Rating The Packers' Draft Choices 2011

[channtheman]

I'm not completely sure but I believe we were top 5 in sacks last year and near in bottom in the return game. You also add the fact that we are most likely letting Jones walk and with Driver in the decline it was a no brainer pick for me, especially with the intangibles this guy brings.

Exactly. Our wide receiver depth is not as great as some want to make it out to be. I think its very likely Jones is gone and Driver has been getting worse, not better. It wouldn't surprise me if he flat out sucked this year. That leaves us with Jordy and Jennings. If Finley could stay healthy we have him as well.

[Smidgeon]

Don't count out Finley, who was AR's favorite target before going down last season. So that's 4. And he's gotten by with a Brett Swain as the #5 guy, so I don't see any reason whatsoever for TT to spend any more reasonably high picks on WR's.

The 8 sacks we'd have likely gotten out of Houston seems more valuable IMO than the 600 yards and 4 TD's we're going to get out of Cobb. That's my take on it.

Sacks from OLB besides Matthews last year = 8.

Poppinga - 1
Zombo - 4
Walden - 3

Houston's imaginary sacks - 8

[HarveyWallbangers]

The 8 sacks we'd have likely gotten out of Houston seems more valuable IMO than the 600 yards and 4 TD's we're going to get out of Cobb. That's my take on it.

I think the big difference is that Cobb is very likely to reach the numbers you state than Houston is. Also, Jay Glazer said that every GM he talked to said Cobb was the greatest kid in the draft--while Houston failed two drug tests (including one at the combine when he knew it was coming). I was actually on the Houston bandwagon (in a lukewarm fashion), but later in the draft. I wanted Cobb more than Houston.

[Gunakor]

Walden's 3 sacks came in one game - that doesn't tell me anything other than that Walden had a great game that day.

[Brandon494]

I didn't even know about Houston's failed drug test, that right there makes the decision more of a no brainer. We also have Jones coming back and Dom Caper drawing up crazy blitz packages, we'll be fine on defense.

[cheesner]

Gonna go with an A.

Favorite Pick: Green. Seems the player most fans like the least, does the best. See Jennings, Collins and Neal (just wait).

Player I'm pulling the most for: Guy. Great story, sounds like a player I who will work very hard and will do well.

[Fritz]

Sacks from OLB besides Matthews last year = 8.

Poppinga - 1
Zombo - 4
Walden - 3

Houston's imaginary sacks - 8

When I was a kid, I wonder if my imaginary friend had an imaginary sack?

[Lurker64]

I think Mike Neal and/or C.J. Wilson can replace Jenkins, but Neal has to stay healthy. That's the concern. Then again, Cullen got injured a lot. Often, it affected his play. When healthy though, he was one of the best 3-4 DEs in the NFL.

Mike Neal's injury history: His Freshman year at Purdue, before he became a starter he missed some time with a Turf Toe.
His first year with the Green Bay Packers he had a separated shoulder that turned into a torn rotator cuff when he tried to play with it.

That's it.

I don't think he projects as a guy who is constantly injured.

[Deputy Nutz]

Neal is going to be fine, plus the emergence of Wilson leaves solid depth at defensive end. I was not worried for the Packers that they didn't take a defensive end. A 5 tech tackle isn't worth spending a high draft pick on.

Load up the depth chart and someone will emerge. Green can be used on strictly running downs if nothing else and then spell Raji. So you in theory have three linemen with experience on the roster playing right defensive end. It will work out.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Mike Neal's injury history: His Freshman year at Purdue, before he became a starter he missed some time with a Turf Toe.
His first year with the Green Bay Packers he had a separated shoulder that turned into a torn rotator cuff when he tried to play with it.

That's it.

I don't think he projects as a guy who is constantly injured.

I liked what I saw from Neal, and I'm not overly concerned with his injury, but he did have a significant injury his rookie year. I think we'll be fine with him as a starter--as long as he does go down the Justin Harrell path.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Neal is going to be fine, plus the emergence of Wilson leaves solid depth at defensive end. I was not worried for the Packers that they didn't take a defensive end. A 5 tech tackle isn't worth spending a high draft pick on.

Load up the depth chart and someone will emerge. Green can be used on strictly running downs if nothing else and then spell Raji. So you in theory have three linemen with experience on the roster playing right defensive end. It will work out.

For a non-Packers fan you are pretty informed about the team.

[Lurker64]

A 5 tech tackle isn't worth spending a high draft pick on.

Most of the time I agree with you here, but this is a position where the gulf between the "elite" and the "very good" is enormous. It's not worth taking a "very good" 5-tech before the 2nd, IMO. They're like guards, largely fungible. But some of your elite 5-techs like Richard Seymour and Bruce Smith are easily worth top 10 picks. That's why you're going to continue to see teams take 5-techs high in the draft. If you're drafting late, like I expect the Packers to be for the forseeable future... you're just not going to sniff guys like that. So don't worry about the position until day 2 of the draft.

People get excited about sacks and forget what the actual role of a 5-tech is, most of the time. You want to create pressures, sure, since a large part of what makes a Capers style 3-4 attractive is that it's never immediately obvious to a QB what the back 8 are doing, but most of the time your job is just to keep the LBs clean. It's a position where you'll certainly take a hall-of-famer if one is available, but the rest of the time workerbees are fine.

[Deputy Nutz]

Luker I agree with you, if there is a guy that is elite you take him, but very few guys project as dominant 5 tech end, they are usually undersized tackles, that get moved over. All the defensive ends that the Patriots, Packers, and the Steelers were defensive tackles in college or in the pros. I guess what I am saying is that there are no true 5 tech end coming out of college, they all get converted after they are selected. The Steelers very rarely draft high 5 tech tackles, The Patriots have use a couple of high selections at 5 tech. The Packers starters were street free agents at some point in their careers in Jenkins and Green.

Hard to find guys that can give a consistent pass rush from that position, and the goal is to eat blockers in the run game and make sure that OLBs get free. shitty position if you ask me

[Deputy Nutz]

For a non-Packers fan you are pretty informed about the team.

I just report what I see and think

[channtheman]

Luker I agree with you, if there is a guy that is elite you take him, but very few guys project as dominant 5 tech end, they are usually undersized tackles, that get moved over. All the defensive ends that the Patriots, Packers, and the Steelers were defensive tackles in college or in the pros. I guess what I am saying is that there are no true 5 tech end coming out of college, they all get converted after they are selected. The Steelers very rarely draft high 5 tech tackles, The Patriots have use a couple of high selections at 5 tech. The Packers starters were street free agents at some point in their careers in Jenkins and Green.

Hard to find guys that can give a consistent pass rush from that position, and the goal is to eat blockers in the run game and make sure that OLBs get free. shitty position if you ask me

I think the fatass that eats fried chicken and twinkies all off season is pretty psyched they have a million dollar position just for him in the NFL.