Jump to content

2024 NFL Draft Discussion


MacReady

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

He saves like 1 million if we cut him (if I am reading that right).  Don't think we will be picking up the 5th year option though.  That would be 12.4 million.

I think the deadline for deciding on the 5th year option is just after the draft?  I'd be shocked to see GB commit to the 5th year option with Stokes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LLcheesehead12 said:

I do wonder about moving on from Stokes though.  Guy hasn't stayed healthy lately and seems to get beat a lot when he is playing.

 

I'd like to see him get a healthy camp under his belt and see what he can do.  Speed is such a big part of his game, and it's hard to tell what he's lost.  He's got the ball skills of a phone pole, but he's got decent coverage skills.  I think he can be a key contributor if he can get back to form.  Gotta stay healthy though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger Rosengarden could be a dude at tackle. Ridiculous RAS everywhere except size - which is a plus when looking at potential Packers. Seen a fifth round grade on him but also saw Mel Kiper has in going in the first round. Usually goes in round 2 of the draft simulators lol.

 

Some potential day 3 guys:

Javon Foster - Bad 40 time and didn’t test in agilities. But has great explosives and size that fits the Packer mold. Played in a zone run scheme and has starts on both sides of the line. Currently in the round 4 area. 
 

Caeden Wallace, Penn St - His RAS was updated and sitting at 9.14. That is dragged down by his size. Elite explosives, great in speed.
 

 Tylan Grable from UCF.
 

Garrett Greenfield from South Dakota. 
 

For Guard -

CJ Hanson from Holy Cross

Jarrett Kingston from USC

Edited by sgtcheezwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RAS seems pretty easy to calculate. The score for each variable is just what percentile their score fell in. 

 

So, I wonder if for positions where the Packers have pretty strict size thresholds, such as OT, if you filtered out anybody who falls outside the size threshold and then re-ran RAS. I think I would only do this for Size grades because you would still want the 40 times and what not compared against the entire population.

 

In theory, this would adjust the RAS scores into a PAS score (Packers Athletic Score hehe) and then there is your board for that position. Would stop from 6 foot 7 tackles skewing the scores. 
 

Worth the exercise or am I overthinking this?

Edited by sgtcheezwiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, sgtcheezwiz said:

RAS seems pretty easy to calculate. The score for each variable is just what percentile their score fell in. 

 

So, I wonder if for positions where the Packers have pretty strict size thresholds, such as OT, if you filtered out anybody who falls outside the size threshold and then re-ran RAS. I think I would only do this for Size grades because you would still want the 40 times and what not compared against the entire population.

 

In theory, this would adjust the RAS scores into a PAS score (Packers Athletic Score hehe) and then there is your board for that position. Would stop from 6 foot 7 tackles skewing the scores. 
 

Worth the exercise or am I overthinking this?

You would have to know the exact size thresholds they use though.  Guys like Jayden Reed and Jaire Alexander don't fit the typical Packers prototype.  Jaire is a hair too short, and Reed is both short and light, at least to what we thought the limits were based on previous roster construction.  

 

I think you are better off just looking at the already calculated RAS, and the individual numbers given in the chart, and eliminating the major size outliers.  It isn't perfect, but it is a reasonably close indicator of the Packers tendencies.  I think you would be doing hours of work to find very similar results.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting quote from Gute regarding EDGE

Quote

However, with the Packers switching to a 4-3 defense under new DC Jeff Hafley, the notion of featuring smaller edge rushers doesn't seem off the table. The San Francisco 49ers, the team for which Hafley previously coached and will use as the model for his system in Green Bay, have found success with lighter defensive ends. Just this offseason, they signed 240-pound Leonard Floyd to a multiyear deal in hopes of continuing that trend.

Gutekunst didn't totally dismiss the idea of adding smaller defensive ends, but he doesn't seem enthralled with it either.

"I prefer bigger guys on the edge," Gutekunst said. "At the same time, if they have a skill set that can work, some of those 240 to 250 guys maybe help on special teams more than let's say your 270 guy can. I think it really depends on the player. What I don't want to do is get small. I think you've seen some of these 4-3 teams with the way they play, particularly in some of the sub packages where they may move ends inside, they can get small in a hurry. I don't want that to happen. Certainly, that'll be something we focus on as we move forward."

https://www.theleap.football/p/the-important-packers-developments

Sounds like starting EDGE must be heavy but he might be willing to secede to lighter EDGE in the late rounds provided that it helps with special teams. It's another piece of the puzzle for us when trying to predict the Packers draft philosophy and their positional thresholds.

I tell you what....I have a conspiracy theory rattling in my head for a while and this is another piece of evidence to back that theory.

The theory goes, is I believe Gute ran TT last draft. I don't think TT had any input at all. The Kevin King pick has Gute fingerprints all over it with his size and RAS. That's why King was chosen over Watt. Watt was 252lbs at the time when Gute wanted to get bigger at EDGE with 270lbs types.

He's obsessed with size. He made it a point to get taller at WR, taller at OL, heavier at EDGE. Pretty much anywhere he possibly could. Where he couldn't get size he compensated for getting guys with excellent athleticism.

Edited by Chili
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chili said:

Interesting quote from Gute regarding EDGE

Sounds like starting EDGE must be heavy but he might be willing to secede to lighter EDGE in the late rounds provided that it helps with special teams.

I tell you what....I have a conspiracy theory rattling in my head for a while and this is another piece of evidence to back that theory.

The theory goes, is I believe Gute ran TT last draft. I don't think TT had any input at all. The Kevin King pick has Gute fingerprints all over it with his size and RAS. That's why King was chosen over Watt. Watt was 252lbs at the time when Gute wanted to get bigger at EDGE with 270lbs types.

He's obsessed with size. He made it a point to get taller at WR, taller at OL, heavier at EDGE. Pretty much anywhere he possibly could. Where he couldn't get size he compensated for getting guys with excellent athleticism.

I talked about this in earlier posts regarding potential interest in a guy like Chop. He might make sense and fit in Hafley's system when you look at how other teams have utilized lighter edge players, but after listening to Gute's comments I came away feeling like he's still pretty adverse to going in that direction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...