pacman5252 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said: People don't like Chubb? He's the most balanced EDGE in the draft imo. Balance is nice, but for a guy who people have going top 5, you want to have elite pass rusher ability. I’ve been listening to a lot of pff pods, and watched his film of Chubb, and you can see he isn’t incredibly explosive off the edge, which also corresponds with his bad three cone. He isn’t a twitch/explosive player, just big, good straight line, powerful. He isn’t going to beat nfl tackles with speed moves, which brings us to his comps. Pff comped him to Shaq Lawson, nfl.com comped him to Chris Long. Good players, but, not top 15 worthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 9 hours ago, pacman5252 said: Balance is nice, but for a guy who people have going top 5, you want to have elite pass rusher ability. I’ve been listening to a lot of pff pods, and watched his film of Chubb, and you can see he isn’t incredibly explosive off the edge, which also corresponds with his bad three cone. He isn’t a twitch/explosive player, just big, good straight line, powerful. He isn’t going to beat nfl tackles with speed moves, which brings us to his comps. Pff comped him to Shaq Lawson, nfl.com comped him to Chris Long. Good players, but, not top 15 worthy. I don't think you're drafting Landry/Davenport over him. I think Chubb is a better Davenport and can actually bend better. Landry relies on his speed around the edge, and is bad vs the run. Chubb's not Myles Garrett/Clowney level of pass rush ability, but whos better in this class? Maybe argue Landry based on his 2016 film, but do you think he is the better player overall? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 On 3/30/2018 at 8:22 PM, pacman5252 said: Few thoughts; I like James much more than Fitz. Watch the tape and it is clear James is the better athlete. Fitz is not going to be a full time nfl corner but could be that dynamic nickel safety. Am I the only one who does like Chubb? He does have twitch athletic ability. He is more Vonnie Holiday/C Long. I do like Josh Jackson and Leighton Vander Esch. I’m very up and down on Davenport. I definitely love the athletic ability and upside. I fear he will need more time to make a real impact though. If you’re picking 14, it would be nice to get a starter and not a guy who may sit a bit. The one good thing about losing Rodgers last year is we now have a chance at drafting a real difference maker at #14(or higher if we trade up) for the first time in a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollino14 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 I like Chubb, I wouldn’t give the house up for him though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilprin Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 44 minutes ago, pollino14 said: I like Chubb, I wouldn’t give the house up for him though. I agree...I don't think it is wise to ever give up the house for a player. Regardless of who it is or the position. Injuries and unrealized potential all too common with players top to bottom in the draft. I like Chubb, but I don't like Chubb better than the 3-4 collective players being sacrificed. If it hits...great, if it doesn't yikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 7 minutes ago, Pilprin said: I agree...I don't think it is wise to ever give up the house for a player. Regardless of who it is or the position. Injuries and unrealized potential all too common with players top to bottom in the draft. I like Chubb, but I don't like Chubb better than the 3-4 collective players being sacrificed. If it hits...great, if it doesn't yikes. Yeah definitely don't trade the house for him, he ain't Juilo Jones lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacman5252 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Pugger said: The one good thing about losing Rodgers last year is we now have a chance at drafting a real difference maker at #14(or higher if we trade up) for the first time in a while. I couldn't agree more. It is nice to have a better shot at a more sure thing with higher upside. I'm also really interested to see what happens the rest of the draft. We have so much capital. 2 4s, 3 5s. I really don't see us using all these picks. I see us either getting back in the first or getting another second... Also, who doesn't love the first pick of day 3? Such a fun pick to have because you can sleep on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacman5252 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 3 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said: I don't think you're drafting Landry/Davenport over him. I think Chubb is a better Davenport and can actually bend better. Landry relies on his speed around the edge, and is bad vs the run. Chubb's not Myles Garrett/Clowney level of pass rush ability, but whos better in this class? Maybe argue Landry based on his 2016 film, but do you think he is the better player overall? Considering what we run and the premium on getting to the QB, I'd take Laundry over Chubb every day. I'm also not too high on Davenport right now, for the reason you said. His 3 cone is similar to Chubb's (7.2 vs 7.3) which validates the "poor bend" take. They are both really just 4-3 ends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pollino14 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Pilprin said: I agree...I don't think it is wise to ever give up the house for a player. Regardless of who it is or the position. Injuries and unrealized potential all too common with players top to bottom in the draft. I like Chubb, but I don't like Chubb better than the 3-4 collective players being sacrificed. If it hits...great, if it doesn't yikes. I’m not against trading the house for a player, but that player better be a superstar and while I think Chubb will be good, I don’t see superstar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilprin Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 If we had the #1 pick in the draft my top three picks would be James, Ward, and Chubb. It's not actually very close. After that its mixed. I really like Landry and will be sad to see him off the board at #14 unless one of the other three slip. If he isn't there, I look to move down a few picks and target Van Esche or Oliver. I am not a big believer in Davenport...but it probably has more to do with my lack of exposure to him. I am cooling on Edmonds big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 41 minutes ago, Pilprin said: If we had the #1 pick in the draft my top three picks would be James, Ward, and Chubb. It's not actually very close. After that its mixed. I really like Landry and will be sad to see him off the board at #14 unless one of the other three slip. If he isn't there, I look to move down a few picks and target Van Esche or Oliver. I am not a big believer in Davenport...but it probably has more to do with my lack of exposure to him. I am cooling on Edmonds big time. If we had the No. 1 pick, I'd trade out, period. No defensive player is worth No. 1 in the draft and Barkley isn't worth No. 1, especially for GB. I'd get the best deal possible from a team needing a QB and move down at least into the 4-7 range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 1 hour ago, pacman5252 said: Considering what we run and the premium on getting to the QB, I'd take Laundry over Chubb every day. I'm also not too high on Davenport right now, for the reason you said. His 3 cone is similar to Chubb's (7.2 vs 7.3) which validates the "poor bend" take. They are both really just 4-3 ends. I wouldn't mind all 3 tbh, think they can all play 3-4 Edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacman5252 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Gopackgonerd said: I wouldn't mind all 3 tbh, think they can all play 3-4 Edge. It depends what you are looking for. I feel like Chubb and Davenport we'd get another at best Nick Perry (3 cones are all in the same ball park 7.20-7.35, bigger, less fluid). Landry is by far the quickest and is really the better pure pass rusher, which we need and I'd value more. His quickness jumps off the table more. Landry's 3 cone was 6.88 which is on par with what Clay's was 6.9). That is another reason I'm also on Leighton Vander Esh (pass rushing ILB, 3 cone of 6.88). I'd like more fluid athletes than stiffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kepler Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 2 hours ago, packfanfb said: If we had the No. 1 pick, I'd trade out, period. No defensive player is worth No. 1 in the draft and Barkley isn't worth No. 1, especially for GB. I'd get the best deal possible from a team needing a QB and move down at least into the 4-7 range. Definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted April 2, 2018 Share Posted April 2, 2018 3 hours ago, packfanfb said: If we had the No. 1 pick, I'd trade out, period. No defensive player is worth No. 1 in the draft and Barkley isn't worth No. 1, especially for GB. I'd get the best deal possible from a team needing a QB and move down at least into the 4-7 range. In theory, that works amazingly. But realistically, who'd make that kind of move? Let's assume the Browns and Packers had each other's pick and the Jets/Colts trade never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.