Round 1: Pick #29; Eric Stokes, CB, Georgia

[packfanfb]

Here's the best way I can define the Stokes pick: You hope he's the guy, with his tools, that if he got to play another 1-2 years in college and refined his technique would have been a top-15 pick in 2022-23, but you got him at 29 because he's just not there yet. 

[Rainmaker90]

On 5/10/2021 at 1:03 PM, packfanfb said:

Here's the best way I can define the Stokes pick: You hope he's the guy, with his tools, that if he got to play another 1-2 years in college and refined his technique would have been a top-15 pick in 2022-23, but you got him at 29 because he's just not there yet. 

I think that’s a great way to put it. Whatever his question marks are, the coaches believe they can coach him up. 

[Joe]

He's definitely a reach, but someone else would've definitely pulled the trigger on him before pick 45 in the 2nd round TBH. The better news is that we're not expecting him to be CB1, nor are we expecting him to pass King on the depth chart by the start of the season. He was drafted because of his speed, production, and the fact that he has the potential to be a better pro than a college player; just like Gary. The physical tools are there and need to be untapped.

[deathstar]

You all are acting like he was bad in college. Literally only gave up a TD to Devonta while playing great D. Some of the takes in here don’t jibe with reality.

[Packer_ESP]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

He's definitely a reach, but someone else would've definitely pulled the trigger on him before pick 45 in the 2nd round TBH.

So.... not a reach then?

[Joe]

11 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

So.... not a reach then?

Still a reach. Could've traded back and still got him. Hell, I would've traded back into the mid-30's, grabbed Teven Jenkins and then used our Day 3 capital to trade up to get Stokes if you give me those two.

[Packer_ESP]

20 minutes ago, Joe said:

Still a reach. Could've traded back and still got him. Hell, I would've traded back into the mid-30's, grabbed Teven Jenkins and then used our Day 3 capital to trade up to get Stokes if you give me those two.

My point is if you are willing to take him in the mid 30s it’s not a reach at all. A 6 draft slot difference is not that significant, especially when you add the loss  of the fifth year option, the uncertainty that he will still be there and the fact that we don’t know if any mid 30s team was willing to trade up.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Packer_ESP

[packfanfb]

6 hours ago, deathstar said:

You all are acting like he was bad in college. Literally only gave up a TD to Devonta while playing great D. Some of the takes in here don’t jibe with reality.

No one is saying he's bad, but he lasted to 29 for a reason. CBs who run and move at his size go in the top 10 if they are ready Day 1 from a technical standpoint. Stokes needs to catch up and develop in some areas, and if he does, it's a home run pick down the line. 

[vegas492]

8 hours ago, Packer_ESP said:

So.... not a reach then?

Look at where his teammate went.  No.  Not a reach.  

People who think it is a reach are the same people who take internet draft boards super seriously.

[{Family Ghost}]

8 hours ago, Joe said:

Still a reach. Could've traded back and still got him. Hell, I would've traded back into the mid-30's, grabbed Teven Jenkins and then used our Day 3 capital to trade up to get Stokes if you give me those two.

I would have been fine with that scenario, but there is value in taking a guy late in round one versus early round two .. that extra year of control can be very valuable.  

[vegas492]

4 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I would have been fine with that scenario, but there is value in taking a guy late in round one versus early round two .. that extra year of control can be very valuable.  

I don't think that there has been a year that has gone by since 2012 when I haven't looked at the draft after it has been finished and thought that we should have moved down, gained draft picks, taken a good guy that slipped, then traded back up for another guy that slipped.

Hindsight.  Much tougher to actually do, because you don't know where guys will be, and most importantly, you don't know who is willing to trade.  If it were actually that easy, every one would be doing it.

Why aren't they?  You nailed it.  5'th year option.  Well, that and not actually knowing who will trade with you.  You could very well trade out and find yourself missing out on the players that you really liked.  Which would have happened with Stokes.

[CWood21]

On 5/10/2021 at 12:03 PM, packfanfb said:

Here's the best way I can define the Stokes pick: You hope he's the guy, with his tools, that if he got to play another 1-2 years in college and refined his technique would have been a top-15 pick in 2022-23, but you got him at 29 because he's just not there yet. 

But at the end of the day, would you rather take a risk on a guy with his athletic profile but short in the technique department or someone who is physically lacking but has strong technique?  CB is a position where when the legs go, the CB level of play usually goes.

[packfanfb]

7 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

But at the end of the day, would you rather take a risk on a guy with his athletic profile but short in the technique department or someone who is physically lacking but has strong technique?  CB is a position where when the legs go, the CB level of play usually goes.

For Gute, the answer is pretty much always option A. If we really want to see it play out, I guess we can compare Stokes to Samuel Jr. in 3 years because that's the comparison you're defining. 

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

For Gute, the answer is pretty much always option A. If we really want to see it play out, I guess we can compare Stokes to Samuel Jr. in 3 years because that's the comparison you're defining. 

I'm not asking for Gute.  I'm asking for you.  The Packers had their choice of the second tier CBs other then Greg Newsome.  They could have taken ASJ whom they spent a TON of time scouting, and opted to pass on him.  They chose him over the other Georgia CB.  They clearly had Stokes as their best CB available.

[{Family Ghost}]

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'm not asking for Gute.  I'm asking for you.  The Packers had their choice of the second tier CBs other then Greg Newsome.  They could have taken ASJ whom they spent a TON of time scouting, and opted to pass on him.  They chose him over the other Georgia CB.  They clearly had Stokes as their best CB available.

Yeah .. I can't find fault in the pick at all.  The kid performed in a great conference, runs like the wind, and has the ideal measurements.  I'm actually surprised Stokes wasn't a lock first rounder by the pundits.  

Edited May 13, 2021 by {Family Ghost}