Never too early 2020 NFL Draft Thread

[mraynrand]

How many Super Bowl rings does Randy Moss have?

had to do it

[Zool]

Now do the dirty bird dance.

[RashanGary]

I'd rather have a stud ILB than a WR. With more and more play pass, RPO and (zone/boot mixes) being run in the NFL, an ILB that can diagnose AND run is becoming a premium playmaker for defenses.

I don't know if one is there. I see kuekly do some savvy ass shit like hide behind the DL and bait a RB into a gap, just to blow it up. And I see guys play the ball really well. But I guess it's hard for me to watch enough tape to know if a college guy is consistent at it.

In gute we trust I guess

[RashanGary]

Smart, instinctive, tough, fast guys who love contacy and who have that consistency in their ambitions to continue to get better aren't born every day.

[mraynrand]

I'd rather have a stud ILB than a WR. With more and more play pass, RPO and (zone/boot mixes) being run in the NFL, an ILB that can diagnose AND run is becoming a premium playmaker for defenses.

I don't know if one is there. I see kuekly do some savvy ass shit like hide behind the DL and bait a RB into a gap, just to blow it up. And I see guys play the ball really well. But I guess it's hard for me to watch enough tape to know if a college guy is consistent at it.

In gute we trust I guess

I think for 2020, I'd rather have a great defensive athlete from the draft as the top pick and bring in the best competent WR/TE FA you can find. Someone who can mesh with Rodgers right away.

[RashanGary]

I think for 2020, I'd rather have a great defensive athlete from the draft as the top pick and bring in the best competent WR/TE FA you can find. Someone who can mesh with Rodgers right away.

Burafict is a really good player as an option to go the other way. But I think I'd rather draft a stud ILB or SS (move Amos to LB in that case)

[mraynrand]

Burafict is a really good player as an option to go the other way.

Probably too risky. One wrong tackle and you lose him for the season.

[run pMc]

Oates says its all about speed. Except for Adams and Jones.

https://madison.com/wsj/sports/football/professional/tom-oates-fleet-feet-needed-for-packers-to-reach-next/article_9ee81b27-b96d-544c-b4f7-39339f5182f1.html

Speed is good. Production is better.

And Tom doesn't wrestle with the big receiver plan that Gutekunst had last year. Someone should ask him about it.

Speed is nice. At WR, I'd prioritize route running/the abillity to separate and reliable hands over speed. If they can run a 4.5 40 they are fast enough. I wouldn't want a WR that runs a 4.6+ like Allison or Laquon Treadwell. I just don't think they are fast enough to separate reliably or make it to their route marks fast enough. Plus CB are more comfortable creeping up and sitting on their routes. (Yes I know 4.5 vs. 4.6 isn't much, over 40 yards it's about a yard difference. The throwing windows are often small/close fast so I think on a 12-15yd dig route the difference b/t ESB's 4.48 and G-Mo's 4.62 does matter.)

Even if MVS doesn't get thrown to they could have him run about 8-10 go routes a game and that should be enough to scare most teams and likely get Rodgers to try him at least once.

Speed in the defensive back 7 and RB, and not go back to having 4.62 guys like Allison at WR would be good.

I thought the big receiver thing would help Rodgers. My thinking was bigger receiver --> higher contested throw completion rate, bigger catch radius, harder to bring down, etc.
But now I think Rodgers is so risk-averse he doesn't do a lot of 50/50 contested throws or jump balls, which takes away many of the big WR advantages...plus some of these tall guys are lanky and easy to tackle.

They can do fine with a 6'1" guy who can get open and gain YAC (e.g., A.J. Brown, Deebo Samuel).

[run pMc]

Probably too risky. One wrong tackle and you lose him for the season.

Agree -- he was suspended for the season because of a late hit that was Trevathan/Adams bad. He's a mean SOB but I think he's a liability, he's getting old, and can't cover TE/RB anyway.
(And likely not "Packer people", whatever that is.)

If they're gonna sign someone to replace Blake, I'd prefer they kick the tires on Kwiatkoski.

[texaspackerbacker]

Speed is nice. At WR, I'd prioritize route running/the abillity to separate and reliable hands over speed. If they can run a 4.5 40 they are fast enough. I wouldn't want a WR that runs a 4.6+ like Allison or Laquon Treadwell. I just don't think they are fast enough to separate reliably or make it to their route marks fast enough. Plus CB are more comfortable creeping up and sitting on their routes. (Yes I know 4.5 vs. 4.6 isn't much, over 40 yards it's about a yard difference. The throwing windows are often small/close fast so I think on a 12-15yd dig route the difference b/t ESB's 4.48 and G-Mo's 4.62 does matter.)

Even if MVS doesn't get thrown to they could have him run about 8-10 go routes a game and that should be enough to scare most teams and likely get Rodgers to try him at least once.

Speed in the defensive back 7 and RB, and not go back to having 4.62 guys like Allison at WR would be good.

I thought the big receiver thing would help Rodgers. My thinking was bigger receiver --> higher contested throw completion rate, bigger catch radius, harder to bring down, etc.
But now I think Rodgers is so risk-averse he doesn't do a lot of 50/50 contested throws or jump balls, which takes away many of the big WR advantages...plus some of these tall guys are lanky and easy to tackle.

They can do fine with a 6'1" guy who can get open and gain YAC (e.g., A.J. Brown, Deebo Samuel).

Speed is more than nice, and more to the point, it's the thing we don't have. Route runners and/or big guys are what you need for the short and medium passing game, but we could certainly use that deep threat. Besides, coaches ought to be able to teach route running. Speed, on the other hand, is God-given. As for big receivers helping, we did go 14-4 after all.

I ABSOLUTELY want my QB to be risk averse ....... some people actually do not?

And regarding Martinez, I'd rather keep and augment him than replace him.

[mraynrand]

I ABSOLUTELY want my QB to be risk averse ....... some people actually do not?

It's a dial, not an on-off switch.

[texaspackerbacker]

Then the dial should be at zero ...... unless, of course, you are down about 3 TDs in the 4th quarter or maybe time is running out in the half and you throw a hail mary. The former has hardly ever happened to the Packers, and on the latter, our GOAT QB has exercised risk pretty successfully there.

[pbmax]

Speed is nice. At WR, I'd prioritize route running/the abillity to separate and reliable hands over speed. If they can run a 4.5 40 they are fast enough. I wouldn't want a WR that runs a 4.6+ like Allison or Laquon Treadwell. I just don't think they are fast enough to separate reliably or make it to their route marks fast enough. Plus CB are more comfortable creeping up and sitting on their routes. (Yes I know 4.5 vs. 4.6 isn't much, over 40 yards it's about a yard difference. The throwing windows are often small/close fast so I think on a 12-15yd dig route the difference b/t ESB's 4.48 and G-Mo's 4.62 does matter.)

Even if MVS doesn't get thrown to they could have him run about 8-10 go routes a game and that should be enough to scare most teams and likely get Rodgers to try him at least once.

Speed in the defensive back 7 and RB, and not go back to having 4.62 guys like Allison at WR would be good.

I thought the big receiver thing would help Rodgers. My thinking was bigger receiver --> higher contested throw completion rate, bigger catch radius, harder to bring down, etc.
But now I think Rodgers is so risk-averse he doesn't do a lot of 50/50 contested throws or jump balls, which takes away many of the big WR advantages...plus some of these tall guys are lanky and easy to tackle.

They can do fine with a 6'1" guy who can get open and gain YAC (e.g., A.J. Brown, Deebo Samuel).

He trusted Lazard, Adams, Graham a few times and Stonebringer.

[pbmax]

Speed is more than nice, and more to the point, it's the thing we don't have. Route runners and/or big guys are what you need for the short and medium passing game, but we could certainly use that deep threat. Besides, coaches ought to be able to teach route running. Speed, on the other hand, is God-given. As for big receivers helping, we did go 14-4 after all.

I ABSOLUTELY want my QB to be risk averse ....... some people actually do not?

And regarding Martinez, I'd rather keep and augment him than replace him.

You should have more INTs than fumbles.

[texaspackerbacker]

Seriously? hahahaha

Even if you aren't exhibiting Rand-level sarcasm and are serious, a fumble is about 50/50 to be recovered by our side, while a pick is a pick is a pick - straight to the other team.