Jump to content

Your 'initial' assessment of the Draft


Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

E0Y8zeGWYAQj3fy?format=jpg&name=4096x409

Those two who gave GB an F should rethink their line of work... wasn't even close to an F even with the Rodgers drama. Yeesh.

 

I give is a A-. I thought they did a great job drafting a combination of BPA and need. I wanted a CB, OL, and either DL/WR in that order and that's what they did. I like the players they picked and think they all will have roles this year, with a few instant contributors. Solid, solid draft by GB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Isherwood said:

Thor Nystrom is a big blowhard

 

Edit: Viking fan too

A viking fan? That explains it. He hated this draft from a viking perspective and didn't want us to improve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without a normal college season, I expected there to be some picks we didn't see coming. Either obscure players or differing evaluations. Sophomore players who caught their attention in the 2020 draft process and they thought to keep their eye on them for 2021. Players who they thought with another year of development they could be something special. When the season was lost to covid (I know they played but practice training was severely cut back) these players didn't have the opportunity to develop. So why not take a flyer on them and see what happens?

 

I give the draft a B. Didn't think Stokes was our best option, but like the next 2. As far as OL goes, we have had great success there and I trust Gute and staff to find talent. I also think we have a great OL coaching staff.

I think Amari Rodgers will be big for this team as a rookie and get all the accolades, but Myers will be the biggest impact on our success.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2021 at 10:33 PM, CWood21 said:

Solid overall draft, nothing spectacular draft.  I think it's one of those drafts we look back that turn out to be a solid backbone class.

I see 3 starters pretty quickly from this draft class - Stokes, Meyers, Rodgers. At least a couple of the other picks have a chance to be a starter. Big win if true. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, gizmo2012 said:

I see 3 starters pretty quickly from this draft class - Stokes, Meyers, Rodgers. At least a couple of the other picks have a chance to be a starter. Big win if true. 

Stokes vs Surtain will be a fun TC battle

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, gizmo2012 said:

I see 3 starters pretty quickly from this draft class - Stokes, Meyers, Rodgers. At least a couple of the other picks have a chance to be a starter. Big win if true. 

Myers is the only starter we drafted IMO. Rodgers will play about as much as Ervin did. Stokes will play about as much as Redmond last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Myers is the only starter we drafted IMO. Rodgers will play about as much as Ervin did. Stokes will play about as much as Redmond last year.

Rookies rarely start right away but the 3 starters I predicted have a good chance to be in the starting lineup as starters soon.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Solid B+ grade from me.  I see Rodgers (the new guy) playing as much as Ervin initially but produce much better.  And then he'll play more.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, BluePacker said:

Those two who gave GB an F should rethink their line of work... wasn't even close to an F even with the Rodgers drama. Yeesh.

 

I give is a A-. I thought they did a great job drafting a combination of BPA and need. I wanted a CB, OL, and either DL/WR in that order and that's what they did. I like the players they picked and think they all will have roles this year, with a few instant contributors. Solid, solid draft by GB.

Did I miss somehing, or has the letter 'E' been banished from grades ?  When you compare graders, huge differences become clear..........from the guy that only gives A or B grades, to one that hands out two F grades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amari Rodgers won't be a starter this year unless you care to call your punt returner a "starter."   I'll set my sights on "reasonable contributor" and hope for more.

Packers play too much 12 personnel and Adams, Lazard, MVS are rarely ceding spots to Rodgers when the play calls for 3 WR's.    I think Rodgers gives the team a few more options than Ervin did in the greater scheme so a few more opportunities but Ervin started 0 of 12 games with the Pack.

Stokes will be a big contributor throughout and has the potential to unseat King later in the season or grab starts while King is out with his inevitable injury break.    Early in the season I would think the team will ride with King - a player they know and trust (NFCCG jokes aside) and Stokes will log time in dime unless he can unseat Sullivan.

Agree Myers seems the best bet for heavy early minutes and the only true "starter" from the class yr 1

Link to post
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...