R T Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) Was listening to Gutes talk about this group of Safeties in this draft, I believe it was before the Combine, and he said he thought it was a good, deep group. That surprised me a little at the time because there really isn't a surefire 1st rounder in the group (DeJean aside), but the more a I dig the more I like it. The 3 I like the most haven't had a great deal of buzz tied to the Packers which might be just what Gutes planned. Those 3 are Bishop/Utah, Bullard/Georgia and Taylor-Demerson/Texas Tech. All 3 likely go in the 2nd/3rd round range and would be great fits for the Packers. Edited April 16 by R T 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Scoremore said: He just needed an opportunity. When he got it he produced. He's #5 on our squad. But our WR room is loaded. He could be a full time starter for a number of teams. Guess we'll have to disagree but I love this kid. Definitely a lot more than a JAG. There is a reason we poached him. Have a real hard time believing he won't be on the 53. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 5 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: While RAS seems to think the bigger the better, I'm not sure the Packers like the really big OTs early on. Certainly they will take them late and gamble they can can at least be a backup, (Jones 6'9, 370, Tenuta 6'8", 317) but early on I think they like the 6'4" to 6'6", guys that are 310 to 325 lbs, like Bulaga, Bakhtiari, Sherrod who are all in that range. About that... I am not criticizing you. Or the pattern. But is there any data that we pass on these larger tackles? Like, there is plenty of evidence to point to the Packers not taking CBs under 190 or WRs under 6'1. Was there a 6'8 tackle available, that went in the same general draft range as Spriggs or Stepaniak? The issue I have with this specific parameter is that we have been very good for a very long time with our tackles. If we aren't looking for a tackle, we are passing on a 5'4 tackle just the same as we are passing on a 6'10 tackle. Since 1992, our top 100 pick tackles have been: Earl Dotson, John Michaels, Ross Verba, Chad Clifton, Daryn Colledge, Bryan Bulaga, Derrick Sherrod, and Jason Spriggs. It is a very small sample size, and we got about 40 seasons of starts out of Clifton, Taushcer, Bulaga, and Bakhtiari. I am just not sure that there is much of a list of players that fit in the Venn Diagram of: Packers need a tackle, Tackle is taller than 6'7, Tackle weighs more than 340, and Player is selected in reasonable range of Packers' draft pick. I just don't see it. All that said, I also don't think that the team is necessarily going for giant OL just because Jones, Telfort, and Tenuta are ogres. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Interesting that Mims is a RT, or at least he was at Georgia. Not sure there is a lot to read into that but if we select a tackle in round 1, I would have expected a guy who has played LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mdpackfan22 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 4 hours ago, Mazrimiv said: So just to be clear on this, teams should definitely pay out 2nd contracts to very good/elite players on the OL and (debatably) QB, but should definitely not pay out 2nd contracts to very good/elite RB's, WR's and (presumably) TE's Do I have this correct? A great TE is better value wise than a great WR Darren Waller is the highest paid TE at 17m/yr That would come in at 21st highest rated between Tyler Lockett and Jerry Jeudy. Waller's contract is also only 22m guaranteed while Jeudy is 41m guaranteed. Biggest reason for Chiefs success outside of Mahomes is they have one of the greatest TEs ever making less than the top 25 WRs. If Musgrave and Kraft reach their potential, I would rather extend both of them to a 2nd contract than our WRs. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodestar Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 So I watched Tip Reiman and Ben Sinnott's highlights last night. I know TE isn't a need, but holy crap these guys are both fun as hell, and I think both bring a new wrinkle on offense. Reiman hits like a freight train and would add an enforcer element in the run game. Sinnott is slippery and moves like a RB after the catch; he reminds me of an explosive, actual playmaking Deguara. I wouldn't be upset at all if we drafted one of these guys in the 3rd or 4th round. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mdpackfan22 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 5 hours ago, Mazrimiv said: A RD3 for Higgins seems about right, the "early" part may or may not be true. I think CIN would take GB's #91 for Higgens in a heartbeat, and GB fans would say it was a mistake. I disagree on Chase. Teams aren't giving premium picks for the privilege of paying the contract you don't want to pay. Higgins is easily getting more than a 3rd rounder for the sole fact that the Bengals would get a 3rd rd comp for letting him walk. Claypool got traded for a high 2nd and Higgins is a much better player. Hollywood Brown got traded for a 1st and he's a similar player impact wise. Chase is a top 5 WR and only 24 years old. If he is traded, he's getting at minimum what we received for Davante(1st and 2nd). Chase is younger and we had less leverage since Davante was franchise tagged and made it be known he only wanted to go to LV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtcheezwiz Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 38 minutes ago, R T said: Was listening to Gutes talk about this group of Safeties in this draft, I believe it was before the Combine, and he said he thought it was a good, deep group. That surprised me a little at the time because there really isn't a surefire 1st rounder in the group (DeJean aside), but the more a I dig the more I like it. The 3 I like the most haven't had a great deal of buzz tied to the Packers which might be just what Gutes planned. Those 3 are Bishop/Utah, Bullard/Georgia and Taylor-Demerson/Texas Tech. All 3 likely go in the 2nd/3rd round range and would be great fits for the Packers. Would absolutely love Bullard or Bishop. Huge on Bullard because he’s quite athletic, he’s versatile, and he tackles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 42 minutes ago, R T said: Was listening to Gutes talk about this group of Safeties in this draft, I believe it was before the Combine, and he said he thought it was a good, deep group. That surprised me a little at the time because there really isn't a surefire 1st rounder in the group (DeJean aside), but the more a I dig the more I like it. The 3 I like the most haven't had a great deal of buzz tied to the Packers which might be just what Gutes planned. Those 3 are Bishop/Utah, Bullard/Georgia and Taylor-Demerson/Texas Tech. All 3 likely go in the 2nd/3rd round range and would be great fits for the Packers. 3 of my top guys. Love Mustapha on day 3 too. Reminds me of Jordan Whitehead with the physicality at his size. I'm team Bishop right now when thinking about a player who pairs best with McKinney. Problem is I think mid/late-60s is his sweet spot. I doubt he lasts until 88 and think we'd have to burn 58 on him (which I'm fine with). Read that Hafley apparently recruited Biship pretty hard at BC. May or may not be noteworthy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 6 hours ago, Old Guy said: Not sure what he can add to the discussion that isn't already on set. Not sure what the greatest coach in the history of CFB can add… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 28 minutes ago, Lodestar said: So I watched Tip Reiman and Ben Sinnott's highlights last night. I know TE isn't a need, but holy crap these guys are both fun as hell, and I think both bring a new wrinkle on offense. Reiman hits like a freight train and would add an enforcer element in the run game. Sinnott is slippery and moves like a RB after the catch; he reminds me of an explosive, actual playmaking Deguara. I wouldn't be upset at all if we drafted one of these guys in the 3rd or 4th round. My Day 2 "surprise" pick from Gute is either Sinnott or Johnny Wilson. Sinnott might not make it out of round 2 while Wilson is probably round 3. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mdpackfan22 Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 48 minutes ago, Old Guy said: Small sample size but a PFF score of 88.1 and 4.3 speed. Bo definitely has a place in this league 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 33 minutes ago, Lodestar said: So I watched Tip Reiman and Ben Sinnott's highlights last night. I know TE isn't a need, but holy crap these guys are both fun as hell, and I think both bring a new wrinkle on offense. Reiman hits like a freight train and would add an enforcer element in the run game. Sinnott is slippery and moves like a RB after the catch; he reminds me of an explosive, actual playmaking Deguara. I wouldn't be upset at all if we drafted one of these guys in the 3rd or 4th round. For what it is worth, admittedly not all that much, in the sims that I do Sinnott seems to go in the early 3rd. Reiman usually lasts into the 200s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Forgot today was Johnny Newton's workout. Haven't seen any numbers yet, just generally that he looked good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts