http://www.jsonline.com/story/sports...off/581329001/
Printable View
Overall that is looking like a pretty bad draft.
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...cks-and-trades
Has Kenny Clark really been a good player so far? I guess I viewed him as still TBD. I haven't been following the Packers super closely though.
Pretty bold declaring it a bad draft then. ;)
In my opinion, Clark was worthy of a D1. He shows up against first string O-Lineman and consistently gets push.
Spriggs is already twice as good as Barclay every was pass protecting. I only got to watch the first half on game pass before falling asleep last night. One of his sacks was technique error, one depends on who missed the assignment (Spriggs, Hundley, etc). So I don't see him as bad as Sherrod or Barclay on the edge. So far, he seems to fit the bill as a second round draft pick--he still has work to do, but it's clear he has ability
Fackrell seems like a complete whiff. But a draft is only about 50/50 overall for any contribution.
Martinez isn't anything special, but he seems to belong in the NFL.
Lowry is definitely starter material. GB seems to do well finding lineman in the 4th.
Davis has speed and talent, both enough for the NFL, but he's just inconsistent enough. Needs to get over that hump. Could be this year. But WRs in McCarthy's system can take 3-4 years unless they're shifty slot receivers like Greg Jennings or Cobb.
Murphy sounds like a player by all accounts. He's apparently playing second string at RT, but I don't notice him during games. Sounds like he's consistent. And writers are suggested he try to back up the LT, so he's definitely doing well. Pretty good for a D6.
So with 4 definite hits (Clark, Martinez, Lowry, and Murphy) out of 7 (8 if you count Spriggs as 2), they're at the norm of 50% now. If Spriggs or Davis turn out, it's an above average draft. If Clark becomes really good (supposedly D-Line is supposed to take longer than this to develop), it's a great draft.
So far, it appears Clark and Lowry are the only ones with a shot to rise above and maybe become pro-bowl capable (Clark more than Lowry). So not a Rodgers/Collins draft, but not bad either.
I don't think Spriggs is a bad backup, but it does suck we had to use 2 picks to get him. I don't think he'll become a starter for us.
There is still time. Cliffy was ready Week 1, but Tauscher started because of an Earl Dotson injury (back).
Bach took his lumps the first two years. At times beat by both speed and power. Spriggs needs to solve one first then get better at other. I don't think he should ever be beaten by speed with his physical abilities. That is where I would start.
Once you throw up that wall, then work on counters.
Baranczyk thought his hands were unsettled, but I though he was too high on the corner and lost leverage.
I agree, his hands are OK. Every young player needs a better punch. Hell, Bakh has a crappy punch but makes up for it with tenacity and positioning. Thing is its a dance and you have to be in sync. If your hands are in position and your body isn't you end up holding. Its why I thought sherrod had a shot. His feet were so good for a mountain that he got in front of guys. Spriggs is the opposite, so athletic and long, but doesn't get in front of guys....wtf.
Put Spriggs on the Christian Ringo diet; Better yet, give Ringo a shot at O Tackle.
Article on Spriggs" struggles with a couple videos. http://packerswire.usatoday.com/2017...jason-spriggs/
On one, hands look way too high, up on the helmet. On the other, looks like he's anticipating outside rush and can't recover inside.
Kenny Clark is getting it. I think he'll be our dest DL guy by end of the year, followed by Lowry. I love Daniels, don't get me wrong...and he goes to my church so don't tell him, but his bark is WAY bigger than his bite.
I don't know what the Packers want of Spriggs. It seemed natural to move either him or Bulaga to RG. Spriggs is too tall and plays too tall to play guard, but I thought he played well last year. Put some weight on him, and I think he'd be fine. Or you put Bulaga in there. I know he complained, but if you tell him, he then has a choice to make since he's under contract. I like Bulaga also, but I've always thought he'd be a dominate guard, much like Mike Wahle. But what do the Packers want of Spriggs? Bak is now your LT forever. Bulaga evidently is your RT, right? So what do you want of Spriggs? you moved up to get him. Is all you want form him to is to develop and then you trade him? seems dumb.
Both their contracts end the same year. So you're hoping that 1. Spriggs will for sure develop into a starter by then? (which i think he already is, but case in point) 2. He would resign after not getting a chance until 2020? So then during 2019, you offer him a starters contract without ever truly (possibly) never starting? And then you still have Bulaga on the team, so he'll become a cancer?
Doesn't seem well planned. I really think they didn't expect Bak to develop, or Bak to resign...and then he did.
I'd bet my left nut Bulaga doesn't stay healthy through 2019
I wish Spriggs was showing the steady improvement fans and coaches love to see, if not the great leap forward, but it's also far, far too soon to call the guy a bust.
Different position, but as I recall Mike Wahle was quite unpolished early on. And Earl Dotson had terrible false-start issues for the longest time.
They needed backup tackles after the Tretter/Barclay/Sitton experiment. And yes, they were not sure Bach was going to re-up with them. I am pretty sure they were enamored with Bach before the draft that year.
Also Bulaga's legs weren't getting any younger.
Definite need pick.
What gets me - a little bit anyway - is that the Packers seem to favor smallish possibly mobile tackles instead of big ol' road graders. When I saw that 6'6 335 guy from the Redskins go off the field last week, I was reminded of that again. I wish we'd go with that sort of player. Spriggs supposedly gained weight/muscle, but he doesn't look bigger, and his play kinda shoots down the muscle idea.
I've been a bakh detractor, but his tenacity is right there with Lang. Similar players. You need that streak of asshole to be a great DL (or you have to be a physical freak). Spriggs lacks that nastiness. He isn't the mountain sherrod was. He doesn't have Cliftons punch. Maybe he works hard and maiximizes his skills, but that will leave him an average RT is my guess.
Way to jinx it:
Packer Report
Bulaga limping off during run-game drill vs. defense. Obviously not a good thing.
At least he was kind enough to give them a warning this year.
And it's Murphy up, not Spriggs.
heard mm speak of spriggs recently and acts like he's not concerned at all.
It doesn't make sense based on forum consensus last year. Spriggs was supposed to be the heir apparent to the mediocre Bahktiari. Then people spoke of all the wasted talent just sitting on the bench after Bahk was resigned. General opinion was the uber talented Spriggs would be first off the bench for either tackle position.
Not only was Bahk way better than Packer fan gave him credit but Spriggs has been way worse. And to top it off, Murphy has out performed Spriggs.
So yeah, it makes sense to those of us who've seen the fall of Spriggs happening, but to some, this is a surprise. He's a 2nd round pick being out played by a 6th.
I hope Spriggs gets it together and becomes a serviceable backup at both spots..... but I'm not holding my breath. TT needs to keep looking for a good backup LT next off season. Spriggs isn't good enough and needs to either step up or be pushed out.