Jump to content

Jenkins' best position?


Les Punting

Recommended Posts

GB's draft strategy with respect to the OL seems to hinge on this question.

With the departure of Wagner, GB has a gaping hole at RT. There seems to be wide consensus for drafting an OT high, with the intention of plugging him in as an immediate starter. As I survey the board, I don't see too many players that could be counted on to excel as rookies. Darrisaw, maybe TJenkins. Both those players could be off the board by pick 29. 

The tackle spots are the premium positions on the OL. If you have a player that's capable of performing at a high level at T or G he should probably be playing outside. We got to see Jenkins at T last year and the results were good. Yes, moving Jenkins outside leaves a hole at G/C but those positions traditionally require less draft capital to acquire and the current roster seems capable of providing viable starters inside.  

Personally, I think Jenkins' best position is RT. He doesn't have an ideal build but his plus handwork makes him very formidable as a pass protector. He's certainly been good on the interior, but not so good that moving him should be off the table. He's not the near flawless performer that say, Josh Sitton was in his prime. 

Moving Jenkins to tackle full-time seems like the most efficient path forward. It relieves the pressure to reach for an OT early and allows for more moderately priced shopping among the draft options at G/C, freeing up the higher picks to address other needs.   

Thoughts?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I thought you were taking about the OT from Oklahoma State in the draft named Jenkins. Elgton Jenkins future is probably at LG or C, he is an elite IOL and there is not need to make him an average to slightly better Tackle. Also don't think there is a gaping hole anywhere. 

Edited by R T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Jenkins could be a very capable RT, more than just average to slightly better.  I don't see RT as being a black hole, though.  Billy Turner played well there and was the RT starter on a 13-win team.  Of course we don't know how long they may want to fill for Bakhti.  Maybe not a single start?  Maybe a month of starts but not really all that many relative to the course of a season?  Maybe more?  Beats me.  

I kinda agree with RT:  long-term the Packers may be best-served to let Jenkins play inside and be elite there, and have other guys play tackle.  But certainly it's possible that if Bakhti misses a variably number of games, that Jenkins is in play to take some starts at tackle, as he did last year. 

I get your point, though.  *IF* the Packers decided that they've just spent a zillion on Bakhti, and were to decide that they were just going to plan Jenkins over to RT as the primary RT, perhaps that might make it easier to get away without investing high draft capital on an OT.  

I think it will be hard to assume that, though, no matter how the draft unfolds.  If they get some BPA picks that they love at other spots, and don't end up taking an OL till day 3, that still won't prove that Jenkins was locked into RT prior to the draft.  And even if they do select an OT in round 1 or 2, that doesn't prove the guy will actually ever end up being a long-term starter at tackle and that Jenkins will stay inside:  even a 1st or 2nd day pick might still end up busting (Jason Spriggs?) or ending up inside (Colledge, etc.)

Part of the beauty with Jenkins is that *IF* the Packers can assemble a good collection of good OL, they'll be able to shake them out and have a good line, almost regardless of how the good linemen are arranged position-wise.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he can play at a high level anywhere on the line.

He could be the best center in the game.  He's smart.  He can quarterback the line.  He will help everyone out and can lead on run plays if asked.  He's got elite center qualities.

Obviously he's a stud as a LG.

I think he has all the traits for LT.

I also feel RT is his worst position.  That being said, he would still be just fine out there.  But I view RT as more of a power tackle with a stronger base.

C.  LG.  LT for me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, R T said:

At first I thought you were taking about the OT from Oklahoma State in the draft named Jenkins. Elgton Jenkins future is probably at RG or C, he is an elite IOL and there is not need to make him an average to slightly better Tackle. Also don't think there is a gaping hole anywhere. 

Try him at RT, or ask him. He'll make more money at RT then he will at any other position and it's the next highest premium for me over LT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

Try him at RT, or ask him. He'll make more money at RT then he will at any other position and it's the next highest premium for me over LT. 

I'd think tackle would definitely be appealing to him and as his agent.  As you pointed out he's got more earning potential there than at G or C.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm on board with putting him at RT and leaving him there.  I wonder if they keep him at Guard simply because it's the least disruptive should he have to fill in elsewhere.  Runyan, Patrick, Bak's health and of course the draft will all be factors. 

 

Edited by cannondale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PACKRULE said:

Try him at RT, or ask him. He'll make more money at RT then he will at any other position and it's the next highest premium for me over LT. 

That or maybe Runyan moves to RT? Kid played there in college right? Having an awesome leftside is nothing to poo about either. But I was just spitting it out there. I was impressed with Runyan when he stepped in. With a pro weight room offseason he'll be ready to start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, R T said:

Center is were he probably can be the greatest asset to the Packers.

I think Jenkins will be great wherever he plays. If he's a 90 RT, he's more valuable to us than if he's a 98 C. OTs are hard to come by in this league. 

Having a C at Linsley's level was great but probably a luxury. Hence why we didn't think twice about letting him walk. If we have to put Patrick at C and he's our "worst" OL on paper, we will be just fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I think Jenkins will be great wherever he plays. If he's a 90 RT, he's more valuable to us than if he's a 98 C. OTs are hard to come by in this league. 

Having a C at Linsley's level was great but probably a luxury. Hence why we didn't think twice about letting him walk. If we have to put Patrick at C and he's our "worst" OL on paper, we will be just fine. 

Sorry I disagree. Not sure why fans want to take a Pro bowl caliber IOL and turn him into just another Tackle. To each their own.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, R T said:

Sorry I disagree. Not sure why fans want to take a Pro bowl caliber IOL and turn him into just another Tackle. To each their own.  

Because people, including myself, think he could be a damn good RT... not "just another Tackle". We also drafted 3 OL expected to play on the interior last year including Runyan, Stepiniak, Hanson. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ReadyToThump said:

Because people, including myself, think he could be a damn good RT... not "just another Tackle". We also drafted 3 OL expected to play on the interior last year including Runyan, Stepiniak, Hanson. 

 

The Packers drafted three 6th round IOL last year and cut Hanson, that is what you are basing moving a Pro Bowl caliber player for? What are you basing this thinking he could be a damn good RT off of? A handful of snaps there last season? Lane Taylor one time played a whole game at LT in a win against the Cowboys and was great, that didn't mean he would be a damn good full time LT.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, R T said:

The Packers drafted three 6th round IOL last year and cut Hanson, that is what you are basing moving a Pro Bowl caliber player for? What are you basing this thinking he could be a damn good RT off of? A handful of snaps there last season? Lane Taylor one time played a whole game at LT in a win against the Cowboys and was great, that didn't mean he would be a damn good full time LT.  

No. I'm simply saying we have more depth at IOL than we do at OT. 

Jenkins has all the measurables, physical and mental ability to excel at any position on the line. If you see different, I'm not really sure what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...