Packer 2021 Draft Discussion- Eric Stokes, CB, Georgia; Round 2 Josh Myers, C, Ohio State; 3: Amari Rodgers, WR, Clemson

[nodakfan17]

A short, but interesting read on the history of the Wonderlic test from Yahoo Sports:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nfl-draft-if-the-wonderlic-is-dead-does-this-mean-the-draft-has-grown-up-141835157.html

 

No big surprises here - It is probably a fair test for general intelligence, but high scores aren’t necessarily correlated with success in the NFL (otherwise Ryan Fitzpatrick would be the MVP). Most teams don’t weight it that high when evaluating a prospect, but it’s a nice intangible. Some players have reportedly left answers blank so as to not seem too intelligent (and therefore tempted by job opportunities outside of football).

[reillymcshane]

If any of these guys drops, the Packers will take:

 

Caleb Farley, CB, Virginia Tech

Greg Newsome, CB, Northwestern

Teven Jenkins, OT, Oklahoma State

Jeremiah Owusu-Koramoah, LB, Notre Dame

 

But I don't expect any of them to fall to us. Thus the guy I think will be there, and who we will pick, is:

 

Elijah Moore, WR, Ole Miss. Perfect slot receiver. Tough, fearless, good hands, competitive, productive. Should be able to contribute right away. At 5-9 ½", he lacks size. Moore's draft position in most mocks tends to be at the end of the 1st round through the middle of 2nd.

 

I could also see the team taking WRs Terrance Marshall (whose stock has been rising).

 

OT Samuel Cosmi out of Texas seems like a solid, safe pick, and has a very good chance of being there for us. Ditto for Alex Leatherwood (although some scouts feel he is best suited for OG). OC/OG Landon Dickerson is a fascinating player. Pro Bowl caliber guy who's had several major injuries in college.

 

There are also a couple of interesting LBs that could be there for us - Jamin Davis and Zaven Collins.

[DHonks]

As usual, I don’t envision the Packers taking a WR until the 3rd or 4th round. Why take a receiver high in the draft when Rodgers hasn’t thrown to a rookie since Cobb?

[nodakfan17]

I don’t get the wide receiver obsession some fans (and the media) seem to have. Rodgers was the MVP of the league throwing to the current bunch. If they want to ‘get Rodgers some help’ (media term), I’d prefer they draft an OT who they can plug and play on the right side and eliminate some of the shuffling that may occur until Bahktiari is healthy. Now if the BPA at #29 is a WR, I hope they take him, but only because I’m a BPA guy and it addresses a need (but not a glaring hole).

 

Edit: Demovsky took WR Rashod Bateman in ESPN’s beat reporter mock draft. I thought the local guys would have a better pulse on this team, but then again, who knows what will happen tomorrow.

[nodakfan17]

This mock draft from nfl.com has the Packers taking OT Jalen Mayfield (which would be a solid pick), but their rationale is that the Packers ‘lack of depth’ on the OL was exposed in the playoffs.

 

I’d argue their depth was pretty solid all year, but they were short their All-Pro left tackle against the best front seven in the NFL. That’s not really a depth issue.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/bucky-brooks-2021-nfl-mock-draft-3-0-49ers-pick-trey-lance-najee-harris-to-cardi

[patrickgpe]

I don’t get the wide receiver obsession some fans (and the media) seem to have. Rodgers was the MVP of the league throwing to the current bunch. If they want to ‘get Rodgers some help’ (media term), I’d prefer they draft an OT who they can plug and play on the right side and eliminate some of the shuffling that may occur until Bahktiari is healthy. Now if the BPA at #29 is a WR, I hope they take him, but only because I’m a BPA guy and it addresses a need (but not a glaring hole).

 

Edit: Demovsky took WR Rashod Bateman in ESPN’s beat reporter mock draft. I thought the local guys would have a better pulse on this team, but then again, who knows what will happen tomorrow.

Silverstein was very good on his day of mock draft in getting the picks right in the wolf days. To get the pulse of the team you need a GM that will tell you stuff. These days everything is so tight lipped, anything you put out there is a guess or a feel.

[PeaveyFury]

I think that with Wagner and Linsley gone, I think they DO have a depth issue now. No real backup OT (other than Jenkins, who is going to start at C otherwise), and some new mix of interior linemen, though they have options there to choose from. They would do well this weekend to snag 2-3 o-line names, and one of them may/should be an early pick.

[CheezWizHed]

I’d argue their depth was pretty solid all year, but they were short their All-Pro left tackle against the best front seven in the NFL. That’s not really a depth issue.

 

I'm scratching my head here. Our starters were pretty good last year, but when we lost our LT, our depth was exposed. Then we lost one starter to FA and one of our depth Tackles isn't resigned. And our LT is still questionable as to when he will return. How do we not have a depth issue? I'd say OL is our biggest need at the moment.

 

I don’t get the wide receiver obsession some fans (and the media) seem to have. Rodgers was the MVP of the league throwing to the current bunch.

 

Typically, it takes time for WRs to develop. So a WR pick is normally one for the future. Depending on who we pick, he is probably the 4th WR this year, but could pass MVS and Lazard pretty quickly. I like both MVS and Lazard, but they are probably both #3 WRs at this point - potential to be a #2, but neither is taking that step yet.

 

Yes, Rodgers won the MVP. That doesn't mean we don't have deficiencies at WR or that we couldn't be better...

 

If Bateman falls to us, I think you sprint to the podium and say thank you very much!

[PeaveyFury]

Typically, it takes time for WRs to develop. So a WR pick is normally one for the future.

 

I agree with your post, but I want to note that I doubt the pick will be viewed as for the future by the media/fans- that guy will be expected to produce immediately, and if/when he doesn't, he'll be called a poor draft pick by same a year from now.

[nodakfan17]

I’d argue their depth was pretty solid all year, but they were short their All-Pro left tackle against the best front seven in the NFL. That’s not really a depth issue.

 

I'm scratching my head here. Our starters were pretty good last year, but when we lost our LT, our depth was exposed. Then we lost one starter to FA and one of our depth Tackles isn't resigned. And our LT is still questionable as to when he will return. How do we not have a depth issue? I'd say OL is our biggest need at the moment.

I agree wholeheartedly that OL is their biggest need. I’ll be disappointed if they don’t take a tackle in the first two rounds.

 

But putting the NFC Championship Game loss on OL depth? The writer was reaching to justify their selection. It would have been easier to state the Packers have questions on the OL due to the departure of Corey Linsley and late season injury to David Bakhtiari.

 

I thought they re-shuffled the OL masterfully last year after losing Bulaga in free agency, Linsley for a stretch, and then Bakhtiari in the playoffs. Turner and Jenkins each started at 3 different positions over the course of the season. There’s just no way to have a backup All Pro left tackle in case of emergency and they ran in to one of the few teams who could exploit the injury to Bakhtiari.

[nodakfan17]

Typically, it takes time for WRs to develop. So a WR pick is normally one for the future.

 

I agree with your post, but I want to note that I doubt the pick will be viewed as for the future by the media/fans- that guy will be expected to produce immediately, and if/when he doesn't, he'll be called a poor draft pick by same a year from now.

I hope they take a receiver or two this weekend, but I don’t view it as a glaring weakness. If BPA at #29 is a WR, then they should take a WR. However, I still view OL, DL, and CB as greater needs.

[PeaveyFury]

Typically, it takes time for WRs to develop. So a WR pick is normally one for the future.

 

I agree with your post, but I want to note that I doubt the pick will be viewed as for the future by the media/fans- that guy will be expected to produce immediately, and if/when he doesn't, he'll be called a poor draft pick by same a year from now.

I hope they take a receiver or two this weekend, but I don’t view it as a glaring weakness. If BPA at #29 is a WR, then they should take a WR. However, I still view OL, DL, and CB as greater needs.

 

I think you're right as well. BPA, and they have far greater needs. But the media is pushing 'WR help for Rodgers' significantly this week....

[CheezWizHed]

We are in a pretty good spot to not have any glaring needs at the moment - though Bahk's injury puts LT/RT at risk to start the season. So obviously BPA. But sometimes you have several players that are equally BPA.

 

I'd say by "need", we have OT first then CB/DL/WR are all pretty equal.

 

CB vs WR: Both positions need 2 or 3 (occasionally 4) players on the field at the same time, so number of starters and depth is nicely comparable.

Alexander-Adams - Grade A top of the line starter

King-MVS: Inconsistent starter with athletic ability. Both have had "WOW" and "ARRRGGGHHH" moments.

Sullivan-Lazard: UDFA that outperform their draft status. Shown flashes of being really good, but still not taking the next step. Lazard's injuries seem to be the biggest hurdle for him.

Jackson-St.Brown: Lots of ability, but not getting much time. This season is probably their last with the Packers if they don't figure it out.

Rest: both have some good athletes that need to put the next step up. Mostly late round picks and UDFAs.

 

To me the two positions seem neck-and-neck. Both also have similar long-term concerns with contract situations.

 

Edit- I did forget Funchess, which probably does give WR a leg (two technically) up on CB. Not sure what he provides though after being out nearly two years. Not much help long term either.

[reillymcshane]

 

Typically, it takes time for WRs to develop. So a WR pick is normally one for the future. Depending on who we pick, he is probably the 4th WR this year, but could pass MVS and Lazard pretty quickly. I like both MVS and Lazard, but they are probably both #3 WRs at this point - potential to be a #2, but neither is taking that step yet.

I also want to point out that the Packers don't have a single WR under contract beyond 2021. I'm guessing we will get Adams on a new deal, but the other guys are question marks. A big season for any of them might put them out of reach financially going forward. And if they don't get a big deal - that probably means they don't have that great of a 2021.

 

MVS and Lazard have been productive players - but also have been plagued by inconsistent play and injuries. A WR in the 1st round could easily supplant one or both of these guys as early as this season.

[nodakfan17]

Happy Draft Day, Everyone. In the words of Michael Scott, ‘I am ready to get hurt again.’

[pacopete4]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

[adambr2]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

 

I think people get into the MLB draft now. It's a bigger thing than say 10 years ago.

 

But to your point, not nearly the hype of the NFL draft.

[pacopete4]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

 

I think people get into the MLB draft now. It's a bigger thing than say 10 years ago.

 

But to your point, not nearly the hype of the NFL draft.

 

There are just so many casual fans that think they can evaluate talent. Heck, there are analysts that get paid to be on TV/radio that think they can evaluate talent and really don't have a clue. Most headlines leading up to the draft and after the draft are ones to get clicks. It's become rather annoying to me. I actually avoid much of it now and I used to love to tune into the draft.

[PeaveyFury]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

 

I think people get into the MLB draft now. It's a bigger thing than say 10 years ago.

 

But to your point, not nearly the hype of the NFL draft.

 

There are just so many casual fans that think they can evaluate talent. Heck, there are analysts that get paid to be on TV/radio that think they can evaluate talent and really don't have a clue. Most headlines leading up to the draft and after the draft are ones to get clicks. It's become rather annoying to me. I actually avoid much of it now and I used to love to tune into the draft.

 

It's the nonsense of online mock drafts. Anyone and their brother can post them, whether they have any team sources or not (usually not). It gives people a false sense of what teams are thinking, and how players are ranked. Every year, we see examples of guys expected to go way earlier than they do (cough, Zack Baun), then they fall because teams are worried about something we as fans (and the mocksters) never knew about. Then, when teams make valid picks based on solid talent evaluation like Elgton Jenkins, fans think it was a bad pick because they've never heard of him and random 'talent evaluators' had a 4th round grade on him. Two years later, he's an All-Pro. Did the Packers get lucky? No, it was quality evaluation of the prospect due to resources they have that the fans have zero clue about.

[adambr2]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

 

I think people get into the MLB draft now. It's a bigger thing than say 10 years ago.

 

But to your point, not nearly the hype of the NFL draft.

 

There are just so many casual fans that think they can evaluate talent. Heck, there are analysts that get paid to be on TV/radio that think they can evaluate talent and really don't have a clue. Most headlines leading up to the draft and after the draft are ones to get clicks. It's become rather annoying to me. I actually avoid much of it now and I used to love to tune into the draft.

 

I think that's how the evaluation procedure goes of most casual fans. They read an article about Player X and how he's going to be the Next Big Thing, they read 3 paragraphs about it, they see a draft projection for him and they're sold. Then the guy ends up slipping 10 spots and falls to their favorite team and they end up in arms when their favorite team does the same thing that the 9 previous teams has done and passes on them.

 

To be fair, the casuals don't always end up being wrong (TJ Watt). But they also usually don't even have a guy like Jaire Alexander or Elgton Jenkins on their radar.

[brewcrewdue80]

I will give the board relief this next year after this draft because I invested no time looking at mocks watching highlight videos combine stats etc. I'll likely be sleeping by time GB does anything and will have no feelings on if its a good pick a wasted opportunity, or a terrible pick.

Im at work now, i wanted to post a player A and Player B comp heading in to this draft vs last year's draft but can't do that here.

[PeaveyFury]

Then the guy ends up slipping 10 spots and falls to their favorite team and they end up in arms when their favorite team does the same thing that the 9 previous teams has done and passes on them.

 

So very right.

 

To be fair, the casuals don't always end up being wrong (TJ Watt). But they also usually don't even have a guy like Jaire Alexander or Elgton Jenkins on their radar.

 

I think it's also reasonable to note that they're still, in many cases, holding a situation like Watt against Gute even though he wasn't in charge back then. I have no idea regarding how Gute felt about Watt vs. King, etc., or how much Thompson's declining health may have impacted his decision making, but Gute wasn't in charge. All he's done thus far in his tenure in charge is draft impact players with almost all of their top picks.

[adambr2]

Oh yeah, I'm not holding Watt against Gute. Just pointing out that there are indeed cases where the ones yelling "Why didn't we take TJ Watt?!" do end up being right.

 

I remember really wanting Myles Jack one year and he really slipped on medicals. He's turned out to be pretty good. Of course so has the guy we actually picked, Kenny Clark, who I knew nothing about.

[homer]

I almost wish this was like the MLB draft where no one paid attention to it.

 

I think people get into the MLB draft now. It's a bigger thing than say 10 years ago.

 

But to your point, not nearly the hype of the NFL draft.

 

There are just so many casual fans that think they can evaluate talent. Heck, there are analysts that get paid to be on TV/radio that think they can evaluate talent and really don't have a clue. Most headlines leading up to the draft and after the draft are ones to get clicks. It's become rather annoying to me. I actually avoid much of it now and I used to love to tune into the draft.

 

I love the draft grades. Does anyone go back after 5 years and evaluate how bad the draft grades are?

[GAME05]

Writers are getting a lot better at posting their three-year-old draft grades and showing where they went wrong and right. They're not only entertaining but a good reminder that whatever grade you get right after the draft really doesn't matter.

 

I'd love to pull some old draft reviews/grades from LambeauLeap. I'd bet good money that the folks there did way better than the professional analysts.