Official 2021 NFL Draft Thread

[Joemailman]

I don't want Toney at 29 either, which probably means they take him. I forget where, but some scout said he didn't run the routes from the playbook, or know how, which is worrisome. He's an unbelievable athlete with some of the best balance I've seen but he's a gadget guy. He's a bigger & slightly slower Rondale Moore. I could see MLF use him on jet sweeps, those stupid bubble screens, and out of the slot... but I wonder if Rodgers will trust him enough to throw him the ball. Also, given the depth of the WR class I think they can find someone who does 85% of that on Day 3.

I'm half expecting Gute to draft a pair of WRs Day 3 and park them on the PS for development. When the current crop hit FA at end of season they'll have a full year in the system to take over for MVS/Lazard/Funchess. Except for Adams... they need to keep him.

Gute has shown he drafts for the future (often) more than what they need now, so looking at what the roster holes will likely be this at time next year should provide some clues to what he'll do. Preston Smith and some of the WRs are likely gone. Billy Turner will have a year left. Two of Kevin King, Sullivan and Redmond will likely be gone. Burks, Josh Jackson. Lotta guys who haven't panned out, but a few who have they can't/won't keep... and either way, they are positions that need to be filled, and the draft is cheaper than FA.

That comment by a scout probably needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Could be a team trying to disguise that they really like Toney. That said, route running at this point does not seem to be a strong point. He's had some nagging type injuries that have caused him to miss games a couple of years. My guess is Gute will feel he can find a slot/jet sweep/returner guy later in the draft. But he's an explosive player so I wouldn't rule out Gute rolling the dice on Toney.

[RashanGary]

Walker Little, OT, Stanford has a chance too. Dominant sophomore tape, injury after first game of junior season then opt out last year with covid.

[texaspackerbacker]

I got Walker Little late in the 4th round of my only mock draft, which seemed like a bargain. The guy not only sat out due to corona, though. He also had a knee injury and surgery in 2019. So maybe 4th round is about right.

[RashanGary]

“The evolution of this game has happened so much right before our guys,” another executive in personnel said. “These slot receivers, from 155 pounds up to 215, are productive, skilled, talented. Every school in the country has three- and four-receiver packages. The truth is, for every good lineman, there’s six wideouts. It is so crazy.”

From bob mcginns draft series, WR and TE. It’s like I say, there are a ton of WRs and not many good lineman in the NFL, especially tackle and defensive tackle.

[Fritz]

I got Walker Little late in the 4th round of my only mock draft, which seemed like a bargain. The guy not only sat out due to corona, though. He also had a knee injury and surgery in 2019. So maybe 4th round is about right.

That Eskridge kid from Western Michigan that Wist likes gets mentioned in an article I read in Acme. I like the idea of having a shifty guy in the slot and someone who could actually return punts and kicks and not just fair-catch the punts and let the kicks bounce through the end zone.

[wthigoot]

It's amazing how Bill O'Brien left the Texans without a R1 and R2. He should've been fired sooner -- for his GM moves if not his coaching.
Vikings without their R2 because of Ngakue.

Packers with a lot of late round picks, so not a lot of ammo to really move up in R1 but could move around in R3-7. I think Gute will keep a lot of the picks and use them for cheap roster building in a year where they are facing cap hell.

Seattle will probably be looking for a trade down in Rds 2 and 4 to get some extra picks. Should be able to jump up to there if there is a desired player. Can the comp picks be traded or is that still in the future?

[Fritz]

I think this year they can trade those comp picks. Glad they did that. It opens things up for good GM's, and creates a minefield for lousy GM's.

My problem in all this is that I read so little about these guys, that the one thing I read becomes my opinion, to the exclusion of all else. And I only get to know about ten or fifteen guys at all, so if the Packers pick someone not in that group, I automatically think it's a bad pick.

It's lazy fan dumbness. I don't know shit. You guys who watch some clips and do a lot of reading know a hell of a lot more than I do. But just remember Gute has watched about twenty times what you have. And has seen some of these guys in person, and talked to them. It doesn't mean he's a great GM - that's still to be determined - but he has a lot more information than we do. And most of you have a lot more information than I do.

And the one time I thought I knew something for real - because I'd watched Rashan Gary for a few years, albeit casually, and didn't see him do shit - it turns out I might've been wrong there, too.

[sharpe1027]

So our dl is Clark (not bust) keel and lowery (not busts but some argue they basically suck). Then you ave I believe lancaster and no one (I think unless we resigned harrison and I missed it). I am comfortable saying Lancaster is a 'bust' at this level of analysis because he is a jag. As is Lowry at this point. Some teams are deep at dl so it balances out.
I see your point but feel like arguing it I guess.
My take away is our dl is depresding as f.

It's not the worst metric, but it arguably doesn't translate well across different positions as a comparison. Seems most useful for assessing best round value for a single position.

I'd argue the bust percentage is a function of how much value is placed on a position. GMs will draft more at those positions. Since there's a fixed number of starting spots you necessarily have a higher bust rate by this metric.

[Upnorth]

It's not the worst metric, but it arguably doesn't translate well across different positions as a comparison. Seems most useful for assessing best round value for a single position.

I'd argue the bust percentage is a function of how much value is placed on a position. GMs will draft more at those positions. Since there's a fixed number of starting spots you necessarily have a higher bust rate by this metric.

So ol has more picks than any other yet has the highest success. I would argue that means 2 things
1) ol is seem by gms as one of the most important positions (likely 2nd most important right tex? )
2) it is likely the easiest position to scout for at least some level of sucess

[Bretsky]

A few definites from our Round one pick


GUTE will take somebody nobody initially likes. Then over time everybody who detested the pick will start talking themselves into the pick as being solid after drinking the homer juice.
I will be the second last one to give in, right ahead of Wist. It's partly due to my ongoing rage from back when TT shit on himself and passed on TJ WATT.

[sharpe1027]

So ol has more picks than any other yet has the highest success. I would argue that means 2 things
1) ol is seem by gms as one of the most important positions (likely 2nd most important right tex? )
2) it is likely the easiest position to scout for at least some level of sucess

If they drafted twice as many OL each year with their picks, the hit ratio would be roughly 50% lower.

There's a static number of OL starting opportunities.

[RashanGary]

If they drafted twice as many OL each year with their picks, the hit ratio would be roughly 50% lower.

There's a static number of OL starting opportunities.

True. 5 on every team so there are more of.thrm than any other position if you lump all OL together.

[RashanGary]

It's not the worst metric, but it arguably doesn't translate well across different positions as a comparison. Seems most useful for assessing best round value for a single position.

I'd argue the bust percentage is a function of how much value is placed on a position. GMs will draft more at those positions. Since there's a fixed number of starting spots you necessarily have a higher bust rate by this metric.

1 starting RB on each team so higher bust rates based on the starter criteria. 5 starting OL so lower bust rate based on starter criteria. However, not all starting OL are quality. Most starting RBs are. Very few quality starting DT's but most teams have two good WR's.

So the starter criteria is flawed, but the best we have to compile this type of data and start the conversation.

[sharpe1027]

1 starting RB on each team so higher bust rates based on the starter criteria. 5 starting OL so lower bust rate based on starter criteria. However, not all starting OL are quality. Most starting RBs are. Very few quality starting DT's but most teams have two good WR's.

So the starter criteria is flawed, but the best we have to compile this type of data and start the conversation.

Yeah. If the drafted roughly equal quantities as the available starting positions, the hit rates would be pretty similar. There's still issues with position differences in average length of careers, average time it takes time develop into a starter, etc.

[HarveyWallbangers]

A few definites from our Round one pick


GUTE will take somebody nobody initially likes. Then over time everybody who detested the pick will start talking themselves into the pick as being solid after drinking the homer juice.
I will be the second last one to give in, right ahead of Wist. It's partly due to my ongoing rage from back when TT shit on himself and passed on TJ WATT.

Is this really the case? He's had four 1st round picks, and I really liked two of them (Jaire and Savage).