Which players would you be okay with spending #9 on?

[gbpackfan]

The PERFECT situation would be to trade down a couple spots and get Tyson Jackson at 11-14 range. Then grab your pass rushing LB early in the second. But trading takes two and it appears that EVERYONE wants to trade back this year.

[texaspackerbacker]

I disagree with you, Waldo, on Jenkins. He's a good player at a university that plays a lot of NFL technique with their corners so good ones tend to be easily evaluated and succeed in the NFL. Injury withstanding, he will have a lot of good years in the NFL. With the #9 I do want more than a "good player" and maybe that's all he is, but he doesn't deserve to be on the "no way list" any more than some of the other players.

I'm an anti-CB person. I think that you can build a fine secondary in the second round and beyond, especially at CB (if not there are always plenty available in FA every year). You first round pass defense should be able to tackle the QB before he throws the ball IMO.

I think that there is an inverse relationship between secondaries and defensive quality. There are very few good defenses that have elite CB's. Elite CB's typically take increased resources over average CB's, resources better spent on pressure. With good pressure average CB's defend like elite CB's.

Waldo, the problem is the Packers pass rush doesn't get many sacks, so they better have good CB's. Ron Wolf drafted CB's every year, the year he drafted McKenzie, he drafted 3. Look at the rookie year Rogers-Cromartie had with the Cardinals, he helped them make it to the Super Bowl.

So instead of spending resources on a CB, wouldn't it be better spent on a pass rush?

I'm fine with drafting a CB, there are a couple that I really like. But I wouldn't do so until the 3rd-4th round.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again anyway.

A pass rusher fails--doesn't get to the QB, and you have a bunch people covering his back. There's a decent percentage of chance that the pass will float to the ground incomplete, a fair chance it will go for a short to moderate gain, and a slim chance it will be intercepted.

A Corner fails, and your opponent probably gets a TD or at least a long gainer, especially in a man coverage scheme.

Corner is the more important position of the two, and arguably, the position where it is more difficult of the two to find excellent talent.

All that being said, I'm still not putting Corner at the top of my wish list this year, as we probably have a more immediate need for a future star OT.

Just behind that I would put getting a future star Corner.

What we absolutely DON'T need, however, is to waste that top pick--or probably even a second or third--on some pass rusher, a position, despite the wrongheaded claims of some, where the Packers are well stocked, and where the guy we would be getting would stand a much stronger chance of being a bust than either a OT or a Corner.

[Lurker64]

Tex-

You okay with Cullen Jenkins, Justin Harrell, Michael Montgomery, Johnny Jolly, and Alfred Malone as our group at DE, or would you strenuously object to Tyson Jackson like you apparently object to everybody at the OLB spot.

I have no doubt in my mind that Jackson is healthier than Jenkins or Harrell, stouter at the point than Montgomery, has fewer legal problems than Johnny Jolly, and has a higher ceiling than Alfred Malone (a player I like, however.)

[SnakeLH2006]

I'm an anti-CB person.

Agreed...Anyone remember the hype of T-Buck or even the dude from Ohio State a few years ago the Panthers drafted that Pack fans were pining over? Yes CB is overrated in the first unless his name is Deion.

Snake really wants a starting NT or OT for sure, but if not, trade down and get a steal (top 10 guy who falls to 15 or so).

Otherwise...Snake loves a good BJ and ManBoobs Smith wouldn't be bad at either LT or most likely RT. Those anchor positions are 110% necessary to advance our team.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex-

You okay with Cullen Jenkins, Justin Harrell, Michael Montgomery, Johnny Jolly, and Alfred Malone as our group at DE, or would you strenuously object to Tyson Jackson like you apparently object to everybody at the OLB spot.

I have no doubt in my mind that Jackson is healthier than Jenkins or Harrell, stouter at the point than Montgomery, has fewer legal problems than Johnny Jolly, and has a higher ceiling than Alfred Malone (a player I like, however.)

I'm moderately OK with what we have at DE. Jenkins's injuries were freakish, not chronic. With any normal luck, he should be OK. Harrell's bicep the same, although his back is worrisome. I like Jolly, as I said in a different post for his ability to knock down passes, and I, too, like Malone.

Like most others, I think #9 is way too high for Tyson Jackson. If by some miracle, he dropped to us in the second round, I'd be for taking him--but that's highly unlikely. Beyond that, I'd expect and not be opposed to taking some DE farther down in the draft.

[TheCheese]

Re: Jackson

Since I'm on the Jackson bandwagon, let me explain why he's the guy to pick at #9.

First off- solid character. Was one of the core leaders at LSU.

Second- Injury history. Played 40 straight games. Hell, Harrell could'nt do that in his wildest fantasies.

Three- suits the 3-4 to perfection. He is not a speed rusher. His main suit is stopping the run which just happens to coincide with our biggest weakness. His strength is taking on blockers. This is perfect cause in a 3-4 the LB's should get the tackles. He has great ball recognition skills.

Four- HUGE upside. Has'nt scratched the surface yet with his ability. Is strong now and will get stronger with the right weight lifting program.

Sporting News states TJ is maybe the only top true 3-4 end in this draft. Character, production and upside potential are attributes TT seeks.

the other guys that might be 3-4 de's have been playing DT in college. so they would have to move a bit, and then you have a little bit of a question as to if the guys can even play 3-4 de. they probably can handle it just fine, but you know TJ can do it

he's a safe pick, he's a great player and he fills a huge need. the only downside is that De in the 3-4 is not usually filled with guy that are taken in the top 10.

but i say oh well. if he's there and you want him and 9 then take him tt. no reason to take a chance on getting one of the other guys in the later rounds and missing out.

tyson jackson and clint sintim or larry english in the second and our 3-4 d will be on the right track

Tyson Jackson and Larry English in the first two rounds would be fucking amazing. This would boost the fuck out of our defense. Hopefully, although unlikely, somehow English finds himself there for our second pick. Dude is a beast.

[wist43]

Re: Jackson

the only downside is that De in the 3-4 is not usually filled with guy that are taken in the top 10.

Richard Seymour was taken at #6 overall, and nobody would dare criticize the Pats for passing on guys like Andre Carter or Jamal Reynolds (the top prospects for the the "big money position" of OLB in the 3-4 defense) for taking the big DE.

I really don't want a DE in the 1st round if we're going to be running a 3-4, but as I've been pointing out, I doubt run a pure 3-4 much... if Capers walks the talk, and plays to his personnel, which of course, are a bunch of substandard 4-3 guys.

As for Seymour, I see him as the exception to the rule... he is just one hell of a DL. Equally good at DE/DT in either a 4-3 or 3-4. Not many guys like him out there.

[Packnut]

DE

I disagree with you, Waldo, on Jenkins. He's a good player at a university that plays a lot of NFL technique with their corners so good ones tend to be easily evaluated and succeed in the NFL. Injury withstanding, he will have a lot of good years in the NFL. With the #9 I do want more than a "good player" and maybe that's all he is, but he doesn't deserve to be on the "no way list" any more than some of the other players.

I'm an anti-CB person. I think that you can build a fine secondary in the second round and beyond, especially at CB (if not there are always plenty available in FA every year). You first round pass defense should be able to tackle the QB before he throws the ball IMO.

I think that there is an inverse relationship between secondaries and defensive quality. There are very few good defenses that have elite CB's. Elite CB's typically take increased resources over average CB's, resources better spent on pressure. With good pressure average CB's defend like elite CB's.

Waldo, the problem is the Packers pass rush doesn't get many sacks, so they better have good CB's. Ron Wolf drafted CB's every year, the year he drafted McKenzie, he drafted 3. Look at the rookie year Rogers-Cromartie had with the Cardinals, he helped them make it to the Super Bowl.

So instead of spending resources on a CB, wouldn't it be better spent on a pass rush?

I'm fine with drafting a CB, there are a couple that I really like. But I wouldn't do so until the 3rd-4th round.

I've said this before, but I'll say it again anyway.

A pass rusher fails--doesn't get to the QB, and you have a bunch people covering his back. There's a decent percentage of chance that the pass will float to the ground incomplete, a fair chance it will go for a short to moderate gain, and a slim chance it will be intercepted.

A Corner fails, and your opponent probably gets a TD or at least a long gainer, especially in a man coverage scheme.

Corner is the more important position of the two, and arguably, the position where it is more difficult of the two to find excellent talent.

All that being said, I'm still not putting Corner at the top of my wish list this year, as we probably have a more immediate need for a future star OT.

Just behind that I would put getting a future star Corner.

What we absolutely DON'T need, however, is to waste that top pick--or probably even a second or third--on some pass rusher, a position, despite the wrongheaded claims of some, where the Packers are well stocked, and where the guy we would be getting would stand a much stronger chance of being a bust than either a OT or a Corner.

But the problem is the ONLY place we are well stocked at DE is in YOUR MIND. In fact, I'd wager there are not more than 5 people on this freakin planet that believe what you do. You have not one basis of fact to support your opinion.

Harrell and Jenkins have proven to be injury riddled players. That is a FACT you cannot deny (unless you are insane). Counting on players who can't stay healthy is a sure fire recipe for disaster.

AND, IF you knew anything about Jackson, you would know he is NOT a pass rusher. His strength is taking on blockers and stopping the run. Now may-be it does'nt bother you that we gave up 100+ on the ground almost every damn game, but some of us know you do not win in the NFL if you can't stop the run!