Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Just my two cents 17
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 15452
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 3:49 pm    Post subject: Just my two cents 17 Reply with quote

MODS, feel free to shut this one down. I just wanted everyone to be able to see it.

THE TRADE: I've been asked about this trade a lot. I don't think it worked out as planned for the Packers but I don't think it hurt one bit either. I'm also 99% sure they would have taken King at #29 anyway. They made that move back because they wanted the possible trades talks that would come with having the first pick on day two/three. That didn't play out but they got their guy anyway and also got a very nice player in Biegel out of the deal as well. That said, they did lose a 5th year of control on King.

KING: As many have said on here I'm sure the Atlanta playoff loss opened this lead brasses eyes a bit at CB. I can CLEARLY see why they might have put a premium on landing a big CB that could run. That said, I had a higher grade on Josh Jones than I did on King when all was said and done. In many ways the King pick comes down to ones faith in their staff. Everyone I talked with wanted to work with him but most all could see the risk in drafting THAT skillset where he was clearly going to go. He was coming off the board with the next pick though. The upside is very real but there is some risk with this one IMO. Hard not to feel good about the pick with this Packers staff in place though. Al Harris with legs if he hits!!!! I have no problem with the Packers taking him here. I did have him at the backend of this group though and #41 overall on my big.

Jones: Easily my fav of this Packers class. This kid was born to play in Capers D. That staff loved him and the tape was top shelf. Great eyes, numbers match the film. Tough kid that leads the room and rubs off on others. Enjoys a players life off the field but is all about putting in his work. Was made to play in todays NFL and will lean the gameday matchup game. Don't take that the wrong way though. Jones could start at both the Free and the Strong. He can also play some CB and LB and should be a damn demon on ST's. A true 4down prospect right here! The type of player that will show value from day one and help his staff sleep at night because of all he can do on gameday. I just hope they don't give him too much too soon! Great value pick! I had him at #29 on my big and at the very top of that tier.

Adams: Adams was another guy we were very high on in our room and in the fit. Five star kid out of high school and a born freak in every way. Sadly, it has also been what has kinda hurt him over the years as well. It's hard to live up and even harder to take those kids off the field at the college level. Everyone is talking about this kids motor but his pitch count was CRAZY high. Cut that in 1/4 at the next level and lets see what happens. Kid sure is a damn freak though. Very good with the hands also. Don't be shocked if Adams shows better than most do at position played his rookie year. I look for him to be one of those guys that's a much better pro than college player. That staff would pound the table HARD for him also. VERY TELLING. Pending what they ask him to do with the body Adams can play any of them. Another great value pick IMO. #56 on my big.

Biegel: Biegel was one of mine but got pulled on medical with a foot before I graded him out. Very good college football player. At the very least he should be a ACE level ST's player if he stays healthy. I have my doubts about his ability to set the edge in this Capers D or beat NFL tackles in the passing game. Motor always runs hot though and I'm sure he'll land a effort sack or two along the way. I just think there is a good chance he has a good bit more upside as an off the ball LB at the next level. Smart, tough, and hard working though. Nice guy to have around on gameday. Can sure as hell get you out of a game or two at any of them on the second level.

Williams: Nothing sexy about Williams but he has everything ya need/want other than the top gear. I do hope they'll put a few more pounds on that long frame though. There is no reason he can't handle another 10 pounds or so and it will help the body hold up a great deal. I'm sure he'll close out more than his share of games in Green Bay. That style needs reps to truly shine though. Very nice set to have in the room with Monty and Jones. They all have their place. Williams is not a special talent but it"s hard to ask for a better fit in just about every way. Truth be told we felt Green Bay was taking Williams with that Biegel pick. Push for me in terms of where I had him on my board but a GREAT fit in Green Bay IMO.

Yancey: I go the other way with Yancey and would ask him to lose 10-15lbs. Yancey is not for me but he does offer a different mold of WR in camp. Smart, tough kid with strong hands and sound work habits. VERY tight hips that doesn't let the paper skillset play/show though. I think he has some work to do though. Might take Janis's roster spot after a year on the PS. I could not have used a pick on him though. That said, Yancey is 6'2 220plus and runs a hair under 4.5. One could make a case that those guys are always worth a long look on the cheap though.

Jones: Our area guy really liked Jones and graded the hands as elite. I'll never pound the table for a little RB but that film was pretty damn good really. I'll be sold if he keeps the damn ball off the ground. Plays faster than the numbers and a little bigger than the size because of top shelf balance. Good little football player. Worth the pick IMO. We had him on our late board. Nice having two RB's in Green Bay that left their schools as the all time leading rushers....and Jones did so as a JR.

Amichia: Kid is a freak athlete but I couldn't have used a pick on that tape. That said, Amichia had a different staff each year and has a great body type to work with. Bunch of guys in the scouting world wanted a longer look at him. Sure was on the ground a lot in that film I watched though. I pulled him down after watching the film....then the numbers came in and we ALL took a second look. Still wasn't very good but he has a few good built in reasons for why. PFA grade from me when all was said and done. I'd stick that kids locker right next to Evans and hand him a pen and paper......

Mays: Looks the part of an NFL RB. Very strong, well built kid. Stiff, but not held back a great deal by it because of his running style. It probably holds him back in terms of injury far more than it ever will on the field. Would have been a mids board kid if not for the injury. Pretty good feet for a RB his size. Will always be held back because of his lack of vision but this kid is a worker both on and off the field. Physical two down RB with closer ability. I don't love him in short yardage/Goal though because of the lack of premium vision. Brings next to nothing to the table on 3rd downs either. PFA grade. Fell HARD because of the injury in a VERY deep RB class.

Dupre: Another five star kid out of high school that never really had a chance to live up. Classic corner-fade WR in just about every way. Not real far off from the Packers Allison to tell the truth. Elite hands, body control, and ball skills. Can play it over the shoulder and high point it with the very best in this class. Average speed both long and short. Willing but thin blocker. Average to below average RAC skills. Dupre is what he is. The bust rate for that brand of WR is low though. I don't know if I love the idea of having both Dupre and Allison on the same team in this strong run after catch O though, and truth be told, Allison might be a hair better and Rodgers loves him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ajdodge09


Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Posts: 4884
Location: Poland
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is why I still visit this forum. Thank you Palmy, you da best.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skibrett15


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2525
Location: nibelheim
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please explain the title. 2 cents 17...

I had a lot of the same thoughts re: the trade and King specifically.

1) They took King and Seattle IMMEDIATELY traded out of pick 34, even after trading down twice already out of the first into slot 34. Clearly they weren't getting King even a single pick later.

2) They were actively trying to shop 33 despite the above. TT was selling the pick hard on the press conference, which was actively hilarious.

3) They even leaked DeShone Kizer as the "possible pick" which honestly was just sloppy. Clearly they had no intention of drafting Kizer.
A) They should have leaked "fielding lots of calls for teams interested in qbs" instead. The reality is that this kind of media manipulation CAN work when teams are often influenced by their owners more than their GMs. Much more so than any team would like to admit. But leaking Kizer just smells really fishy since TT isn't going to do that given the value on the board at CB and their dire need at CB.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shanedorf


Joined: 18 Mar 2014
Posts: 1421
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 4:06 pm    Post subject: Re: Just my two cents 17 Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:


THE TRADE: I've been asked about this trade a lot. I don't think it worked out as planned for the Packers but I don't think it hurt one bit either. I'm also 99% sure they would have taken King at #29 anyway. They made that move back because they wanted the possible trades talks that would come with having the first pick on day two/three.

thx for the write up, greatly appreciated. It was interesting hearing the normally reserved TT telling everybody:
" the phone lines are open, operators standing by ! "

They didn't get the boatload of picks that they hoped for but the QBs went early and I guess there just wasn't another must-have player on deck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17814
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

skibrett15 wrote:
Please explain the title. 2 cents 17...

I had a lot of the same thoughts re: the trade and King specifically.

1) They took King and Seattle IMMEDIATELY traded out of pick 34, even after trading down twice already out of the first into slot 34. Clearly they weren't getting King even a single pick later.

2) They were actively trying to shop 33 despite the above. TT was selling the pick hard on the press conference, which was actively hilarious.

3) They even leaked DeShone Kizer as the "possible pick" which honestly was just sloppy. Clearly they had no intention of drafting Kizer.
A) They should have leaked "fielding lots of calls for teams interested in qbs" instead. The reality is that this kind of media manipulation CAN work when teams are often influenced by their owners more than their GMs. Much more so than any team would like to admit. But leaking Kizer just smells really fishy since TT isn't going to do that given the value on the board at CB and their dire need at CB.


My 2 cents for 2017
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
{Family Ghost}


Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 2859
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's kind of exciting to read such positive comments about Josh Jones and Montravious Adams. Both sound like potential home run selections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JBURGE25


Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 18368
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy let me roll this off you.

Say that things went a little differently. Seattle didn't trade down again at 31 and instead picked King. Do you think TT would have been a little more receptive to a trade down? Maybe Lamp, or even Josh Jones is the pick at 33?

I think it was kind of a well known fact that King would be a huge target for Seattle, and you even assume that he's the pick at 34. I'm not sure why they wouldn't stay at 31 and grab him. If you say you were 99% sure GB was taking King at 29, I can't understand why Seattle would move down again.

I guess the next question that stems off of that is how much did teams love McDowell.. frankly, I liked him, but was pretty surprised to see him that early.
_________________

FF Big Brother III Winner Cool
[sig by El ramster]
blueswedeshoes wrote:
JBURGE25 wrote:
I don't hunt
So I gathered.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 15452
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

{Family Ghost} wrote:
That's kind of exciting to read such positive comments about Josh Jones and Montravious Adams. Both sound like potential home run selections.


Pretty hard for me to look at Jones and not think of Mike Mitchell on the cheap. Just a mold that plays in every way in this fit. The idea of having that plug on those contract numbers makes my mouth water.

All of them have flaws. Adams is just an elite pure talent with flaws I think the Packers will be able to fix. The Packers have given up on a few good players too soon because of hands play or a lack there of. Guys like Daniels that were good with the hands out of school excel in Green Bay. LIS, Adams has his flaws but he's pretty damn good with those hands already.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chili


Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 606
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James Starks made the mistake of adding the pounds to bulk up for the NFL. He was nothing like the college player on tape for us. He was slow and ineffective. It wasn't until his 4th year when he shed the weight that he finally started becoming more effective and reliable for us.

So to say Williams should add another 10lbs is a big mistake imo. Williams isnt as athletic as Starks so adding the pounds is just going to make him lose that critical burst that made him so effective in college.

Look at Lacy his burst was the most crucial aspect of his game, it was the difference between being a fat plodder or being a big back with moves. Lacy went from that into a fat plodder in his final years with us. He was completely ineffective.

These guys were already big entering the NFL. They were drafted because of what they did at their weights at the time. So for them to get bigger is going to stop them from doing what they did in college for us.

I think bulking up for the NFL is a out of date concept. Its only true for certain positions or for undersized players entering the NFL. Not for players who are already big in the first place.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JBURGE25


Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 18368
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chili wrote:
James Starks made the mistake of adding the pounds to bulk up for the NFL. He was nothing like the college player on tape for us. He was slow and ineffective. It wasn't until his 4th year when he shed the weight that he finally started becoming more effective and reliable for us.

So to say Williams should add another 10lbs is a big mistake imo. Williams isnt as athletic as Starks so adding the pounds is just going to make him lose that critical burst that made him so effective in college.

Look at Lacy his burst was the most crucial aspect of his game, it was the difference between being a fat plodder or being a big back with moves. Lacy went from that into a fat plodder in his final years with us. He was completely ineffective.

These guys were already big entering the NFL. They were drafted because of what they did at their weights at the time. So for them to get bigger is going to stop them from doing what they did in college for us.

I think bulking up for the NFL is a out of date concept. Its only true for certain positions or for undersized players entering the NFL. Not for players who are already big in the first place.


When you have a RB like Williams without elite COD skills and who invites contact, playing at a slightly higher weight will keep him from being day to day all year.
_________________

FF Big Brother III Winner Cool
[sig by El ramster]
blueswedeshoes wrote:
JBURGE25 wrote:
I don't hunt
So I gathered.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 15452
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JBURGE25 wrote:
palmy let me roll this off you.

Say that things went a little differently. Seattle didn't trade down again at 31 and instead picked King. Do you think TT would have been a little more receptive to a trade down? Maybe Lamp, or even Josh Jones is the pick at 33?

I think it was kind of a well known fact that King would be a huge target for Seattle, and you even assume that he's the pick at 34. I'm not sure why they wouldn't stay at 31 and grab him. If you say you were 99% sure GB was taking King at 29, I can't understand why Seattle would move down again.

I guess the next question that stems off of that is how much did teams love McDowell.. frankly, I liked him, but was pretty surprised to see him that early.


The only thing I can tell ya is that I was told they were at the top of a tier on their board. At that point any trade is much easier to swallow. I was told Takkarist McKinley was the tier mark. When he went, they could move.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skibrett15


Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 2525
Location: nibelheim
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chili wrote:
James Starks made the mistake of adding the pounds to bulk up for the NFL. He was nothing like the college player on tape for us. He was slow and ineffective. It wasn't until his 4th year when he shed the weight that he finally started becoming more effective and reliable for us.

So to say Williams should add another 10lbs is a big mistake imo. Williams isnt as athletic as Starks so adding the pounds is just going to make him lose that critical burst that made him so effective in college.

Look at Lacy his burst was the most crucial aspect of his game, it was the difference between being a fat plodder or being a big back with moves. Lacy went from that into a fat plodder in his final years with us. He was completely ineffective.

These guys were already big entering the NFL. They were drafted because of what they did at their weights at the time. So for them to get bigger is going to stop them from doing what they did in college for us.

I think bulking up for the NFL is a out of date concept. Its only true for certain positions or for undersized players entering the NFL. Not for players who are already big in the first place.


No.

No.

Not necessarily. College programs are going to ask NFL players to play a different role in a different scheme than NFL players. Look at Mike Daniels as a perfect example of someone who added a LOT of weight and it worked out really well. Look at David Bakhtiari as another perfect example. Maybe that's what you mean by undersized players.

I could see a world where Williams fills the big back role, with Ty and Jones filling the smaller back/receiving back role. Big back has to run the inside zone over and over, and Williams has a long frame for a RB. I think that's the reason you might want to add pounds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 15452
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chili wrote:
James Starks made the mistake of adding the pounds to bulk up for the NFL. He was nothing like the college player on tape for us. He was slow and ineffective. It wasn't until his 4th year when he shed the weight that he finally started becoming more effective and reliable for us.

So to say Williams should add another 10lbs is a big mistake imo. Williams isnt as athletic as Starks so adding the pounds is just going to make him lose that critical burst that made him so effective in college.

Look at Lacy his burst was the most crucial aspect of his game, it was the difference between being a fat plodder or being a big back with moves. Lacy went from that into a fat plodder in his final years with us. He was completely ineffective.

These guys were already big entering the NFL. They were drafted because of what they did at their weights at the time. So for them to get bigger is going to stop them from doing what they did in college for us.

I think bulking up for the NFL is a out of date concept. Its only true for certain positions or for undersized players entering the NFL. Not for players who are already big in the first place.


We can agree to disagree here if you wish. Did you like his 16 film? If so, you were watching him where I want him to be. By all accounts he cut some off after the season so he would show better. I just liked what I seen on the football field far more than what I seen in the shorts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TransientTexan


Joined: 27 Jul 2014
Posts: 556
Location: Connecticut
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 6:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Just my two cents 17 Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:

Jones: Our area guy really liked Jones and graded the hands as elite. I'll never pound the table for a little RB but that film was pretty damn good really. I'll be sold if he keeps the damn ball off the ground. Plays faster than the numbers and a little bigger than the size because of top shelf balance. Good little football player. Worth the pick IMO. We had him on our late board. Nice having two RB's in Green Bay that left their schools as the all time leading rushers....and Jones did so as a JR.



Great write-up on all the picks, palmy. Gotta admit I'm rooting hard for A.Jones. He was one of the few bright spots at my alma mater the last couple years and seems to be a good kid. But I admit the fumbles do worry me. He's gonna face lots of stronger, faster guys now who are better at going after the ball. Not sure how ball security typically translates to the nfl.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChaRisMa


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 9160
Location: Hunting
PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2017 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TJ Watt?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 1 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group