What Is Green Bay's Biggest Need?
By jasonperone
We are 24 days away from the 2016 NFL draft. With General manager Ted Thompson, we have learned that anything is possible when the Commissioner steps to the podium to announce their first pick. The same can be said for the other picks as well. The Packers prefer to make hay in the draft, versus shelling out bigger money to outside free agents and so most of the responsibility for filling the team's needs falls on Thompson and his team of scouts.
Immediately after the 2015 season ended, the most glaring needs that Green Bay had were at inside linebacker and tight end. Some would throw running back in there as, at that time, we were talking about an enormous Eddie Lacy and uncertainty surrounding who the team's other back would be. We now know that James Starks should be back (he has to survive final cuts and we don't know who will be drafted) and Lacy appears on his way to a trimmer version of himself (there are still nearly five months until the season starts, however).
Until early last week, tight end and linebacker were still the biggest holes on the roster. Then came the announcement that Jared Cook had chosen to sign with the Packers, and tight end started making its way down that list of needs. Inside linebacker remains and so does outside linebacker. An aging Julius Peppers has only a few seasons left in him and we don't know how successful Datone Jones will be in his transition to the elephant end position. With the inside backer spot, we're reminded of how long it took the Packers to adequately address the safety position following the loss of Nick Collins in 2011. For two seasons, the Packers patch worked and glued together whatever they could find and bombed badly on fourth-round pick Jerron McMillian in 2012. Finally they landed Ha Ha Clinton-Dix in 2014 and, along with Morgan Burnett, they position seems fortified (even though some still swear they should have signed Jairus Byrd).
So the question remains: is inside linebacker the team's biggest need? What about defensive line, after the sudden retirement of nose tackle B.J. Raji? Or is it offensive line, with three of the five starting line up for free agency after the 2016 season? Whichever it is, the Packers can't afford to let another situation like the safety position happen again. Whether Thompson or the team value a certain position or not, they need to hit with impact players in this draft.
The prevailing idea is that teams should draft the best player available (BPA) on the board in round one versus going for need. In looking at many of the mock drafts thus far and with the Packers picking 27th in round one, need and BPA may line up. Some mocks have the Packers continuing their love affair with players from the Crimson Tide of Alabama and taking linebacker Reggie Ragland. Others have them selecting linebacker Darron Lee if he falls that far. There have been a few who still have Green Bay taking tight end Hunter Henry, but the signing of Cook seems to be a further indictment of this weak tight end class. On the defensive line, Jarran Reed (another Alabama product) and Andrew Billings have been tossed around.
It's possible that the Packers have someone else in mind and also possible that none of those players are even on the board when Green Bay is on the clock. Last year, the Packers opted to wait until the fourth round to draft linebacker Jake Ryan. Ryan has an incredible work ethic but it's hard to expect a fourth round pick to be the immediate answers to a team's needs. After the second round, it's anything but guaranteed that those selections are going to step in and be starters.
With Ryan entering his second season and after assuming the starting inside spot from Nate Palmer coupled with the return of Sam Barrington, the inside linebacker position is far from in shambles. It may still remain a need, but Green Bay likes both Ryan and Barrington. And as many times as we hear head coach Mike McCarthy and Dom Capers say that Clay Matthews is moving back outside, don't kid yourself into thinking he won't see any snaps on the inside again.
The Packers have cap space most every season and while it's not a ton of space, they do have it. Expect to see at least one if not two of the three offensive linemen back next season. Depending on which two they are, that would give the Packers a chance to add depth to the line during the middle rounds of this draft. Far from emergency mode.
On the defensive line, the Packers have Mike Daniels and Datone Jones on the ends with Letroy Guion and Mike Pennel in the middle. Josh Boyd may figure into that equation and we don't know what Christian Ringo will offer. Pennel is suspended for the first four games of this coming season for violating the NFL's policy on substance abuse. That makes defensive line the team's biggest need heading into 2016.
After the Cook signing and with what is left on the market, signing a free agent lineman is almost certainly out. With Billings' stock climbing and Reed getting a lot of positive play, the Packers may find themselves in a position to have to maneuver to get a guy, if they agree with my assessment of need. Not since 2009 have the Packers traded in the first round. They already had Raji and moved back in to select Matthews. The Packers only have seven picks to trade with this year, as compensatory picks can't be traded. And being at the back end of most rounds, the value of those picks means Thompson would likely have to add some extra picks in if they want to jump the line. Based on history, don't hold your breath. The Packers have proven, on multiple occasions, that they'll gladly go with who they already have even when that solution is clearly not a stellar option.
The draft is always a gamble so guys like Reed and Billings may prove to fall well short of meeting their expectations or they may go on to great careers. It's going to be tough for the Packers to address all of their needs but when it comes to the defensive line, they really do need to hit the nail on the head. Two impact players, one of which can play regularly, should be the target. In just over three week, we'll know how the Packers see their needs and what their plan of attack is.
-------------------
Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts. You can follow him on Twitter here
Comments (93)
AgrippaLII
April 04, 2016 at 06:07 am
The Packers need another pass rusher. A DE, OLB, or DT...it doesn't matter as long as they get more pressure on opposing QB's.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 04:04 pm
Hopefully one of those players will be Jayrone Elliott. I really like him. I think he deserves more playing time. When he played last year he seemed to make an impact every time he was on the field.
But I agree. Always need more pass rushers.
Tundraboy
April 05, 2016 at 07:34 am
That's what I'm hoping and expecting. Just one immediate big impact player on D. We are so overdue to hit on one.
NickPerry
April 04, 2016 at 08:15 am
I'm not sure how many bought the Cheesehead TV Draft Guide but Jersey Al's "Mock Draft" for the Packers is spot on IMO. If the Board managed to fall like that, if Thompson was able to make those picks or the alternates, I'd be one happy camper.
With that said I agree with Jason, "They need to hit with Imapct Players this draft". This draft just might be the most important draft for the Packers in several years. With the number of Players set to be Free Agents next year, losing Raji, maybe Neal, and Pennel for the first 4 games this year, and other NFC teams improving at least of paper, makes ths draft one Thompson has to nail. Not just for the upcoming season but the Packers as a whole for the next few years. Thompson can't afford another 2011 or 2012 draft class, not this year.
EDIT... Noah Spence is scheduled for a visit Friday with the Packers. Interesting because the guy can play but (had/has?) drug issues 2 years ago. Give a 21 year old 1st round money with a history of drug use? I'm all in favor of 2nd chances and would love a talent like him on the other side of Matthews, just don't know if I'd have the nuggents to do it. That's a tough one for TT.
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 09:51 am
I'm a fan of Spence and think there's a reasonable chance he makes it to #27...in which case I think TT jumps on him and tips his cap to the rest of the league in thanks. Apparently he had a public intoxication charge in January that was expunged from his record. The ecstasy thing is in his past and it doesn't bother me. I'd have to be really sure that he's not just replacing an illegal substance with a legal one.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 11:13 am
Hitting on impact players and going to get those impact players are different.
I hope TT goes and gets instead of sitting back and waiting.
jeremyjjbrown
April 04, 2016 at 12:45 pm
No team can afford the Packers 2011 draft class in any year.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 01:26 pm
Ugh...
Besides Cobb (obviously) and House, I don't even know if the rest are in the NFL.
croatpackfan
April 04, 2016 at 06:37 am
Thank you for sharing yout thoughts about this season draft. Somehow I think that Ted Thompson will surprse us again and that he will pick up players which will have effect (in positive way) on Packers result.
But I can not understand why people always like to worry what will be, even before they need to worry about. We do not know who will be available and who is evaluate as primary target. We know something. Ted has more succesful pick ups than not. And I'm satisfied with that! I'm waiting for the draft with anticipation and positive attitude. I know good things will happen for Packers!
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 06:45 am
Right now I would say the biggest need is DL.
With Raji unexpectedly retiring early, it leaves a big hole at NT. Also they could really use a 5 technique DE with Jones set to play more of the OLB/DE role.
ILB has been the biggest need position, but if they don't get a good NT that can keep the OL off of the ILB, it really won't matter who you put at ILB.
I think they can get by with what they have ILB, but would love to see an upgrade. I'm not sure they can get by with what they have on the DL right now.
Idiot Fan
April 04, 2016 at 09:47 am
I don't disagree that we need some help along the line, but even as we stand right now, I'm not sure that we're any worse off than two years ago (when Raji was hurt). That line was adequate, if unspectacular. I thought Guion (eventually) settled in pretty well at NT. The 2014 dline actually ranked higher in rushing YPA against than the 2015 dline. And add to that the fact that Pennel is hitting his third year rather than being a rookie.
I know that "mediocre" is a pretty low bar to set, but at least it's probably not a complete dumpster fire currently :). And if we add in some talent from the draft, we just might move the bar from "mediocre" to "actually pretty good."
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 09:53 am
Two years ago, that defense was horrendous against the run until CMIII moved inside. That was the defining point of improvement for that defense.
Idiot Fan
April 04, 2016 at 02:31 pm
I'm also a fan of CM3 inside, personally :).
Tundraboy
April 04, 2016 at 11:36 pm
Yes sir. Amazing what an impact player in the middle can do. I'll be happy with some Dline pass rush help to take pressure off our ILBs. And seeing Matthew's there from time to time.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 03:04 pm
Well, i'm looking at our starting DL is Daniels, Guion, and Jones? Jones is playing more elephant end/OLB. So they could really use another 5 Technique.
I personally like Guion better as a pass defender then run stuffer. I like Pennel, but with his suspension that weakens the line at the bigging of the year, and I think they still need another big run stuffing NT.
I think 2 DL out of this draft would really help.
zac5
April 04, 2016 at 06:51 am
At this point it’s a no brainer the Packers need help on the defensive line,
But TT must remain true his board and pick the best player available in the first round as I cast my memory to 3 years ago when the Packers chose Datone Jones over DeAndre Hopkins, who was my draft crush at the time.
Or think 18 years ago, who you would have rather taken in the 1998 draft, Vonnie Holliday or Randy Moss?
Yes DT is a must, but not over a better prospect, especially in the first.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 07:11 am
'Or think 18 years ago, who you would have rather taken in the 1998 draft, Vonnie Holliday or Randy Moss?'
When Moss came out he had so many off field problems that most took him off their draft boards.
But I completely agree. Remain true to the board and take the best player available.
With this draft very deep at DL, I could really see one of the DL being the best pick available.
Thegreatreynoldo
April 04, 2016 at 06:52 am
I'd say who we draft is a philosophical and strategic decision. Does TT take the best remaining OLB for example instead of a somewhat higher ranked DL, figuring that a pretty good DL is likely to be available in round 2? The philosophy is whether to simply take the highest ranked player at a position of some need or to take the combination of 2or 3 players with the highest ratings? Strategy comes into play in anticipating the moves of other teams to figure out the probability that a good DL (one TT likes) actually will still be there in the 2nd and 3rd rounds if TT abjures the best DL in Round 1.
Biggest need is a DL, either a NT or a DE. hard to pass though on Ragland, Billings or Robinson if there at 27.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 07:26 am
I remember when Thompson traded up to draft Clay Mathews, he said that Mathews was the last of the best Pass Rushers remaining. So he targeted him and went up and got him. Was Mathews the best player available at the time or was he the best pass rusher available at the time?
I am not sure if Thompson would draft a lesser player to fill a need vs taking a better prospect. But if a position is very strong and he thinks he can get a player of similar abilities (for example at DL) a round later, then he probably would go with a ILB or OLB if they were ranked similar.
Either way you have to draft the best players available. You can't really look at needs because throughout a year you never know what position will get hit hard by injuries.
Thegreatreynoldo
April 04, 2016 at 07:56 am
I think both options are valid, RC. If Billings [Edit: make it Butler or Reed - Billings looks awfully good and clouds the issue] is 22nd and Ragland is 24th, and have reasonably similar nominal grades on TT's board, I'd take Ragland, figuring I can get someone pretty good at NT in the 2nd, and not much at ILB. For me, it depends on the disparity between the actual grade on the two players.
As far as CM3, TT has said that he thought about taking CM3 at #9 instead of Raji. Of course, TT said he thought about taking Rollins instead of Randall last year.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 08:02 am
Yeah, I agree with that.
If there is a bigger drop off in talent at ILB then NT/DE I could definitely see him going with the ILB in the first and DL in the 2nd.
But if the DL is rated a lot better then the ILB, I would expect them to take the DL in the first round.
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 09:59 am
I actually like Butler BETTER than Billings, but that's just me. Butler should be there at #27 (and into early round 2). Billings might not be.
Ragland carries a high grade but the only way I take Ragland at #27 is if I figure I can generate pass rush with him, because he just doesn't look like he's going to be a cover ILB. If that's the case, what does he bring that isn't already on the roster? You can find players similar to Ragland later in the draft if you feel that's what you really need.
If I'm holding onto #27 and Ragland is at the top of my board I'm working the phones like crazy to find a trade partner to move down 6-12 picks. But then, in this draft, I might be doing that anyway.
EdsLaces
April 04, 2016 at 10:57 am
Ragland definitely isn't a cover ilb but what he brings is football smarts and a tenacity that is lacking on our defense.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 02:01 pm
Y'all might be looking at this the wrong way. What if Ragland wouldn't be drafted to be our "chaser" or a cover LB? I mean, what are Jake Ryan, Sam Barrington, Nate Palmer, Carl Bradford? Is Reggie Ragland better then them? If so, how much of an improvement is he compared to those guys?
I wouldn't mind it if TT selected him to replace any of those guys mentioned above and found his partner later in the draft, FA or even in future drafts.
Edit: I don't know how the rest of you look at prospects (and I'm not saying there's a right or wrong way to do it, but I like to watch the 'player vs' videos instead of 'player highlights". Reggie Ragland makes plays. Runs/Rushing/Covering.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 02:37 pm
The other thing to look at is how does he do in blitzing. If he is a good rusher, then odds are they will have him blitz more then drop back. Think about Desmond Bishop. He was out best blitzing ILB we have had since switching to the 3-4 (not including Mathews). Was he great in coverage, no, but he was great at rushing the QB.
Perhaps Ragland could fill that role.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 02:49 pm
That's what I'm thinking as well @RC
I'm watching Ragland's game against Arkansas and he's showing everything. Outside rushing, stunts, covering flats and there's little yards after contact with him.
There are 2 plays that really stood out to me. One was a pick play where he got tripped up and his guy was left open for a big gain. And then there was the same play ran later in the game where he jammed the TE this time into a receiver which screwed up the timing and he ended up deflecting the pass.
NickPerry
April 04, 2016 at 08:28 pm
LOL...What is Carl Bradford? That's the million dollar question! To think I was in love with that pick 2 years ago and he's still NEVER active. Terrell Manning all over again. It was Terrell Manning right?
I'm starting to wonder if Thompson doesn't think he's already got it covered with Barrington and Ryan and addresses the coverage backer with a guy like LSU's Deion Jones in the 3rd. When you think about it that's not a bad way to go. Sam's a smash mouth player a lot like Ragland and Ryan just might surprise us all. O-line, D-line, OLB could be possible 1st and 2nd round picks.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 10:28 pm
I am to, Nick. *sigh*. I am too.
I remember during the draft on ESPN his name was in the group of "Best available" and was given an A-grade. I thought surely he could bring SOMETHING.
He's still young, so there's hope. Hell, it took James Harrison how long to figure things out?
Tundraboy
April 04, 2016 at 11:43 pm
That makes a lot of sense,DW
lou
April 04, 2016 at 11:18 am
Both RC's and your points "thegreatreynoldo" are excellent. The only thing I would disagree with is taking Ragland. I base that on McCarthy's recent quote in regards to the value of a TE that can run the seam and open up the middle of the field, on the other side of that you need a LB that can run with that TE and Lee from OSU is a much better bet than Ragland. Ragland can be a terrific 2 down defender, much like Larinitas, but both lack the range to cover TE's.
RobinsonDavis
April 04, 2016 at 03:47 pm
Great thread! Ted has demonstrated need does not always translate into a #1 or #2 pick. If that were the case, these posts would not be talking about an ILB for how many years?...then again the CBs drafted last year appears to be brilliant (disclosure: I was ticked when they drafted TWO DBs last year vs. an ILB). Like most everyone, in order, I see left-DE, 3-down ILB , NT, and OT as the biggest needs. However, I would not be surprised to see TT & Co. reach for a playmaking WR if available. Seems the WRs are getting the blame rather than our coaches for the lack of productivity. I repeat again, TT has drafted amazingly well in the past, but his record in using high draft picks for impact D-linemen lags other positions he has drafted, but feel the need outweighs the concern.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 05:06 pm
@Robinson Were you ticked at the fact that he drafted back to back DBs or the fact that he skipped over so many ILBs that could replace many LBs on the Packers team? For me, it was the fact that he skipped on so many LBs and then drafted one who had a recent ACL injury.
RobinsonDavis
April 05, 2016 at 11:50 pm
Sorry Drealyn....been traveling for job, but good question. In short - Both. I loved the Ryan pick at #4, but feel we passed over some great LB opportunities early in the draft. I originally felt we screwed up not re-signing Williams, which placed TT into a position of having to draft 2 DBs. I just did not believe we would go 1-2 in the draft.
I was a huge Perryman fan...still am. This is not that I am down on Ryan or Barrington...I am truly not, but we have little depth, and issues covering. Sam is going to be picked on in coverage every time he plays until he can demonstrate that he can cover, consistently. I am more concerned about TT drafting D-Linemen with bad backs and poor work ethic. Harrell, Worthy, Thorton to name 3. Your thoughts?
DrealynWilliams
April 06, 2016 at 12:20 am
No Prob. @Robinson
I wasn't worried about losing Williams, but I was a bit concerned with losing House because we had no proven CB on the team other than Shields. I never question TT picks for 1) I don't follow College Football to know much about players outside of the film I find online and 2) you just never know how a player will turn out.
I'm not down on Ryan either, but there's not much that separates himself and Barrington. I think it all comes down to how important TT/Capers feel the ILB position is. If a LB that can spend some time at ILB isn't picked within the first 3 -- we'll be settling with Barrington/Ryan/Thomas.
I can't call TT's D-Linemen record. I don't know if it's bad scouting or bad luck. Hell, maybe both.
NickPerry
April 04, 2016 at 07:29 am
That's an excellent point because DL is so deep this year Thompson might wait until the 2nd round to address the position if a player is available he likes at a postion not nearly as deep. OLB or OL wouldn't surprise me a bit in round one.
vj_ostrowski
April 04, 2016 at 07:16 am
DL, and I don't think there's a question, only because we need 5T AND NT
We only have one true 5T and one true NT on our roster. Boyd and Pennel. One had ankle reconstruction and the other is suspended for 4 games.
Daniels is a star, but beyond that, Boyd, Pennel, Guion, and what, Ringo? That's scary.
Give me two DL picks in the first 3 rounds, really.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 07:28 am
I would be happy if our first 3 picks ended up being 2 DL and 1 ILB.
Idiot Fan
April 04, 2016 at 02:34 pm
I'd be happy with drafting a developmental olineman or two at some point and spending every other pick we have on the front seven of the defense.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 02:49 pm
I agree.
Thompson has been very good lately at drafting OL in the 4th round area. They have 2 picks in the 4th, so I would be fine if they drafted 2 in the 4th.
NickPerry
April 04, 2016 at 08:00 am
As long as Thompson doesn't come out of Left Field like he did when he picked Thornton in the 3rd round in 2015 or Harrell in 2007. Ted could have had Thornton in the 6th or 7th, maybe even as an UDFA. Harrell? Forget about it!!
Damn VJ, that is scary.
MarkinMadison
April 04, 2016 at 08:15 am
I was pretty excited about the switch to the 3-4 D years ago, but I'm not sure that TT has ever really stocked it with the right horses. Outside of CM3 and Daniels he has failed to draft impact players for the front seven of the defense. And Daniels is really not a prototypical DE because his heart and technique make up for his lack of elite size and speed.
When I think of prototypical DE you are looking for a guy who is 6'5" with a wingspan to take away passing lanes on plays where he is not getting to the QB - and face it even the best DE only gets to the QB a fraction of the time. When I think of a prototypical ILB in today's NFL I think of a guy who has the speed to stay on the field on 3rd down and cover the TE or RB - because guess what, they pass on 1st and 2nd down too. The only LB the Packers have who can do that is CM3.
So I don't care if TT goes ILB or DE, as long as he grabs guys in the first two rounds that can fit the bill. I'm not as worried about NT as some. I know about the suspension. The Packers have found ways to survive suspensions on the DL before. And long-term, between Guion and Pennel, and the odds that Raji wakes up, wonders where is game check is - I don't think NT has to be addressed this year.
croatpackfan
April 04, 2016 at 08:36 am
"Outside of CM3 and Daniels he has failed to draft impact players for the front seven of the defense."
Packers were drafting w/o 1st round from 2011 draft. Why nobody understands that?
TT has his misses, but you can not predict how any player will react on change from College football to NFL. There was busts all over 1st round drafts, as well as all over all 7 rounds. I say TT did pretty well job in drafting and finding UDFA for Packers...
jeremyjjbrown
April 04, 2016 at 12:55 pm
The Packers 2011 1st round draft pick was Derrick Sherrod.
croatpackfan
April 04, 2016 at 03:12 pm
Pick No 20 is already 2nd round pick. That is what most experts says. So, who am I to oppose them?
Thegreatreynoldo
April 05, 2016 at 01:10 am
I agree and get what you are saying, Croat. In most drafts there usually are only 20 to 24 legitimate first round talents. Then there is another tier of about 15 prospects usually listed as late 1st or early 2nd round talents. Most yrs TT is selecting from the latter tier. TT's record when he has a choice of legitimate first round talent to choose from is good: they inc. Clinton Dix, Bulaga, Raji, CM3 and Harrell; when he had to choose from prospects who were not legitimate 1st rounders, the 1st/2nd rd. talents, not as good: Sherrod, Datone, Nick Perry, Randall.
4EVER
April 04, 2016 at 10:28 am
I agree with your sentiment around TT not stocking the right horses. Hopefully, TT has brought in some new blood (scouts) that can detect DL talent with the marbles and desire that transfers over to the NFL. TT's front seven selections on the DL side of the ball have been found to be truly inadequate. Seems he pulled Mike Daniels out of a hat...
I disagree with the assessment of the current NT fiasco. Because true nose tackles are rare, and without one, defensive alignments like the 3-4 will have a difficult time being effective. And B.J. Raji is/was far from a true NT...IMO!
Handsback
April 04, 2016 at 09:52 am
Nobody on this board has access to the Pack's draft board so any discussion is pure speculation. So in MHO you have to look at where the Packer's are concerned. After last year I see weakness in the Oline, Dline, ILB, OLB, RB and WR/TE.
WR and Oline were issues w/ injuries, but with so many on last year of contract I see Oline as big issue. WR/TE not as big an issue. Jordy, Monty, Adams and Cobb susstained pretty bad injuries and just don't see that again.
RB has to an issue w/ a heavy Lacy and marginal Starks. So a RB in middle rounds seems like a probable event.
Packer's D still isn't where it should be in stopping the run. Pass rush isn't bad, but more pressure is needed. So is the run problem the edges/middle/ lack of effort? Maybe a little of everything. Hayward and HHCD needed to be better tacklers. HHCD has gotten better and Hayward is gone. Jones has been added to the Perry/Peppers/Matthews/Eliott group to make the runs on the edge harder to accomplish. The middle even w/ Raji would be the soft issue at hand. So another run stopper/space eater is needed to keep the ILBs clean. Ryan got better and the hope is Barrington comes back as good or better than ever. I would say he's the question mark at this time.
Looking at a DB that can cover and fairly good but aged edge rushers the issue that stands out is stopping the run. For that an interior DLine guy and an ILB is key.
For the Pack I see 1 high pick for Dline, a 2nd rd for ILB, 3rd for OLB 4th I see multiple Oline and RB, 5th-6th maybe Dline/ILB/WR and 7th-WR. We all know TT will take the BPA and who knows who will fall, but I say that a Dline guy is probably most needed area of concern. It took a lot of words to come to that...sorry!
croatpackfan
April 04, 2016 at 03:16 pm
Packer already has 7 WR on the board and they will bring one or two in addition. Why we forget about John Crockett. I think he used little time well enough. I'm sure they will have some RB addition, too.
RCPackerFan
April 04, 2016 at 03:44 pm
I like Crockett. But to be honest, I would like to see them draft one in the mid rounds. I would be fine to go in the season with 4 RB's on the roster. If they don't resign Kuhn, they could keep a 4th RB.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 05:14 pm
I think if a RB is drafted he has to be a threat to be at the least the #2 back, because Lacy's bounce back isn't certain and Starks might have the case of fumbles again.
Drafting a RB should be ahead of WR -- at least there's some assurance there.
RCPackerFan
April 05, 2016 at 06:44 am
Oh yeah, I agree.
I think Crockett could make a run for the #2 job with a good offseason. I still would like to see them add a more change of pace type of RB. One that is shifty and great in the open field. Offer something that the other RB's don't.
DrealynWilliams
April 05, 2016 at 03:16 pm
@RC
I agree. I hate that type of injury happened to J. Franklin more and more each time I think about a true change of pace, shifty, and good hands type of RB.
But maybe we don't really need a 3rd RB...
We have 2 WRs with RB bodies and running styles in Montgomery and Cobb.
April 04, 2016 at 10:05 am
Rd 1 - Rankins, Reed, Billings
Rd. 2 - V Butler, A Johnson, J Garnett, H Henry
Rd 3 - D Jones, K Brothers, C Westerman
Some of my favorite targets in each rd. The ideal draft would be filling the holes at DL, LB, and future hole at OL.
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 10:23 am
If there's a trade-up that consolidates picks for the Packers, I could see a draft scenario where the only players picked are DL, OL, and LB.
April 04, 2016 at 12:08 pm
Agreed. How do you rank the DL prospects in this draft?
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 01:30 pm
(Keeping in mind that I'm no scout....)
I think the Packers can get a 1-dimensional run stuffer on day 3: Antwaun Woods from Southern Cal or Nile Sample from FSU. It's been said that you grow NTs as much as you find them. Some people like D.J. Reader from Clemson, but I'm iffy on his character...not that it mattered in Pennel's case.
I was reading an analysis of all-pro DL and OL recently and the one scouting number that is the most consistent quality of those good players in the trenches is a high number of reps on the bench. Couple that with motor and you've got something. Vernon Butler has been someone I like even at #27...good fire, nice length. People like Billings, I think he'd be good, too. I just like Butler's length better. I like Jerran Reed better than A'Shawn Robinson because I'm not sure the effort is there for Robinson. He could be a draft killer for someone. Reed is a "safer" but more one-dimensional guy.
You mention Johnson in round 2. I like him at that spot. I think he could develop into the kind of guy who anchors a line for years. Some have mocked Chris Jones to the Packers in Rd. 2. Nice length, strong kid. Can develop into a pass-rusher. I could see him there, too.
There's a lot of length in this draft--guys who are 6'5" or so with long arms and proven track records. That said, there are good players that fit the "Mike Daniels-mold" that will show up in round 3 or later: Matt Ioannidis from Temple, Javon Hargrave from SC St. Luther Maddy from Va Tech. Would love to see Matt Judon come in as a DE/OLB guy.
DrealynWilliams
April 04, 2016 at 05:39 pm
I don't see how some are ranking Rankins over Billings. Maybe they watched the two all season or seen some reels that aren't on Youtube, but Billings is all over the place when I watch his vs a team. Running and passing.
stockholder
April 04, 2016 at 10:30 am
I prefer Ragland or Floyd at #27. Alternates Ogbah/Dodd. With all the DLs in this draft, No one is a can't miss! Johnson , Washington,Day ,and Henry, can be just as effective, with a higher reward! This is the year to fix the LBs first. Get a 3 down player.
Bearmeat
April 04, 2016 at 10:58 am
Like RC said above, DL is the strength of this draft. So, unless BPA is clearly DL at 27 overall, I'm going OLB or ILB if I can, then taking DL in 2/3 round.
Thegreatreynoldo
April 05, 2016 at 01:24 am
Well said. You answered my philosophical/strategical question above. As it happens, you appear to agree with me.
4EVER
April 04, 2016 at 06:57 pm
The Packers biggest needs in order are; LT, NT, DE, OG, ILB, OLB, TE, RB, WR.
LT - if not; TT will over-pay Bakhtiari in 2017
NT - 3-4 D requires a true NT to be effective
DE - supplement draft misses
OG - 2017 FA!
ILB - true 3 down talent, position ignored
OLB - supplement draft misses
TE - two high safeties, need more be said, position ignored, MM words; NFL rules point to the middle
RB - zone blocking phenom insurance
WR - this is the pass happy NFL
UPDATE:
PUNTER - WEAK LINK, FA pickup preferred
Lets drop/skip rounds 6-7 experiments and select the BPA in rounds 2-4, and designate round 5 for a true BPA project or two (Jaylon Smith ILB/OLB, Moritz Boehringer WR, Devon Cajuste WR/TE, Deiondre Hall CB, Nick Vigil ILB).
This is simple: trade out of round 1, collecting extra picks in rounds 2 and 4, and throw in an extra pick in 3 if the right - misguided and desperate - GM can be found. Call me crazy, but this very scenario has occurred in previous drafts. Use these extra picks to move up and down in rounds 2-4 for BPA - of the OL, DL, and LB category or an authentic round 1 talent of any category. Use the collected 5-7 picks, to trade back into late round 4 or move around in round 5 for the aforementioned projects.
To me this scheme is a common sense move, a must for a GM that doesn't view FA as a stop gap to draft misses.
Granted this would take some real work! Regrettingly or sadly, finagling or the devious nature needed to pull this off is not in TT repertoire. IMHO.
dobber
April 04, 2016 at 01:14 pm
With the breadth of talent in the late first to mid-second rounds, I would love to see the Packers move down about 10 spots and stockpile higher picks. I think you're right: that's a formula for success in this draft. But with the available guys, someone's going to need to be really desperate to move up...so finding that dance partner might be a really tall order.
4EVER
April 04, 2016 at 01:42 pm
finagle |fəˈnāgəl|
verb [ with obj. ] informal, chiefly US
obtain (something) by devious or dishonest means: Ted masterfully finagled picks from rounds 2, 3, 4 and 6 out of the misguided and desperate, first time GM.
• [ no obj. ] act in a devious or dishonest manner: they wrangled and finagled over the fine points.
Tundraboy
April 04, 2016 at 11:56 pm
More and more I think that is a good plan, stockpile round 2 and 3 picks.
croatpackfan
April 04, 2016 at 03:22 pm
Well pity that Packers do not have 53 picks this season. Because I see that Packers are weak at every position, offensive or defensive side of the ball...
I did not know that TT released complete team. This is first news for me!
4EVER
April 04, 2016 at 05:20 pm
Your over reaction is out of order Croat!
Greatest need, not replacement of weak link needs…I'm with Ted, draft and develop, yet I would have used FA to supplement my misses, in a more timely fashion. And would not gamble in the draft for all 53 pieces on the most part. Since Ted only gambles in the draft for BPA, need, and to supplement his misses, hence the aforementioned lengthy list of needs.
LT - Is the greatest need bar none! No more be said. Your opinion doesn’t count…
NT - is one of the WEAK links
DE - Mike Daniels needs help, yes this is also a WEAK link
OG - a solid backup or replacement needed in prep for 2017 FA is a must
ILB - true 3 down talent, yes truly a WEAK link
OLB - you can never have enough of this type in today’s NFL
TE - WEAK LINK, it takes a TE 2 years, historically, too mature
RB - insurance
WR - this ones for Ted!
Thegreatreynoldo
April 05, 2016 at 03:49 am
"When logic and proportion, Have fallen sloppy dead, And the White Knight is talking backwards, And the Red Queen's off with her head, Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head, Feed your head."
If you can find a GM who is tripping big time, and continues to feed his high, perhaps this plan might work. In the recent past, the two trades most similar to yours involved "Trippin Ted" who moved from 41st to 26th to take CM3 at a cost of the 73rd and 83rd picks (TT got a bottom 5th rounder - #165 - back). By the trade charts, this was overpaying. In 2013, MN moved from 52 to 29, at a cost of #83, #102 (a high 4th) and #229.
No, LT is not our biggest need.
4EVER
April 05, 2016 at 02:45 pm
Update alert!!!
2010
#25: Baltimore → Denver (D). Baltimore traded this selection to Denver for a second-round selection (43), a third-round selection (70), and a fourth-round selection (114)
2010
#30: Minnesota → Detroit (D). Minnesota traded this selection and a fourth-round selection (128) to Detroit for a second-round selection (34), a fourth-round selection (100), and a seventh-round selection (214).
2011
#28: New England → New Orleans (D). New England traded this selection to New Orleans for New Orleans' second-round selection in 2011 (56th overall) and first-round selection in 2012.
2012
#29: Baltimore → Minnesota (D). Baltimore traded this selection to Minnesota for their 2012 second (35th) and fourth round (98th) selections.
2012
#31: Denver → Tampa Bay (D). Denver traded this selection and their fourth round (126th) selection to Tampa for their second (36th) and fourth round (101st) selections this year.
2013
#29: New England → Minnesota (D). New England traded this selection to Minnesota in exchange for Minnesota's 2013 second- (52nd), third- (83rd), fourth- (102nd), and seventh- (229th) round selections.
Update alert!!!!!
2014
# 32: Seattle → Minnesota (D). Seattle traded this selection to Minnesota in exchange for Minnesota's second and fourth round selections (40th &108th).
The greatest need in all of football, bar none, is LT every single year, unless say Joe Thomas is sitting out there or you have a lefty. Also, bracing myself for another over-paid (LT) mistake coming to our Green Bay Packers in 2017.
DrealynWilliams
April 05, 2016 at 08:00 pm
"Your opinion doesn't count."
Woooooooah!
Thegreatreynoldo
April 06, 2016 at 02:26 am
"The greatest need in all of football, bar none, is LT every single year, unless say Joe Thomas is sitting out there or you have a lefty."
No, it is QB. Maybe you meant for GB, given that AR is already our QB. I have advocated picking an OT fairly high the last two tackle-rich drafts (because I didn't want to pay RT Bulaga, but if it had turned out that the OT prospect could play LT, that would have been even better). Agree that LT is the most important position on the OL, and the hardest OL position to fill adequately. I view Decker and Conklin as the most pro-ready OTs, but fear that they are both RTs, not LTs. Spriggs has more upside, but is less ready to start at OT or LT. We do have a year to get Spriggs ready, though. Not sure that there would be that much marginal upgrade from those 3 over Bakh. I don't view any of them as legitimate first rounders, but expect Conklin and Decker to go in the twenties, and Spriggs mid thirties - but who knows for sure?
I oppose trading back this year assuming the draft unfolds roughly the way I imagine because at least one, maybe two of Billings, Ragland, Reed, Lawson, Robinson or gulp, Dodd probably will be available at #27. I view that group as significantly better prospects than those likely available at say #42.
Thegreatreynoldo
April 06, 2016 at 03:45 am
Nice research, 4ever. I actually did the same. Summing it up below, to gain what you described - "trade out of round 1, collecting extra picks in rounds 2 and 4, and throw in an extra pick in 3...." - essentially we'd have to move back from #27 to the low forties to gain a 3rd and a 4th. I don't think that is wise with this particular draft, but ask me again during the draft when we have an idea of who is available at #27, and my answer might change! I might be more interested in dropping from #27 to perhaps #34 - #36 if it meant a net of a 3rd rd pick, even #94.
2009: NE 26 → 41; Net 73, 83 - 162 (2 3rds, minus a 5th =3rd, 4th?
2010: Balt 25 → 40. Nets 70 and 114 (3rd, 4th).
MN 30 → 34 nets 100 and 214 (4th & 7th).
11: NE 28 →56 nets a first Rounder the next yr.
12: Balt 29 → 35 nets 98 (4th).
13: NE 29 → 52 nets 83, 102, 229 (3rd, 4th, & 7th).
14: Sea 32 → 40 nets 108 (4th).
15: Tenn 33 → 40; net 108 and 245 (4th & 7th).
4EVER
April 06, 2016 at 03:29 pm
"So! Where the hell was Biggles when you needed him last Saturday?"
I do, so keep in mind that i'm not paid to scout talent. My threshold gauge for round 1 talent pegs at no tweaking required. My round 1BPA at 27 value picks; Ronnie Stanley, Robert Nkemdiche, A’Shawn Robinson, Shaq Lawson, hence the desire to move out of 1. Add Jaylon Smith as the only round 1 worthy ILB, but by reports, makes that selection a serious gamble. There's also a number of round 1 value selections with not enough video to verify, so there is that.
I'm here to say; draftbreakdown sure has cured the blues that comes with the downtime between the combine and draft each year.
I say, collect the additional picks and feast on the bevy of OL, DL, OLB talent that should be available in rounds 2 - 4! Again, i see no BPA value at 27, that will realistically be there. The graded positive net value is frosting on the cake. Interested though - is there a simple plugin equation available for the draft trade net/grade calculations above?
4EVER
April 06, 2016 at 04:10 pm
I place LT above QB for one reason; the franchise QB (development followed with SB wins).
Update:
Chad Clifton LT 2008-2010
Ken Ruettgers LT 1992-1995
4EVER
April 06, 2016 at 11:51 am
I thought it appropriate to the over the top sarcasm by croat...he pushed THE button!
Thegreatreynoldo
April 06, 2016 at 08:20 pm
Good enough, 4ever. You are a tougher grader than I am. I have a couple of more prospects that I think are legitimate 1st rounders than you do, which accounts for the difference in opinion. Nothing wrong with that! My definition for that at #27 is the prospect must have a good chance to be an above-average NFL starter.
Since'61
April 04, 2016 at 03:58 pm
If a blue or red chip OT is still available when the Packers draft at #27 I would like to see the Packers take him. Let him learn the offense and prepare to replace Bakh in 2017. We need to make LT the most solid position on the OL not the weakest link. Bakh will likely receive a better offer from another team even if TT wants to resign him and then we're left without an effective backup plan. If we can draft a true LT and put him out there and forget about it like we did with Chad Clifton or Ken Ruettgers I say let's get it done. With that move we can prepare Tretter to replace Sitton at guard if necessary or backup Bulaga and Linsley. If an elite LT is not available then we should take the best DL or ILB available. Problem is that we have been drafting high on defense for years and it's beginning to hurt the offense and it showed in the depth of the offense last season. The offense has reached the point where we need better depth at OL, WR and RB. On the defense we actually need starting quality players at ILB and DL. In the first four rounds I would like to see 2 ILBs, 2 DLs and an OT. After that the draft goes from a crap shoot to a blindfolded man playing darts. Thanks, Since '61
Tundraboy
April 05, 2016 at 12:03 am
Yes. As much as we need D line and LBs, getting a top notch LT is for all the reasons you suggest, a necessity for this team. Time to make that position one of the strengths, and only good things will follow.
Thegreatreynoldo
April 05, 2016 at 02:08 am
I'd love to draft a true blue chip (hell, at any position) or red chip LT and forget about LT for 10 years, but it is easier said than done. I advocated drafting an OT for the last few years in drafts that were tackle rich because I didn't want to have to overpay Bulaga due to his injuries. Oh well. OT Stanley isn't going to drop out of the top 15. So, in terms of executing this plan, GB is probably looking at Conklin, Decker, or Spriggs. Not at all sure that Conklin and Decker can even play LT, much less be an upgrade from Bakh. Of the 3, Spriggs has the best chance of being a very good LT, IMO, but none of the 3 have a high chance to be a red chip player at LT. I like them all at RT.
Since'61
April 05, 2016 at 11:03 am
Reynoldo - agree, there is a slight chance that we can pick up a blue or red chip OT. It would be great to settle that position without having to overpay Bakh or possibly lose him to FA. With a QB like Rodgers the Packers should not settle for an adequate LT. We need to address LT for the long term with a quality player as TT has done with Linsley at Center. We need a big nasty at LT who doesn't commit penalties or get bowled over from a bull rusher. This another issue TT has let slide for far too long. Rodgers has taken enough hits and doesn't need to get creamed on the blind side. If Bahk leaves after this season for whatever reason what are we left with? Thanks, Since '61
Tundraboy
April 05, 2016 at 05:49 pm
Thanks since 61. The big nasty LT would be a dream come true. Paired with Rodgers and rest of line.....
PackerBacker
April 04, 2016 at 04:13 pm
I see it being a draft with a lot of big men. All signs are that it's a good draft for DLineman. Also a need for GB. We also need insurance at O-line. He didn't pick any last year and 3 starters need new contracts next year.
I can see him using upwards of 5 picks on big men.
croatpackfan
April 05, 2016 at 04:21 am
"He" got Rotheram last year! And Packers expected from Don Barclay to continue development. That didn't happen. Now we think OL is weak. It was same OL as year before (2014), but, this time with no improvements, or better to say with regression from some players (e. g. Barclay!) and many nagging injuries...
Since'61
April 05, 2016 at 11:09 am
Croat - Rotheram couldn't get past an injured Barclay to make it onto the team last season. What does that tell us? Let's see how he does with another TC under his belt before we declare him as a starting OL. If he develops fine, if not he's fodder for the PS.
Thanks, Since '61
Tundraboy
April 04, 2016 at 04:58 pm
First thought is that Defensive Line was a top priority even before Raji sabbatical. Maybe his leaving is good in the sense that it should make sure we focus on the D line
4EVER
April 05, 2016 at 12:49 pm
Unsettling...for sure!
Ted should remove himself from this years draft-board...he has to be conscious, by now, to his shortcomings in this area? It's more then obvious - even to the rank amateur - that the D front seven is not his cup of tea. Hopefully, he has brought in some new blood, a fresh thinking scout, one that not only identifies DL talent for that talent, but also has the marbles and desire that naturally converts over to the NFL.
On a personal point: 3-4 NT in terms of desire and passion, bar none, the most difficult position in the NFL! What a mentally exhausting task that must be...
barutanseijin
April 04, 2016 at 06:50 pm
Has anyone mentioned punter yet? Maybe not the greatest need, but they really need someone better than Masthay.
4EVER
April 04, 2016 at 06:57 pm
Thx, updated my list above...!
packrulz
April 05, 2016 at 05:25 am
I thought Jake Ryan improved greatly as a rookie last year. Sam Barrington is coming back, so I think the Pack will be fine at ILB. I think this is a loaded draft at DT, which is also a need, so to me it's DT in the first round. I do think they need more speed at WR & RB later in the draft though.
DrealynWilliams
April 05, 2016 at 11:28 am
Greatly??
lou
April 05, 2016 at 03:48 pm
Ryan has some promise and Barrington held his own the previous year but we need the next Desmond Bishop. It took us a long time to replace Collin's, lets hope another player of Clinton Dix's caliber at ILB can be acquired via the draft this year. The number 1 pick has to be on defense and he has to play right away.
Oppy
April 05, 2016 at 04:01 pm
The entire draft will be meaningless and set us back a decade if TT has the opportunity to pick Manny Papoose but doesn't pull the trigger.
Teddy, turn it loose and draft Papoose.
Oppy
April 06, 2016 at 12:00 am
Whoever voted down on picking up the savior Manny Papoose clearly doesn't want the Packers to be great, and doesn't believe in winning.
If he/she did, you'd have to be pro-Papoose. If TT doesn't go out and get this player, he's clearly sabotaging the franchise. There is no gray area. It's Manny Papoose, or anti-packers subterfuge.
holmesmd
April 10, 2016 at 10:58 pm
Who the hell is Manny Papoose?! Lol