Jump to content

2021 NFL Draft Thread


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

My OT Rankings:

1. Slater

2. Sewell

3. Darrisaw

4. Jenkins - RAS 9.75

5. Cosmi - RAS 9.99

6. Hudson - RAS 4.42

7. Radunz - RAS 9.27

8. Eichenberg - RAS 8.53

9. Leatherwood - RAS 9.68

10. Mayfield - RAS 4.90

11. Christensen - RAS 9.84

12. Carman - N/A

 

 

 

Updated the 4-12 with RAS scores (1-3 are long gone by the time we draft). 

Mayfield and Hudson are outliers. 

Rest all fall squarely within the athletic profile Gute covets. 

Edited by packfanfb
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Thank you.  I would have thought he would have scored a tick higher.  The way his feet moved on film led me to believe his shuttle scores would have been better.  His bench doesn't surprise me....long arms.

I haven't watched that many tackles on film yet.  I'm probably going to watch a few and see how those feet compare.  

Because when I watch Little play, those feet are always chopping.  He moves so easily.  If I compare him to what I know, Bakh and Turner, his feet put Turner's to shame.  And they might rival Bakh's.  

Despite that, I still don't see RT in Walker Little.  Not enough base power, yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vegas492you missed the post in which I responded to vonkarman. I did read the post you had recognized and again I stand by the fact that he's a 24 year old prospect that would be a bit of a project at the next level. We need a plug-n-play guy who excels in the run game, which Christensen and Walker Little do not as has been evidenced by tape, not TDN. 

Also, can we stop with the RAS score stuff? It's fascinating, I get it, I'd like that information available, but just because a prospect has a high RAS score doesn't mean they're going to automatically be a Packer selection or a draft hit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Joe said:

@vegas492you missed the post in which I responded to vonkarman. I did read the post you had recognized and again I stand by the fact that he's a 24 year old prospect that would be a bit of a project at the next level. We need a plug-n-play guy who excels in the run game, which Christensen and Walker Little do not as has been evidenced by tape, not TDN. 

Also, can we stop with the RAS score stuff? It's fascinating, I get it, I'd like that information available, but just because a prospect has a high RAS score doesn't mean they're going to automatically be a Packer selection or a draft hit.

Then throw out all the statistical information, none of it means they're going to be automatically a Packer or a draft hit?!?!  RAS is a variable that is considered in the overall evaluation of a prospect.

I didn't pay much attention to it until Gute took over.  His past drafts seem to have a direct correlation to RAS.  Not the end-all, but definitely part of the evaluation. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Then throw out all the statistical information, none of it means they're going to be automatically a Packer or a draft hit?!?!  RAS is a variable that is considered in the overall evaluation of a prospect.

I didn't pay much attention to it until Gute took over.  His past drafts seem to have a direct correlation to RAS.  Not the end-all, but definitely part of the evaluation. 

That was my entire point about RAS. Some here(not you) seem to invest way too much in RAS scores...

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Joe said:

@vegas492you missed the post in which I responded to vonkarman. I did read the post you had recognized and again I stand by the fact that he's a 24 year old prospect that would be a bit of a project at the next level. We need a plug-n-play guy who excels in the run game, which Christensen and Walker Little do not as has been evidenced by tape, not TDN. 

Also, can we stop with the RAS score stuff? It's fascinating, I get it, I'd like that information available, but just because a prospect has a high RAS score doesn't mean they're going to automatically be a Packer selection or a draft hit.

What Packers OL was drafted based on their run blocking prowess?   We draft mobile, flexible OL that are first and foremost projections to be good pass blockers.

It is why with all of the success our OL has had, the team struggles converting short yardage.  We don't have road graders.

We aren't going to pick the kind of player you seem to be advocating for.  When it comes down to picking between the better pass Ol or the better run blocking OL, we pick the better pass blocker.   In today's NFL it is the way to lean every time.   An OT who is "plug and play" and a good run blocker is picked earlier than the  Packers get to pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Joe said:

@vegas492you missed the post in which I responded to vonkarman. I did read the post you had recognized and again I stand by the fact that he's a 24 year old prospect that would be a bit of a project at the next level. We need a plug-n-play guy who excels in the run game, which Christensen and Walker Little do not as has been evidenced by tape, not TDN. 

Also, can we stop with the RAS score stuff? It's fascinating, I get it, I'd like that information available, but just because a prospect has a high RAS score doesn't mean they're going to automatically be a Packer selection or a draft hit.

Uh, no.  Tape has not shown that Walker Little cannot run block.  The draft network wrote that, you basically copied and pasted their analysis on here, then scrambled to show that "you" were right.  And ultimately, you were not.  Dude run blocks as well as you ask any LT to run block.

The only thing I can say about Christensen is that again, you copied and pasted something from their write up, almost exactly and was called out for it.  I'm not going to comment much about him, because I haven't watched much, but from what I saw, he's no guard.  Others here agreed.

Plug and play tackle.  Yah, it would be nice.  Kicking Turner inside would add some depth.  I can get behind a "plug and play" tackle.  Walker is not "plug and play" at RT.  I don't know that Christensen couldn't man RT, I know he could compete with Turner.  I'd be happier with Radnunz, Eich or Mayfield if we are talking pure RT's here.

Regarding RAS....we have a history of liking high RAS guys.  That's why we fan look at those scores.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Uh, no.  Tape has not shown that Walker Little cannot run block.  The draft network wrote that, you basically copied and pasted their analysis on here, then scrambled to show that "you" were right. 

Did we not just go through this the other day???

Either that or you're trying to troll me in which we'll have to get @CWood21involved. We literally discussed this very topic the other day in which I gave you multiple time markings that roundly rejected that Walker Little is strong in the running game.

TRY....TRY to remember what you see in this video this time unless you just want to be stubborn and reject what your eyes are showing you...

 

I should not have to re-post what was posted the other day. Or do I have to state that you ignored the tape the other day because you disagree with what you see on film and would rather spin the argument back to your insinuation that I don't look at tape. THAT is being a troll...

Edited by Joe
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Joe said:

@vegas492you missed the post in which I responded to vonkarman. I did read the post you had recognized and again I stand by the fact that he's a 24 year old prospect that would be a bit of a project at the next level. We need a plug-n-play guy who excels in the run game, which Christensen and Walker Little do not as has been evidenced by tape, not TDN. 

Also, can we stop with the RAS score stuff? It's fascinating, I get it, I'd like that information available, but just because a prospect has a high RAS score doesn't mean they're going to automatically be a Packer selection or a draft hit.

Your tackles do not need to excel in the run game, they are pass blockers first and foremost. Bahk, Bulaga, Clifton all held their own as run blockers, you definitely accept that when they are studs in pass pro.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Packerraymond said:

Your tackles do not need to excel in the run game, they are pass blockers first and foremost. Bahk, Bulaga, Clifton all held their own as run blockers, you definitely accept that when they are studs in pass pro.

In our system, they DO need to excel in the run game, that's where Turner excels believe it or not as he struggles with speed rushers and speed-to-power rushers as evidenced in the TB game. It's also why he's better off at Guard, rather than Tackle as well. Bulaga was strong as a run-blocker as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Joe said:

In our system, they DO need to excel in the run game, that's where Turner excels believe it or not as he struggles with speed rushers and speed-to-power rushers as evidenced in the TB game. It's also why he's better off at Guard, rather than Tackle as well. Bulaga was strong as a run-blocker as well.

No, they don't. In any system in the NFL a tackle needs to excel at pass blocking.

That's like saying and EDGE needs to excel in run support.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Your tackles do not need to excel in the run game, they are pass blockers first and foremost. Bahk, Bulaga, Clifton all held their own as run blockers, you definitely accept that when they are studs in pass pro.

In fact I'd say one of the biggest advantages of the Shanahan tree run system is that it sets up lesser run blockers for success due to the confusion, angles, personnel groupings, etc.  It's basically the 2020 version of what Old Man Shanahan's zone blocking system did in the late 90s/early 00s.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Joe said:

Did we not just go through this the other day???

Either that or you're trying to troll me in which we'll have to get @CWood21involved. We literally discussed this very topic the other day in which I gave you multiple time markings that roundly rejected that Walker Little is strong in the running game.

TRY....TRY to remember what you see in this video this time unless you just want to be stubborn and reject what your eyes are showing you...

 

I should not have to re-post what was posted the other day. Or do I have to state that you ignored the tape the other day because you disagree with what you see on film and would rather spin the argument back to your insinuation that I don't look at tape. THAT is being a troll...

Oh, quite your crying.  We went over this.  You and I see very different things regarding Walker Little.  I watched the tape you sent and it looked exactly like his highlight tape and every other snap I've seen.  Amazing feet.  Impressive athlete who gets a little high when blocking because he is 6'7''.  He blocks in the run game EXACTLY how you would expect a LT to block.

Enough of us have noticed on here how you have very definitive thoughts on prospects based on what you've read from other sites.  Walker Little being the first.  The second you said Christensen was a guard was another clue.  Because that "guard" statement totally gave it away.  Like you've run a few mock sims and read someone evaluation of guys you were looking at.

Edited by vegas492
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the tape again.  I see a player that moves well.  Gets to the 2nd level.  Looks like a GB Packers tackle.

Does he miss a couple blocks during the game?  Yes- like every OL.

To look at that tape and see a player who is a "terrible" run blocker makes me question all evaluations.  I simple don't see the same things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...