Jump to content

2021 NFL Draft Thread

ChaRisMa

By ChaRisMa
in Green Bay Packers

 Share

Recommended Posts

R T

R T

Posted
Posted

Browns reporter Scott Petrak tweeted out, Browns GM Andrew Berry says they have 114 draftable players and 54 listed as priority free agents. 

This goes in hand with a few things Tony Pauline said in his podcast last week. Pauline reported that some of the teams he talked to are going back and adding about 50 players to their boards after they have set them for fear of running out of players in the final rounds of the draft. 

After listening to Pauline I did my personal annual list of Packer types, most years I can come up with a list of 140ish, but this year I have a list of 97 as of now. Wondering if the Packers board is smaller than normal? For teams that are in a rebuild and would like to add picks it is a good year to do that, There will probably be several teams glad to fire sale late picks this year for late picks next year. For the Packers who are bringing most well everyone back and probably will only have about 8 roster spot open for rookies, extra late picks this year is not a big advantage.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Norm

Norm

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, R T said:

McNabb is a good comp to what he could be, but McNabb was much more of a runner coming out of college. Prescott is probably a very good comp for Fields right now. For those that are concerned about triggering the always racially sensitive crowd maybe Josh Allen, but I think Josh Allen is a great comp Trey Lance and not Fields. Maybe Dan Jones?    

McNabb was much more of a runner in college than Fields? Like it's not a ridiculous statement but I don't know what the basis of this is. I actually think I'd give Fields the lean there though it's been a while since Cuse McNabb. 

I don't know **** about **** but I watched entirely too much of the QBs the last few days and I was very surprised how differently my takes were than the general consensus.

Maybe he's an ******* or killed hookers or loves coke or some ****. But other than that I just don't understand the logic of he can't read defenses for **** etc. Then you go watch Wilson lock on to his first read any time there's some scheme concept to get that dude open and force it. And miss finding a wide open dude every 4th play. Yeah that can probably be coached out. (Go watch Wilson Houston game) But still. It sounds like Fields big gripe is really his to me. 

I'm not going to draft Mac Jones (or Davis Mills). That's a me problem though. I don't want mediocre arm mediocre athlete QBs in the top 64. Though I don't think Mills is going there anyways 

Mond being anything beyond the 2nd feels hilarious to me. I don't see the issues. He has some mechanical crap ya gotta coach out, does everything else. 

Lance feels like Kaep. Might be good but idk. Every damn throw has run action off to which I guess he'll be used to that. Not my guy. Don't think his arm is this giant cannon that it's made out to be.

Feel like it's

Lawrence/Fields, either one

Reluctantly Wilson 

Mond/Lance, I'll put Lance there but I want to say it's mond but nobody else thinks so, so whatever

Mac Jones

The only ones I'd even bother after that Franks in the mids. Maybe Newman. Book after the draft. 

Edited by Norm
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R T

R T

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Norm said:

McNabb was much more of a runner in college than Fields? Like it's not a ridiculous statement but I don't know what the basis of this is. I actually think I'd give Fields the lean there though it's been a while since Cuse McNabb. 

I don't know **** about **** but I watched entirely too much of the QBs the last few days and I was very surprised how differently my takes were than the general consensus.

Maybe scrambling runner would of been better? I read where a Ohio State coach stated that the reason they didn't run Fields more was because they didn't want to risk injury because the lack of depth at QB for them. Also a little different era between the two offenses, so many RPO driven offenses today compared to McNabb's period of football.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R T

R T

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, craig said:

What I like with McGinn's stuff is that he's polling scouts and getting comments from actual team scouts.  We can (perhaps rightfully) mock or disagree with stuff that scouts say.  But McGinn's process gets lots of scouts voting and ranking, so it helps to get a pretty good picture of the range of perceptions.  If each team has ≥dozen scouts, the league has >300 scouts.  Obviously they won't all see the same thing or have the same perceptions about a guy.  Likewise they won't always put those into words well, so some scout may put things into words poorly, whatever.  

Two cautions I have with McGinn's stuff:  Either many aren't including comments, or else McGinn is selecting quotes from those who do.  Those comments can color my perceptions, I think.  (Maybe one scout says Corsmi is pretty stiff; and that's what I read and remember; maybe 299 other scouts don't see that, but my perception is colored by that one scout's comment that McGinn included?  Or, maybe the scout was really only trying to say that he's too stiff to be a top-10 pick, to be a hall-of-famer; but maybe at pick 29 he's fine?  Beats me.). 

My other hesitation is that while there may be ≥300 pro scouts in the league, I don't know if McGinn's sources are necessarily representative?  Maybe he's only connected to older scouts?  Or maybe it's only youngish novice scouts who take the time?  Beats me.  

One of the things I like with McGinn's stuff, especially back when he'd share comments on each of the Packers selections, was how wide-ranging the perspectives were.  One guy thinks Linsley was really solid starter-prospect and 3rd-round worthy.  Another was meh, 7th round/UDFA/too-short.  Probably more scatter of perspective the further away you get from the top 30 guys.  

https://theathletic.com/2537509/2021/04/23/ranking-the-top-quarterbacks-in-the-2021-nfl-draft-bob-mcginns-grades-are-in/

 

Your link just goes to a subscribe button. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
deathstar

deathstar

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hitnhope said:

You are seeing things that you want to see.   All of them are very talented throwers, and have the ability to make plays with their feet.  All 3 made multiple pro bowls.

Who should have been the comps?  Who would have been a better match?

Definition of gaslighting right here. Toxic and no room for this on the board.
 

To answer your question 2020 Josh Allen is a great comp for Fields.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craig

craig

Posted
Posted

Packers have only one pick each in rounds 1-2-3.  The prevailing assumption is that CB/OT/DL are primary targets; that the draft depth aligns pretty well with those; and that whichever of those don't get taken 1st, that Gute can do some maneuvering with his 2nd or 3rd picks to make match need to BPA with his 2nd and 3rd picks.  

Hypothetical:  *IF* one of those was not selected before Day 3, which is most likely to pass, and if so what might it tell us?  I kinda think to last year, we all had WR as a target, and the draft was supposedly strong there, but then we didn't take any, and by the 2nd or 3rd round the story was that the draft guys maybe weren't really any more rookie-ready than guys we already had.  

DL:  What might it reflect if we didn't take one before Day 3?  Perhaps that they like Keke and still see more future for him?  Maybe that they like Previllon more than we know?  Maybe that they think the run vulnerability was more scheme than personnel, and that when they prioritized clamping on that in late games, that they were kinda OK there?  

OL:  What might it reflect if we passed there until Day 3?  Maybe reflect that they aren't super worried about Bakhti missing extended time?  Maybe reflect a pretty comfort level with Runyan, or perhaps Hansen or Stepaniek?  Or maybe it could be kinda like last year, the WR in round 3 weren't maybe that much more attractive than Lazard and EQ anyway?  Perhaps if we don't have a new OL with picks 1 or 2, maybe they do actually like Nijman more than we know, and think he's probably as good or better than anybody still there come the 3rd round?  I'm just imagining, but it would be really cool *IF* Nijman was really poised to be a perfectly average T, or maybe even a little better; and that our first three picks could all be free to upgrade other spots?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NFLGURU

NFLGURU

Posted
Posted

A lot will depend on where Fields goes.  McNabb played for Andy Reid, which is a game-changer for a QB.  Put Fields with a HC like Reid, Sean Payton, Schotty, Kingsbury, you'll likely have a much different outcome than if he went to the Jets or Chicago who are in a 50 year search for a QB.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
deathstar

deathstar

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, R T said:

McNabb is a good comp to what he could be, but McNabb was much more of a runner coming out of college. Prescott is probably a very good comp for Fields right now. For those that are concerned about triggering the always racially sensitive crowd maybe Josh Allen, but I think Josh Allen is a great comp Trey Lance and not Fields. Maybe Dan Jones?    

Deshaun Watson is another good comp, but thanks for the idiotic side comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R T

R T

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, craig said:

Packers have only one pick each in rounds 1-2-3.  The prevailing assumption is that CB/OT/DL are primary targets; that the draft depth aligns pretty well with those; and that whichever of those don't get taken 1st, that Gute can do some maneuvering with his 2nd or 3rd picks to make match need to BPA with his 2nd and 3rd picks.  

Hypothetical:  *IF* one of those was not selected before Day 3, which is most likely to pass, and if so what might it tell us?  I kinda think to last year, we all had WR as a target, and the draft was supposedly strong there, but then we didn't take any, and by the 2nd or 3rd round the story was that the draft guys maybe weren't really any more rookie-ready than guys we already had.  

DL:  What might it reflect if we didn't take one before Day 3?  Perhaps that they like Keke and still see more future for him?  Maybe that they like Previllon more than we know?  Maybe that they think the run vulnerability was more scheme than personnel, and that when they prioritized clamping on that in late games, that they were kinda OK there?  

OL:  What might it reflect if we passed there until Day 3?  Maybe reflect that they aren't super worried about Bakhti missing extended time?  Maybe reflect a pretty comfort level with Runyan, or perhaps Hansen or Stepaniek?  Or maybe it could be kinda like last year, the WR in round 3 weren't maybe that much more attractive than Lazard and EQ anyway?  Perhaps if we don't have a new OL with picks 1 or 2, maybe they do actually like Nijman more than we know, and think he's probably as good or better than anybody still there come the 3rd round?  I'm just imagining, but it would be really cool *IF* Nijman was really poised to be a perfectly average T, or maybe even a little better; and that our first three picks could all be free to upgrade other spots?  

So what if they go EDGE/WR/IOL with their first 3 picks? I'm not sure the prevailing assumptions are correct craig. You may remember us have a similar conversation on another forum site last year about this topic. I stated last year that the Packers had no needs and wouldn't need to force a pick at any position going into the draft, yet many believed they had to draft a WR and how could they not draft a DL after what the 49er's just did to them in the NFCC game. The Packers drafted neither. The same thing applies this year, by the time the draft starts Thursday night the Packers will be comfortable taking the best player on their board. The reason I listed EDGE first is because that is where there will be a group of EDGE players selected and that very well may be the position that is the best player on their board. TT said he always drafted the best player on the board because he wasn't smart enough to know which position would be hit by injury ahead of time. Nobody does.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R T

R T

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, deathstar said:

Deshaun Watson is another good comp, but thanks for the idiotic side comment.

You're welcome and thank you for being offended about everything all the time. The world just needs a lot more of that. 

Edited by R T
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
packfanfb

packfanfb

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, R T said:

Hot take, Samuel Cosmi is Jason Spriggs. RAS scores Cosmi 9.99 and Spriggs 9.78.   

Ben Fennell on Twitter: "Cosmi might be one of those OL types you want to completely rebuild/rework - tons of talent/tools... Technique in kick slides and hands are inconsistent and inefficient Any thoughts @CoachPaulAlex https://t.co/rzuQGNUIMg" / Twitter

Was thinking this the other day. That means either Gute learned his lesson or we're in trouble and taking him at 29. I've soured on Cosmi the longer this process has gone on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...