Clint Sintim

[Joemailman]

Sporting News has the Packers taking Sintim http://www.footballsfuture.com/2009/prospects/clint_sintim.html in the 2nd round of their mock draft (Raji in the 1st). I don't get to see too much college football, but this guy sounds interesting, especially because he is one of the few college linebackers that project as a 3-4 linebacker in the NFL. Anyone seen Sintim play?

[red]

no, i've never seen him play, but i've been preaching about him for a few weeks now.

he played olb in the 3-4 system in college for the last 4 years. and excelled at it

imo, he would be a perfect 2nd round draft pick for us

there would be no adjustment time for him like there would be for a maybin or brown or english. he already knows what to do and have to do it

[texaspackerbacker]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

[pittstang5]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

[texaspackerbacker]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

[Cheesehead Craig]

If he is worth a pick in the 2nd rd, why not? In a 3-4 we're going to need more depth at LB if nothing else.

[Lurker64]

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

At the same time though Tex, you've got to take somebody with your second round pick. You can't fall in love with the roster so much that you can't see how some new blood might be better than somebody we already have.

OLB isn't a glaring need, but if a guy who's good at it is BPA, take him.

[pittstang5]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

How is this negative, I'm just saying we don't know. Let's stack the deck in case the guys we have don't work. I have no idea where you got that I'm being negative about the players that the Packers already have.

So, who or what position do you think the Packers should look at in the 2nd round.

[red]

didn't you know?

we have hall of famers starting and backing up at every position

we don't need to draft anybody

we're perfect

that's why we went 6-10 last year

[mission]

didn't you know?

we have hall of famers starting and backing up at every position

we don't need to draft anybody

we're perfect

that's why we went 6-10 last year

It's so negative to think otherwise!!

Now who wants a hug? :oops:

[MJZiggy]

It's Valentine's day. I'll take all the hugs I can get....

[Fritz]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

Tex, I gotta say, even when I agree with ya it's hard to agree with ya. My first reaction to this post is similar to your first reaction - I think you and I have both been saying that we're not sure why everyone's in a rush to add more linebackers to a team that has increased the number of starting linebackers by one, which might mean two more on the roster, yet has added three new linebackers in the past three weeks (Thompson, Kampman, and Hunter). So I'm with you - I don't understand this sudden linebacker chant.

I'm all about best player available, but in terms of need I'd like to see TT load up on defensive and offensive linemen.

However, you gotta admit that drafting any college kid at any position means by definition you're taking a chance on the kid as opposed to the vets you already have, regardless of position.

You're the most negative optimist I ever knew, Tex, you crabby ol' coot!

[cpk1994]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

Tex, I gotta say, even when I agree with ya it's hard to agree with ya. My first reaction to this post is similar to your first reaction - I think you and I have both been saying that we're not sure why everyone's in a rush to add more linebackers to a team that has increased the number of starting linebackers by one, which might mean two more on the roster, yet has added three new linebackers in the past three weeks (Thompson, Kampman, and Hunter). So I'm with you - I don't understand this sudden linebacker chant.

I'm all about best player available, but in terms of need I'd like to see TT load up on defensive and offensive linemen.

However, you gotta admit that drafting any college kid at any position means by definition you're taking a chance on the kid as opposed to the vets you already have, regardless of position.

You're the most negative optimist I ever knew, Tex, you crabby ol' coot!It's very simple Fritz. We don't know if any of the LB's the Packers have can function in the 3-4. By adding someone who has excelled in it, you increase your odds of finding players who can. Its not like the players outside of Hawk and Barnett have contracts that would be impossible to cut. Its just like TT's draft philosophy. The more picks you have the better chance you have to hit onh some. Th emore LB's you, have the better chance you have of getting good 3-4 players.

[sheepshead]

Clint Stintim

Sounds like a country singer.

[ND72]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

[ND72]

It wouldn't be too bad for the Packers to take Raji in the first--although he wouldn't be at the top of my choices. As for Sintim--or any 3-4 OLB, we just don't need it. We have five good players for two spots already.

SERIOUSLY, what are you talking about.

I don't post much, but tex, man, what are you smoking? We just don't need OLBs! We have no idea whether any of the players the packers have now can play in this system. Sure, we can read about Joe Schmoe's analysis stating Kampman will be awesome in the 3-4, but we won't know till that happens. I'm all for stacking this team with whatever talent they can get at any position. If this Sintim kid has played a 3-4 and is good at it...why not grab him. Best Player Available is TTs motto, reguardless of position and need.

Another person comes on here with nothing but negativity for anything the Packers already have, and a willingness to sign on to any weird idea that comes along.

I'd rather take my chances with Kampman, Hunter, Thompson, Chillar, Popinga, maybe Bishop, instead of some college kid who may or may not be any good.

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Hunter? Yuck
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

[PlantPage55]

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

I would like to see us draft 2. I can deal with Thompson as a question mark. After all, he has a ton of potential and should be given an ample opportunity.

But even more, I would LOVE a guy like Suggs to hit the market, scoop him up, and then draft a guy in the first 3 rounds.

[Waldo]

As I look around and get a picture of the #'s 3-4 teams keep, here's pretty much what I've come up with:

DE - 4
NT - 2
+1 swing tackle that can play DE and NT

OLB - 4
ILB - 4
+1 swing LB that can play both OLB and ILB

CB - 4
S - 4
+1 swing DB that can play both CB and S

With our roster we have:
DE - Jenkins, Jolly, Moore
NT - Pickett
Swing - Harrell

OLB - Kampman, Thompson, Hunter
ILB - Barnett, Hawk, Bishop, Chillar, Lansanah
Swing - Pops

CB - Harris, Williams, Blackmon, Lee, Bush
S- Collins, Bigby, Rouse, Peprah
Swing - Woodson

We're short a DE and could probably use 2 decent ones, we're short a NT, we're short an OLB but could probably use a late competition/PS guy, we're going to have to jettison an ILB, and we're going to have to jettison a CB. If we do keep an extra CB, typically the ILB's are the ones shorted (the swing guy tends to be more of an ILB), thus if we do take another CB in the draft high enough that the PS is not an option, we'll probably have to get rid of 2 ILB's.

In summary, offseason needs:
DE - 2
NT - 1
OLB - 1

[Gunakor]

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

Brandon Chillar was the most consistent of all of our LB's from last year. Including Hawk and Barnett. He's a football player, and he'll be fine.

Out of curiosity, what did you see from Chillar last season that has convinced you he's worthless?

[Waldo]

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

Brandon Chillar was the most consistent of all of our LB's from last year. Including Hawk and Barnett. He's a football player, and he'll be fine.

Out of curiosity, what did you see from Chillar last season that has convinced you he's worthless?

He's always fooled by misdirection and easily blocked. He's terrible agaisnt the run, but doesn't miss tackles and can cover, so he's good. That which they don't do (but should) is often more important than that which they do.

If covering and tackling was so important, why don't we play Woodson at LB? Chillar is incredibly unstout agaisnt the run.

[MJZiggy]

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

Brandon Chillar was the most consistent of all of our LB's from last year. Including Hawk and Barnett. He's a football player, and he'll be fine.

Out of curiosity, what did you see from Chillar last season that has convinced you he's worthless?

He's always fooled by misdirection and easily blocked. He's terrible agaisnt the run, but doesn't miss tackles and can cover, so he's good. That which they don't do (but should) is often more important than that which they do.

If covering and tackling was so important, why don't we play Woodson at LB? Chillar is incredibly unstout agaisnt the run.

Unstout? Does that make him more of a lager? :wink:

[texaspackerbacker]

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

Brandon Chillar was the most consistent of all of our LB's from last year. Including Hawk and Barnett. He's a football player, and he'll be fine.

Out of curiosity, what did you see from Chillar last season that has convinced you he's worthless?

Like I said, some people are so negative that they just can't see the value in players currently on the Packers.

Waldo, as you know, I see Chillar more as an OLB. I'm assuming by Moore, you mean Montgomery. You also left off Cole, possibly intentionally.

Getting a backup NT somewhere down in the draft to compete with Cole makes some sense. I could even see a backup DE, although, considering the prospect of Kampman still getting some snaps there, that's less of a necessity. We seem pretty full up, however, at LB.

[Lurker64]

Cole is a FA right? Are we sure that we're going to resign him?

[Waldo]

Kampman I think will be fine...
Thompson? Question mark
Chillar? Worthless
Poop? More than worthless
Bishop I love, but he's not an OLB.

We need to draft like 3 OLB's in this draft.

Brandon Chillar was the most consistent of all of our LB's from last year. Including Hawk and Barnett. He's a football player, and he'll be fine.

Out of curiosity, what did you see from Chillar last season that has convinced you he's worthless?

Like I said, some people are so negative that they just can't see the value in players currently on the Packers.

Waldo, as you know, I see Chillar more as an OLB. I'm assuming by Moore, you mean Montgomery. You also left off Cole, possibly intentionally.

Getting a backup NT somewhere down in the draft to compete with Cole makes some sense. I could even see a backup DE, although, considering the prospect of Kampman still getting some snaps there, that's less of a necessity. We seem pretty full up, however, at LB.

No, I meant Malone, my bad. I really see no place for either Cole or Montgomery in a 3-4 scheme. They are mediocre 4-3 role players that do not translate well. Monty is too small to play DE, too slow to play OLB, Cole is too weak to play NT, too slow to play DE.

I see plenty of value in our current players. We have at least 3 OLB's (Kamp, Thompson, Hunter, Pettway?) and a swing guy (Pops), but none of the rest of our LB's are really a fit at OLB. They aren't very stout, and they aren't very long. We have an excellent ILB corps however.