Green Bay’s Draft Pick Athletic Thresholds: Size Matters
Examining the athletic thresholds the Packers have adhered to under Brian Gutekunst when drafting players.
By markoldacres
It is no secret that Green Bay Packers GM Brian Gutekunst loves his athletes when it comes to the NFL draft.
More often than not, if a prospect puts up pedestrian numbers at the Combine or their pro day, you should not expect them to end up a Packer.
But what exactly are the thresholds Gutekunst has adhered to? It is difficult to pinpoint exactly, but by examining the players selected by the Green Bay since his first draft 2018, there are trends which emerge.
Note: This article will often refer to Kent Lee Platte’s Relative Athletic Score (RAS). This uses athletic testing data to build a composite score out of a possible 10, comparing prospects to thousands of their positional peers to have previously entered the NFL.
The first trend is that in the first and second round of the draft, Gutekunst has only selected well-above-average athletes.
Darnell Savage is the ‘worst’ athlete the Packers have drafted in the first round, and he put up an impressive 8.37 RAS.
In round two, A.J. Dillon’s 9.15 RAS (an elite score) is the lowest of the players drafted since 2018, although Josh Myers did not complete enough testing to get a complete score.
Moving onto positional trends, one of the most well-known thresholds the Packers appear to adhere to is weight for wide receivers. No receiver has weighed less than 191lbs. and been drafted by Brian Gutekunst.
There have been rumours he has considered breaking from tradition for Chris Olave in 2022, and that the Packers hold a strong interest in Tennessee’s Jalin Hyatt this year, who weighs just 176lbs.
But as a general rule of thumb, do not fall in love with undersized slot receivers if you are a Packers fan. It will only lead to disappointment.
Size also matters for Green Bay at other positions, such as running back, EDGE and corner.
All three running backs drafted by Gutekunst have weighed at least 208lbs, while every EDGE player has weighed at least 250lbs and measured at 6’3” tall. The Packers have traditionally preferred bigger, powerful rushers over smaller, speedy ones.
When Jaire Alexander was drafted, Gutekunst mentioned he was right on the border of their height threshold for cornerbacks. Alexander is 5 feet and 10.2 inches tall, so this would appear to be the absolute floor for the height a Packers cornerback can be.
The minimum weight for a player drafted by Green Bay at this position has been 194lbs., ignoring Shemar Jean-Charles, who Gutekunst admitted was an outlier for them. He weighed in at just 184lbs.
Interestingly, the offensive line position may have an upper limit for height. Every OL Gutekunst has drafted has been at least 6’4” tall, but shorter than 6’6”. No offensive lineman selected by the Packers has weighed less than 303lbs or more than 321lbs.
For defensive linemen, the minimum weight threshold has been 287lbs, while for linebackers it has been 227lbs. There have not been enough players drafted at the quarterback, tight end or safety position to get a sense of any trend.
When it comes to the actual athletic tests players traditionally complete at the Combine or their pro day, the Packers seem to value the vertical and broad jump more than anything else.
These two drills combine to make up the ‘explosion’ portion of the RAS score, and the Packers care about this quite a bit, based on their draft picks since 2018.
Of the 46 players Gutekunst has selected, only five of those who completed the explosion drills received lower than a ‘good’ score, and none of them scored in the ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ band compared to their positional peers.
This is worth remembering when considering who the Packers may or may not draft. If they have a poor vertical and broad jump, they may be off Green Bay’s board.
On the flipside, the Packers do not appear to care much for the agility drills, which are the 3-cone and short shuttle. They have drafted plenty of players with poor agility scores or did not complete the tests at all.
The only position where this may change is offensive line. Of the Packers draft picks who completed the agility drills, none of them scored poorly or very poorly.
There is logic to this, as there is evidence to suggest elite agility is a key ingredient for a top NFL offensive lineman.
https://twitter.com/JoshNorris/status/1630314384588251139
So, when looking at players you would like the Packers to draft, consider whether they meet the traditional athletic thresholds which would put them on Green Bay's board. It will save you so much pain on draft day.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Mark Oldacres is a sports writer from Birmingham, England and a Green Bay Packers fan. You can follow him on twitter at @MarkOldacres
__________________________
Comments (51)
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 07:57 am
What is their trending with Kickers?
splitpea1
March 12, 2023 at 11:17 am
I don't know about kickers, but punter JK Scott ranked up there at 8.5, so that must explain why he was so successful in Green Bay....
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 12:15 pm
There no willing to contact metric in RAS
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 06:18 pm
Well, there oughta be!!!
Long pause…………… Kickers………
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 12:15 pm
Yeah. Wow. I thought it was funny.
Totally appreciate the thresholds info tho.
Johnblood27
March 12, 2023 at 07:57 am
well, the formula that Gutey and the GBP use hasn't always led to positive draft results.
Perhaps they need to use the eye test of "does his tape LOOK LIKE a FOOTBALL PLAYER just a bit more and less of the is he an outstanding athlete.
King, Jones, Jackson, Burks, Moore, Savage, Sternberger, Martin, Stokes, Meyers, Rodgers, Newman, maybe Rhyan...
All of these top half of the draft selections were underwhelming in their performance... I chose not to pick on later round selections.
Maybe a few tweaks in the system are called for.
jannesbjornson
March 12, 2023 at 08:12 am
Sunday morning coming down when one reviews the List. They have to hit on the first four as gold. Best to move picks in a trade down to the lower first rd and gain #2 picks. A lot of talent in the CBs, TEs, RBs and Edge. Maybe a new group running the personnel dept ?
Bear
March 12, 2023 at 04:55 pm
20 years counted.
According to Pro Football Reference, most drafted players are busts. the only problem with their system is they don’t take into account the round they where picked. But anyway…
16.7% don’t even end playing for the drafting team (20 years average) 37% are considered ‘useless’, or busts. 5.3% are ‘poor’. Busts such as Jamarcus Russell are here.
So 69% are ‘poor’ or worst.
10.5% average
12.3% good 6.8% great 1% legendary
That gives 20.1% good. 2 out of 10.
jannesbjornson
March 13, 2023 at 08:12 am
Top Picks rds 1-3, you need contributors and Starters, not scrubs and wasted payroll.
stockholder
March 12, 2023 at 05:50 pm
Most people are not draft savvy here.
So Expect their heart to rule.
Your list. Edge = you don't trade down.
The TEs/Safeties you can trade down.
That would give you a extra pick in the top 75.
If he goes Offense-
he will not get the best defensive players.
If he goes safety - He will only win at 15.
Because the better Safeties are Rd 2 - 3.
Picking Edge wins the draft.
Picking offense gives you a building block.
If Love is the QB. You trade Down.
If Rodgers is the QB. You take Edge.
If you don't believe you'll be the GM
after Murphy and Rodgers.
You wreck the Packers draft.
And spend money on Free-Agents.
LLCHESTY
March 12, 2023 at 06:25 pm
At this point you writing like this has to be trolling.
stockholder
March 12, 2023 at 06:37 pm
Is it. I thought it was because you hate Rodgers?
Finding out how many players want him back?
jannesbjornson
March 13, 2023 at 08:35 am
A trade down occurs when Jones, Porter,Jr, are off the board. A move from #15 to the 23-25 range gets another tackle or Edge. I move 2024 picks if necessary. Load up the second round. No Safety with a One pick.
When they were playing catch up he went overboard on the Smith Bros. Bhak stays, fix the RT.
PFN speculation, introspection and illusion:
15 to San Diego for 21/54. 21/116 to NYG for 25/57.
#25 Anton Harrison OT
45/ #2 (2024) to Colts #35.
#35 Uzomah Edge
#54 Kraft TE
#57 to Cowgirls for 58/129.
#58 Rashee Rice WR
#78 Zach Harrison Edge
129/#4 2024 SF for #101
#101 Benton 3 tech
153/242 to JAX 185/191/202
#170 Jakorian Bennett CB
#185 Schoonmaker TE
#191 Jalen Green S
#196 ByronYoung Edge
#202 Chris Rodriguez RB
#232 Averett TE
stockholder
March 13, 2023 at 10:56 am
#35 Uzomah. Well Done.!!!
#78 Harrison works
But safety has to be somewhere.
And I'm still holding out for the DL.
But you got the right trade down.
jannesbjornson
March 13, 2023 at 05:18 pm
Benton is the 3 tech. Best first step of the big guys. Played right in their backyard, so they will not draft him like the whiff on TJ Watt, TJ Edwards, etc. Only a few of the blue chips will be around at #15. Green is the safety. Get a FA safety.
croatpackfan
March 12, 2023 at 08:22 am
So, 12 (maybe 13) players you named out of minimum 35 draft choices (34-37%) are busts by you.
I will not named busts some of them (like Stokes, King, Meyers) as some young players can have bad 2nd year, especially if they are asked to play out of their strength, like Stokes for example, or King (who is, btw, TT draft choice, as well as Jackson).
30 to 40% of draft choices that did not pan out is still very good result for doing the Crystal ball decisions.
Some of the players definitely should/would played better if they were not asked to do out of their confort zone. Like ACR who do not perform well when there is pre snap moving at the line of scrimmage. Would you call him a bust because of that?
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 09:43 am
Stokes had an excellent rookie season and a not so impressive sophomore one in a D playing much more off the receivers and more soft zone. I’d love to hear Gray’s theories on why that went badly. From the rumors it seems that they would be very close to my own. It’s got nothing to do with RAS but, as you say, using players against not with their strengths in that case.
The Packers don’t actually use RAS. They may use a blend iof metrics or their own, but it’s also generally true that the metrics valued by teams vary by position or role. For one role I may look at jumping because I want that first straight line step. At another it’s agility that’s important. For example a perimeter WR may have less emphasis on agility and more on burst than a slot. If I want size in a WR, I’m likely not getting one of the most agile either.
On OL we know from statements that they have wanted guys who can get to the next level or pull, so that jumping is relevant for all positions, but we have typically looked at agility for Ts—think quick feet and we tend to take Ts in college to make into Gs. They may not be the most agile in the T scores, but they are up there among guards (whom RAS scores differently).
I could go on, but the point is that I find this over simplified to the point of not being very illuminating and perhaps misleading and that any such discussion requires us to recall that any player requires usage in a way that doesn’t play against their strengths to achieve their potential. Coaching is a big factor.
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 01:17 pm
I find them sticking too tightly to multiple position stuff, theory being if they can play Tackle, they can play Guard.
We’ve heard Gutekunst say it.
How about just taking an incredible beast of an OG to play OG?
Sean Rhyan is a perfect example. A Tackle with short arms who’s used to playing in space, likely forced inside to play in a phone booth. R3.
One or two multiple position guys, like Tom or Jenkins is great on your roster, but, all of your OL? Increases the probability of losing out on some great players that way.
… uh… er… looks up Josh Sitton & TJ Lang. Both drafted as OTs…
Lol.
Nevermind.
Johnblood27
March 12, 2023 at 08:02 pm
you are a bust as a poster...
LOLOLOL!!!!!
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 08:41 pm
Totally. Agree 100%. … No… a bazillion %.
I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard, “This, is a bust!”
Cheech Marin once called me and said, “Hey! Get outta there man!”
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 10:08 am
“King, Jones, Jackson, Burks, Moore, Savage, Sternberger, Martin, Stokes, Meyers, Rodgers, Newman, maybe Rhyan..”
King lost his athleticism. He was decent at first but injuries and possibly how he was used as a minor factor. Jackson was not a football player, nor was Burks, though Jackson may also have had attitudinal barriers as Sternberger seems to. Mental factors are a big unknown: players have to want it and be able to cope. I think one could add Moore into that category despite evident physical talent.
Martin had an injury that led us to believe he wouldn’t be able to play. Newman has the physical ability for a G, but struggles with recognition mentally—when he gets it right he’s a very effective blocker, particularly in the run game. It’s still possible in my view that he was the worst possible guy to move to T, not merely for lack of lateral ability, but because he, of all candidates, seemed to need time to settle and had regressed over the end of the prior season when he returned to RG. That’s coaching in my book in large part.
Rodgers was a player picked to do something that he was never used for by LaFleur, probably because of Cobb’s return. He was not athletically, physically or experientially suited suited for the roles LaFleur tried him at in the O. He was not a good returner—just a guy whom the leap in class left behind.
Meyers is not a bust yet and Stokes was one of the best rated corners in year one (I address him in my earlier post). They don’t belong here. I’m not a fan of Meyers, but he’s not been awful and may actually prove his worth in year 3 as a C or G. He’s not a bust simply because Creed has been better. Savage is being asked to do things he’s not suited for. He’s played well at times, but like Stokes last year, has suffered from being miscast in Barry’s defense.
Overall, a great deal more nuanced and a lot less true busts. In actual fact, Gute is statistically a little ahead of the curve. I ignored Rhyan because none of us know what he could be. He’s clearly a bad pick unless he gets his head straight. Those happen. We will see if he does, but at this point the validity of his pick afrom a physical perspective is unknown. I did look to see if there were any red flags in his past, I did not find any. Sometimes they are there and sometimes not.
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 12:26 pm
I’m buying all of this.
Well said, jb.
1. Can they play, at a high level?
2. Do they have a knack for big plays?
3. Top level play in consecutive years?
4. Are they exceptionally competitive?
5. Instinctive?
6. Clear student of the game?
7. Consistently plays thru whistle?
8. Injury free?
9. Are they tough?
10. Are they smooth, confident?
11. Hustler?
12. Level headed?
13. Team oriented?
All of it important stuff no one can quantify in the underwear Olympics.
BruceC1960
March 12, 2023 at 08:41 am
Creed Humphrey must have had a low RAS score?
jvole
March 12, 2023 at 09:04 am
Sadly he was a 10. I chalk that up to Gutey needing to be seen as thinking 'outside the box'.
Regardless of RAS, if you have a guy named 'Creed' vs. a guy named 'Josh', you pick CREED!
PhantomII
March 12, 2023 at 02:32 pm
Wow, a 10. I thought he had the biggest (fastest) gut. When I looked at him all I saw were lower back issues carrying that around. Creed was chosen next after we chose our new (C).
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 12:45 pm
He was just 1” shorter and 10 lbs lighter than Myers. Sadly, I think that “We want bigger football players” thing was taken too far by Gutekunst, and, Creed winds up with a Super Bowl ring.
Creed was a 2-Time Big 12 Offensive Lineman of the year. Myers? 2nd team his last season.
jannesbjornson
March 12, 2023 at 05:40 pm
Myers could be a better guard.
stockholder
March 12, 2023 at 06:00 pm
Move him and he's a Bust.
BirdDogUni
March 12, 2023 at 10:02 am
"Size Matters"
I can't believe I have to be the one who says it first...
"That's what she said..."
; P
MooPack
March 12, 2023 at 12:04 pm
Maybe Mark thinks we should select a bunch of Johnsons.
BirdDogUni
March 12, 2023 at 02:58 pm
Bahahahaha
*Well played MP...
PatrickGB
March 12, 2023 at 10:09 am
I wonder how Guties guys compare to what size of players that other teams draft? Is he really an outlier or is that closer to the norm?
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 10:18 am
We have wanted mobility on both lines and that tends to mean lighter overall. That’s what LaFleur and Pettine/Barry use. I’d love to see a little more power on O and more size, but that goes directly back to what your coaches want and will use. Hell, we even had Kenny Clark shed a ton of weight last off season. I’m not sure that was a plus.
PatrickGB
March 12, 2023 at 10:45 am
I wondered about that too. My guess is that they felt that he would do better in a role closer to a DE rather than DT.
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 10:52 am
Possibly, but the reality is that requires a replacement ready and Clark being played as such. I did not really see either justified in the field. Could that be one example of a disconnect when your coaches don’t actually report to the people recruiting?
MooPack
March 12, 2023 at 10:18 am
Packers may not use “RAS”, but the data points are the same. How they are used positionally may be different, but for the most part - “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet"
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 10:20 am
To some extent. But the results can be very different depending on what one omits and how that included is weighted.
MooPack
March 12, 2023 at 10:28 am
I don’t believe we are in disagreement .
PatrickGB
March 12, 2023 at 10:50 am
If a team scout like two-three players equally, the GM may decide that the bigger faster fella has more long term potential.
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 10:58 am
If Rodgers does move on and those who believe that Rodgers has had a strong influence in the shape of the offense are correct, then LaFleur will be changing things up dramatically and his wish list for Gute may lead to surprises for us this year.
BirdDogUni
March 12, 2023 at 11:35 am
Think we already had those surprises in AJ Dillon and Josiah Deguara... I guess we could get even more surprises, but those two were pretty big, IMO.
I really wanted Dillon in the draft. I didn't figure Deguara would go until the 5th or 6th round, so that was a huge surprise for me.
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 12:18 pm
I thought about mentioning them and avoided them as I thought we just get into draft mistake territory. I agree, both would be existing picks whose usage wasn’t as intended at drafting.
zerotolerance
March 12, 2023 at 12:11 pm
Hopefully.
zerotolerance
March 12, 2023 at 12:26 pm
Response to wrong comment.
splitpea1
March 12, 2023 at 11:37 am
I can see the relevance of these measurables in some cases, but not in others--particularly at WR. So I'm looking at DeVonta Smith, Garrett Wilson, Tyler Lockett, and super speedster Jaylen Waddle: all 1000-yard receivers that weigh less than 190 lbs. Think any of them would upgrade the Packers WR room?
croatpackfan
March 12, 2023 at 12:25 pm
I believe they want heavier WR because of blocking, but than suffers speed (mostly). I also believe blocking is more issue of technics than pure weight.
Davante was not super speedstar, but has more yards than any of them. For me the best WRs are those with fast first step, high intelligence and good body balance (that allows you to track the ball in the air without losing your step or speed).
Coldworld
March 12, 2023 at 01:28 pm
We’ve only taken one slot type and he was more of an elusive with ball in hand option physique. We used Adams in ways that overlapped that and then we reacquired Cobb. That’s part of the skew I suspect.
LLCHESTY
March 12, 2023 at 06:45 pm
The premise might be sound-you want bigger WRs to help with blocking when the weather turns cold. Unfortunately neither of the last two HCs ran any more with the changing seasons so it's a bit of a hackneyed premise.
Handsback
March 12, 2023 at 07:35 pm
In the "for what it's worth category" there was a great article in the Dallas Morning News about how jimmy Johnson had developed a value chart for players and used that chart in the Hershel Walker trade. Here are the important traits that Jimmy said he looked for in players. One had never been developed so he did it himself. Here are his 5 desired qualities:
1. Intelligence
2.Playmakers
3. Gym Rats Players who liked to compete and work hard.
4. Quickness and speed
5. Characters, because you can't win championships with bums.
He went on to say that other GM and coaches came to him including the GM for the San Antonio Spurs to ask how it worked.
Traits 1, 3, and 5 could be flushed out at the Combine. Now I know people will point to Michael Irving's character but he was also a bright playmaker and I'm sure there were other players where exceptions were made. But I'm pretty sure the Packers have something like this and their picks following their value chart may make us scratch our heads.
Just MHO
greengold
March 12, 2023 at 08:07 pm
Thanks for that, Handsback.
Off topic, but hearing “Jimmy Johnson” and “characters,”immediately transports me to a job site in Dallas, where Jimmy Johnson’s son was caught attempting to steal my rental car.
Carry on.
Handsback
March 12, 2023 at 10:03 pm
GG, exactly! Jimmy never had him on the team. Yeah I know bad joke.