VOTE - Packer Rats MOCK PACKER PICK

[Smeefers]

No way Ingram slips this far in the real draft, Watkins gets my vote, we can get 4-6 years out of him and protecting ARod is critical. He'll be more consistent than Colledge ever was.
The top-ranked guard according to NFLDraftScout.com, Baylor's Danny Watkins, played left tackle in the Bears' spread offense. His dominant performance at the Senior Bowl and showing in private workouts make him a first-round target with potential to play any position on the line.

Yeah, there is no way that he falls to us in the real draft, but he did in this mock one. There's absolutely no way I pass on Ingram. No way. In fact, if he's still on the board, TT will be crying like a blubbering child as he makes the call, not having gotten a steal like this since Aaron Rodgers.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I wish Brooks Reed wasn't on the poll as well. Every year we do this, it seems the one player most want fails to get picked and inexplicably falls to the Packers selection. No way Brooks lasts until 32. Keep smoking on your pipe dreams fellow rats.

[Bretsky]

Most mock drafts I see don't have Reed getting picked earlier than GB and some have him in round 2

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Most I've seen have Brooks being picked before Ayers (UCLA OLB). His combine and pro day numbers alone will elevate him in to the first round. Call it the "Clay Matthews" effect. If I'm wrong I'll eat crow, but I just don't see it.

[Lurker64]

So assuming we don't have a shot at Reed or Ingram, who would everybody pick in that case?

For me, it's between Ijalana and Sheard.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

So assuming we don't have a shot at Reed or Ingram, who would everybody pick in that case?

For me, it's between Ijalana and Sheard.

I like both. Add Watkins to that list for me as well. Who cares if he's 26? Offensive guards have one of the highest longevities of any position.

[3irty1]

Major reach for Brooks Reed. Someone remember and told-ya-so me if I'm wrong, but I bet Brooks Reed can be had with pick #64.

[3irty1]

I understand the votes for Mark Ingram, he's a great value here. Where are all the votes for Ben Ijalana??? Safest pick on the board IMO. Could play nearly anywhere on the line and should give a major boost to this unit which will likely lose two or three solid players.

I voted for Baldwin. The offense underperformed last year during the regular season last year and now there is a chance they lose a productive receiver in James Jones. TT has chosen a lot of players that are vaguely in the Baldwin mold but none of them are quite right. Baldwin is what Jordy was supposed to be IMO. Give McCarthy another big weapon and the offensive droughts from last year are a thing of the past IMO. It takes a special player to cover a guy like Baldwin... or Finley... or Jennings. Baldwin is a decent value at #32 but IMO he represents such a mismatch schematically that when paired with Finely, the offense can do whatever it wants.

[Guiness]

I understand the votes for Mark Ingram, he's a great value here. Where are all the votes for Ben Ijalana??? Safest pick on the board IMO. Could play nearly anywhere on the line and should give a major boost to this unit which will likely lose two or three solid players.

I voted for Baldwin. The offense underperformed last year during the regular season last year and now there is a chance they lose a productive receiver in James Jones. TT has chosen a lot of players that are vaguely in the Baldwin mold but none of them are quite right. Baldwin is what Jordy was supposed to be IMO. Give McCarthy another big weapon and the offensive droughts from last year are a thing of the past IMO. It takes a special player to cover a guy like Baldwin... or Finley... or Jennings. Baldwin is a decent value at #32 but IMO he represents such a mismatch schematically that when paired with Finely, the offense can do whatever it wants.

Baldwin? Don't know much about him.

[3irty1]

Baldwin? Don't know much about him.

6'5" 230 lb WR
4.5 seconds in the 40 yard dash

Plays at about the same speed as James Jones but is significantly bigger. Actually a lot of his game reminds me of Jones. Both have big natural soft hands that you look for in a glue-handed receiver, both have a surprising amount of wiggle when asked to make guys miss and fight for yards after the catch. Jones does a little better job of exploding out of his cuts to create separation IMO but Baldwin has rare leaping ability (41" vertical) and shows the ability to highpoint the ball and take it away from defenders--a skill that can make you a star in the NFL. Baldwin is also a punishing blocker for a WR. My biggest concern about him is that he seems to jump for balls that don't need to be jumped for which results in taking a few in the stomach, particularly over the middle, with no chance of creating after the catch. This is probably a habit that came from the terrible QB play he's had to endure with which he's routinely found himself left out to dry over the middle. With an NFL QB that can hit him in stride he'll have a chance to grow as a route runner and drop his bad habits.

[Lurker64]

I understand the votes for Mark Ingram, he's a great value here. Where are all the votes for Ben Ijalana??? Safest pick on the board IMO. Could play nearly anywhere on the line and should give a major boost to this unit which will likely lose two or three solid players.

I would have voted for Ijalana, but I voted for Reed because I didn't want Ingram to be the pick. I'd rather have Ijalana than Reed though.

[Guiness]

PFT's mock is interesting.

It has the Pack taking Justin Houston at #32, passing on Ingram - so no first round RB's.

They also have quarterbacks going #1, 4, 10, and 15 (Panthers, Bengals, Skins and Dolphins). I was going to call them morons for that, but it's possibly accurate and GM's do tend to panic when they haven't got a signal caller. A couple of extra QB's being taken in the first round will push other quality players down.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ft-take-three/

[Lurker64]

For those of you who voted for Ingram, he's currently scheduled to get an exhaustive evaluation on his knee to determine whether or not there is structural damage or degenerative arthritis. Assuming that Ingram's knee is not completely healthy, how much of a mess would it have to be before you'd change your vote? Note that the results from this evaluation will be available to all NFL teams before the draft, so you can assume that you have access to it and respond conditionally.

For Ingram supporters, supposing that Ingram's knee is a total mess... would you advocate taking a different RB instead, say LeShoure or Williams?

[Guiness]

For those of you who voted for Ingram, he's currently scheduled to get an exhaustive evaluation on his knee to determine whether or not there is structural damage or degenerative arthritis. Assuming that Ingram's knee is not completely healthy, how much of a mess would it have to be before you'd change your vote? Note that the results from this evaluation will be available to all NFL teams before the draft, so you can assume that you have access to it and respond conditionally.

For Ingram supporters, supposing that Ingram's knee is a total mess... would you advocate taking a different RB instead, say LeShoure or Williams?

Not at all.

The Ingram choice was based on BPA alone - not need/desire for an RB at all. Actually, on the list of team needs, I'd rank RB as the third lowest - behind ILB and TE, so no chance we we reach a little for one of the other RB's.

If Liuget is as bad a fit as some are saying, I could see him being crossed off the board just because he'd be useless to us I don't know who would be next in line. Those two were the players who seemed to have dropped below their value.

Maybe Watkins is next? *shrug*

[RashanGary]

I started thinking about backs who have had great red zone production over the years. Immediately I thought about Ladanian Tomlinson (similar size and no nonsense running style). But LT is faster, so that's not a perfect comparison. Then I thought of Priest Holmes. Exact same size. Exact same running style. I don't know if Ingram just had a bad day at the track, but I think Priest Holmes is a great comparison back for Mark Ingram.

[RashanGary]

Lurker, of course, if his knee is shot and his career guaranteed to be short, sure, we'd choose someone else. Just going off the tape though, the guy is a damn good overall RB and a great redzone back. He'd be welcomed here with open arms. Grant is 18 mos away from 30 years old. Very few RB's with STarks build can handle the load in the NFL. Ingram would be a great piece for us.

[Lurker64]

To be honest, I think Mikel LeShoure would be a more effective back on this team than Mark Ingram. More of a one-cut guy.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

To be honest, I think Mikel LeShoure would be a more effective back on this team than Mark Ingram. More of a one-cut guy.

Agree with you completely here. I also didn't know Ingram still had a questionable knee; I assumed he checked out.

Also, not a big fan of Ryan Williams. I saw a lot of VTech games due to being in the region. I just don't think Williams makes you miss enough. I also have to question his speed on the edges. He might have trouble breaking away in the NFL.

I'm assuming you want one of the guards with this pick Lurker. Which one? And, who in your eyes is the BPA in our mock draft?

[Lurker64]

I'm assuming you want one of the guards with this pick Lurker. Which one? And, who in your eyes is the BPA in our mock draft?

Based purely on tape, since we don't have full workouts on all of these guys, and sliding from a BPA approach (best player available) to a BVA (best value available); that is the player who does the most to improve your team; the guy I like the most here is Ijalana, second is probably Watkins. Not sure how much of a problem Watkins' age is really. Ijalana is actually the #3 OL on my personal board, behind Carimi and Smith. We didn't get a workout on him, but he was one of two players who really popped out when you watched Villanova games (and they went deep into the FCS playoffs the last couple years, so I saw about 8 games), the other being RB/WR Matt Szczur who has gone off to play baseball professionally instead. I think he's probably the best guard in this class (it's him or Watkins), and not unsuited to playing tackle either, unlike a one-position player like Pouncey.

So if I'm the GM, I'm pulling the trigger on Ijalana or Watkins here, probably Ijalana though I could be convinced to go with Watkins and I think this is what Thompson may well do, just because he's a strong believer in the "there are only so many athletic big men on the planet." Breaks my heart not to take an OLB, since it's the biggest need, but I would consider moving up in the second to target an Acho or a Moch. I just can't advocate taking an RB in the first round, it's not something I would do as a GM. There's some options at WR here, but I think that we're at the top of the second tier here and the middle tiers for WRs this year are actually pretty good so you afford to wait.

Darkhorse BPA here is Notre Dame TE Kyle Rudolph. I know that McCarthy is a big fan of the two-TE offense, and if he has doubts about Finley's recovery or Quarless's development (Crabtree is a valued contributor, but he's destined to just be a spot player) I could see that being the pick, which would confuse or enrage a lot of Packer fans... which is why it's probably the pick.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Based purely on tape, since we don't have full workouts on all of these guys, and sliding from a BPA approach (best player available) to a BVA (best value available); that is the player who does the most to improve your team; the guy I like the most here is Ijalana, second is probably Watkins. Not sure how much of a problem Watkins' age is really. Ijalana is actually the #3 OL on my personal board, behind Carimi and Smith. We didn't get a workout on him, but he was one of two players who really popped out when you watched Villanova games (and they went deep into the FCS playoffs the last couple years, so I saw about 8 games), the other being RB/WR Matt Szczur who has gone off to play baseball professionally instead. I think he's probably the best guard in this class (it's him or Watkins), and not unsuited to playing tackle either, unlike a one-position player like Pouncey.

So if I'm the GM, I'm pulling the trigger on Ijalana or Watkins here, probably Ijalana though I could be convinced to go with Watkins and I think this is what Thompson may well do, just because he's a strong believer in the "there are only so many athletic big men on the planet." Breaks my heart not to take an OLB, since it's the biggest need, but I would consider moving up in the second to target an Acho or a Moch. I just can't advocate taking an RB in the first round, it's not something I would do as a GM. There's some options at WR here, but I think that we're at the top of the second tier here and the middle tiers for WRs this year are actually pretty good so you afford to wait.

Darkhorse BPA here is Notre Dame TE Kyle Rudolph. I know that McCarthy is a big fan of the two-TE offense, and if he has doubts about Finley's recovery or Quarless's development (Crabtree is a valued contributor, but he's destined to just be a spot player) I could see that being the pick, which would confuse or enrage a lot of Packer fans... which is why it's probably the pick.

Thanks for your explanation. I haven't seen any Villanova games, so Ijalana is a mystery to me. I did however watch a couple Baylor games last year, and Watkins was the anchor of that line.

If we did go reciever, I'd like to see Titus Young over Baldwin. Titus Young could be the return threat we've been missing, plus, he doesn't have a questionable work ethic like Baldwin. And you may be right, in the opinion that Rudolph is a viable darkhorse BPA.

One thing is clear, there will be plenty of value at pick 32.