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

[packfanfb]

1 minute 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.

Sure. For me, it's a tough call because I think ASJ's instincts as a CB are something you cannot really teach and they are so important for CBs. You either have that trait or you don't. I don't know whether Stokes has them or not because frankly, he's still learning the position to an extent. If not, he's a step slower even if he runs a 4.2, that's just how it works, and ASJ is a step faster even at 4.5. Stokes has the higher ceiling, but also has the lower floor IMO. I'd feel about the same with either guy, and if all goes well, they'll both be good players.  

[CWood21]

9 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Sure. For me, it's a tough call because I think ASJ's instincts as a CB are something you cannot really teach and they are so important for CBs. You either have that trait or you don't. I don't know whether Stokes has them or not because frankly, he's still learning the position to an extent. If not, he's a step slower even if he runs a 4.2, that's just how it works, and ASJ is a step faster even at 4.5. Stokes has the higher ceiling, but also has the lower floor IMO. I'd feel about the same with either guy, and if all goes well, they'll both be good players.  

Still learning the position?  Stokes played in 31 games at Georgia and ASJ played in 31 games at Florida State.  Why is Stokes still learning the position, but ASJ isn't?  This is a fallacy.  If you want to argue that Stokes relied more on his athleticism then his technique, I wouldn't fight you too hard.  But that's the problem with a player like ASJ, if the technique isn't perfect then he's going to struggle to find success.  There's no athletic skills to rely on. I mean, we're seeing it right now with Kevin King.  His instincts aren't there.  If we weren't talking about a former NFL player's son, would ASJ be valued as highly?  Probably not.

[Joe]

10 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Still learning the position?  Stokes played in 31 games at Georgia and ASJ played in 31 games at Florida State.  Why is Stokes still learning the position, but ASJ isn't?  This is a fallacy.  If you want to argue that Stokes relied more on his athleticism then his technique, I wouldn't fight you too hard.  But that's the problem with a player like ASJ, if the technique isn't perfect then he's going to struggle to find success.  There's no athletic skills to rely on. I mean, we're seeing it right now with Kevin King.  His instincts aren't there.  If we weren't talking about a former NFL player's son, would ASJ be valued as highly?  Probably not.

because Stokes' production climbed significantly from 2019 to 2020 and scouts don't think he plays to his timed speed. ASJ's production was more consistent.

The more I think of the conversation we had earlier in this thread about a match-style coverage scheme, the more I think Stokes was drafted not so much for his timed speed, but because of his ball skills. If "right place right time" is supposed to be a knock on his INT's from last year, then you'd think he'd take advantage of a match-style coverage scheme where he can be physical, yet focus more on tracking the ball and reading the QB's eyes FWIW.

[packfanfb]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Still learning the position?  Stokes played in 31 games at Georgia and ASJ played in 31 games at Florida State.  Why is Stokes still learning the position, but ASJ isn't?  This is a fallacy.  If you want to argue that Stokes relied more on his athleticism then his technique, I wouldn't fight you too hard.  But that's the problem with a player like ASJ, if the technique isn't perfect then he's going to struggle to find success.  There's no athletic skills to rely on. I mean, we're seeing it right now with Kevin King.  His instincts aren't there.  If we weren't talking about a former NFL player's son, would ASJ be valued as highly?  Probably not.

Don't trust me, trust the scouts. https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/news/scouts-share-mixed-views-on-first-round-pick-stokes 

This is on par with just about every review of Stokes to date, and is precisely what I'm talking about. If Stokes puts it all together, as I said in a previous post, a top-10 type of player is there, but it's these same reasons that make him a more boom-or-bust prospect versus a guy like ASJ, especially coming out of college. Not sure what argument you're trying to have here, it seems pretty simple. 

[CWood21]

56 minutes ago, Joe said:

because Stokes' production climbed significantly from 2019 to 2020 and scouts don't think he plays to his timed speed. ASJ's production was more consistent.

The more I think of the conversation we had earlier in this thread about a match-style coverage scheme, the more I think Stokes was drafted not so much for his timed speed, but because of his ball skills. If "right place right time" is supposed to be a knock on his INT's from last year, then you'd think he'd take advantage of a match-style coverage scheme where he can be physical, yet focus more on tracking the ball and reading the QB's eyes FWIW.

And that's what happens when you box score scout INTs.  Over his 3 seasons in Georgia, Stokes averaged 8.7 INTs+PDs (0.84 per game).  Over his 3 seasons at Florida State, Samuel averaged 11 INTs+PDs (1.06 per game).  We've already given the credit for Samuel having better ball skills then Stokes, but INTs aren't the only indicator for ball skills.  PDs are absolutely an indicator of how well a player is aware of where the ball is.  Assuming PFF's numbers on targets are correct, Stokes was targeted 118 times in his career for an average of an INT or PD every 4.5 pass attempts.  ASJ's career average is an INT or PD ever 4.2 pass attempts.

[Packerraymond]

ASJ has the same floor as Stokes, and half the ceiling. Short and a middling athlete, woo! 

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, packfanfb said:

Don't trust me, trust the scouts. https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/news/scouts-share-mixed-views-on-first-round-pick-stokes 

This is on par with just about every review of Stokes to date, and is precisely what I'm talking about. If Stokes puts it all together, as I said in a previous post, a top-10 type of player is there, but it's these same reasons that make him a more boom-or-bust prospect versus a guy like ASJ, especially coming out of college. Not sure what argument you're trying to have here, it seems pretty simple. 

Some anonymous scouts are who we are citing now?  If you're going to go down that route, you need to go dig up the quotes about this draft wasn't a very strong draft at the top and there were largely less than 20 first round graded players.  I hate to burst your bubble, but there's always going to be 32 picks in the first round.  So if the draft has less than 32 first round players, you're going to see players graded in the second round go off the board in the first round.  And the farther you go down the draft, you'll see more variety on draft boards.  A team like Green Bay might highly value Eric Stokes and his physical gifts, but other teams might prefer the "safer" ASJ instead.  As I mentioned before, there wasn't a ton of grade differences between he and ASJ.  It largely comes down to what you want in a corner (athleticism vs. technique), and what your defensive scheme entails.  I liked ASJ, I absolutely did.  But you'd be crazy to argue that ASJ has a higher ceiling then Stokes.

[packfanfb]

45 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

A team like Green Bay might highly value Eric Stokes and his physical gifts, but other teams might prefer the "safer" ASJ instead.  As I mentioned before, there wasn't a ton of grade differences between he and ASJ.  It largely comes down to what you want in a corner (athleticism vs. technique), and what your defensive scheme entails.  I liked ASJ, I absolutely did.  But you'd be crazy to argue that ASJ has a higher ceiling then Stokes.

I think this is pretty much agreeable, especially since I said Stokes has the higher ceiling. As I said all along, if Stokes played another year at Georgia and all went well, he very well could have been a top 15 pick in the 2022 draft. That's what GB is hoping for obviously. Hell, for me, if Stokes' floor is Kevin King without the injury history, I'll take it. 

[Chili]

ASJ video review. Sounds like he was a prospect who has talent but also have some flaws - exactly what we use to describe Stokes.  It depends what type of flaws you can live with and either they can easily be worked on. Stokes flaws is mostly technique which can always be improved, throw in his athleticism and speed it is an absolute no brainer to select him. ASJ struggled against better competition and due to his size is a non-factor getting off blocks - not so easily improved. There's a play later on in the video where he just slides off Amari Rodgers.

It's also interesting to note that after Stokes pick two more corners were selected before ASJ was finally selected halfway through the second round so it's clear not all teams had him rated as highly as we fans did.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Chili

[Arthur Penske]

It’s rookie camp so dosent mean much but better than reading he already sucks 

 

 

[Norm]

45 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

It’s rookie camp so dosent mean much but better than reading he already sucks 

 

 

It's most impressive because he shut down Chris Blair!

[packfanfb]

12 minutes ago, Norm said:

It's most impressive because he shut down Chris Blair!

Kumerow > Blair > Michael Thomas

Looks like Stokes is good for Week 1. 

[deathstar]

This guy is adorable.

[packfanfb]

Caught the ball thrown to him. Automatic > over Redmond.

[OneTwoSixFive]

On 5/13/2021 at 6:55 PM, CWood21 said:

 If you're going to go down that route, you need to go dig up the quotes about this draft wasn't a very strong draft at the top and there were largely less than 20 first round graded players.

this is foolish....................

No, I always jump on this when I see it, so I'll bite my lip this time, except to briefly say "When was the last time there were MORE than 32 first round graded players ?