines pretty much all your posts, but none more than the ones about anything draft-related).

You're haven't been around to hear this explanation any of the first 10 times it's been given?

[vegas492]

Grading a draft right after it is done is like dating your second cousin.  Sure you can do it, but don't be surprised when people give you strange looks.

[AlexGreen#20]

44 minutes ago, Joe said:

If you're going to grade our draft, we got a bunch of guys that will at least start as role players and the first three could become impact players immediately if they pan out the way we would want them to. If that means we had a B for this draft, I'll be more than happy to take it. I don't see anyone in this draft busting except for Gary and only because of his shoulder issue.

That's an illogical assumption to make. If you get 2 average starters out of a draft, you had a pretty good draft. Acting like we're pulling 4 starters out of this draft for sure is just wrong minded. 

If you assume you have a 50% chance of hitting on a first rounder, 25% chance of hitting on a 2nd rounder, 10% chance of hitting on a 3rd rounder, and a 5% chance of hitting on anything later than that, we'd expect 1.55 starters out of this draft.

[Gopher Trace]

19 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're haven't been around to hear this explanation any of the first 10 times it's been given?

The most convincing explanation is you're not very good (Occam's razor, if you will).

[Cakeshoppe]

2 hours ago, Gopher Trace said:

And, as always, I'd simply like to point out that the player you have chosen to name yourself after was a miserable failure of a draft pick (which undermines pretty much all your posts, but none more than the ones about anything draft-related).

If being enthusiastic 8 years ago about a draft pick that ended up bombing out of the league for largely injury reasons is disqualifying, then there are zero people qualified to hold opinions on football.

[OneTwoSixFive]

deleted

Edited May 6, 2019 by OneTwoSixFive

[Golfman]

20 minutes ago, Cakeshoppe said:

If being enthusiastic 8 years ago about a draft pick that ended up bombing out of the league for largely injury reasons is disqualifying, then there are zero people qualified to hold opinions on football.

Injury reasons? Is LOFT an injury? 

[OneTwoSixFive]

2 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

That's an illogical assumption to make. If you get 2 average starters out of a draft, you had a pretty good draft. Acting like we're pulling 4 starters out of this draft for sure is just wrong minded. 

That seems too low an expectation to me, though it does depend on the definition of average starters. Given how multiple teams are these days with so many sub packages, I'd guess that some players outside of base personnel get more snaps than in years gone by. Nickel corner is one example. In some systems they are on the field a majority of the time. Teams that are known as having 3-4 defenses can have one, two three four, whatever, on the front line and the line choices on third down are often different from the first two downs.

With all that in mind, in an average draft I'd go with getting the two starters, plus one frequent roleplayer and several shorter term guys who fill backup roles and ST duties for a time, while the team decides on whether they can handle more (most times they can't, and are replaced by newer guys.....but not always, some will ascend). Perhaps the average should be marginally higher than that, to allow for surprise successes later in the draft. So instead of two average starters, lets say 2.25.

This year, the Packers started with at least one pick in every round and with 2x 1sts, 2x 4ths and 2x 6ths. From that bounty I'd hope that three of their first four picks have starter potential. I'd also hope that one other guy (I'm thinking of RB Williams) can be in a rotation. Along with that are the shorter-term guys that the Packers can either spend some time trying to develop their potential, or use them as ST players and often, both. The Packers chose to lose both their 4th rounders to go up for Savage, but that was their choice, the high expectation from the picks they started with, remains (for me) the same.

Edited May 6, 2019 by OneTwoSixFive

[Cakeshoppe]

48 minutes ago, Golfman said:

Injury reasons? Is LOFT an injury? 

I'm not going to claim he was a good player before the injury, but he tore his ACL in his rookie season and it affected his play throughout his second season to the point where he was an injury scratch the final 4 games because of the same lingering injury. I consider that an injury bomb