Official Day one Draft thread

[RashanGary]

Gute said he ran a 4.29, so that would make sense that they timed him a touch slower than the pro day media numbers. 4.29 is so friggin fast tho. I love the idea of having two corners who can play man or zone. That opens things up for Berry to mix coverages. Hopefully this kid picks it up quick.

[RashanGary]

Gute talked about Stokes. They had him rated high, didn’t know if he’d make it to them, but glad he did. They got a guy they had high on their board. No excuses for this pick. They wanted this guy. They didn’t get an unlucky draft.

Said they liked his tape against Alabama and LSU. Liked how he developed into a really good player over the years. More than an athlete but they love the upside. Said sky was the limit.

Gute likes his mentality and drive and personality as a whole.


I’m happy with the pick and all of the traits this guy has.

[Fritz]

Gute said he ran a 4.29, so that would make sense that they timed him a touch slower than the pro day media numbers. 4.29 is so friggin fast tho. I love the idea of having two corners who can play man or zone. That opens things up for Berry to mix coverages. Hopefully this kid picks it up quick.

Yeah, he's got about four games til Kevin King gets hurt.

[bobblehead]

My only worry is his subpar shuttle and 3 cone times. In the NFL an inline 40 isn't as important as the agility runs. However some of that could be training related. If he didn't practice them he likely would be subpar.

On the plus, and its really what matters, facing Jeudy, Chase, Smith and all that SEC talent and coming out pretty clean is more important than me than any track competition.

Gutes proved his chops with Jaire (I think he was behind the King pick also, but I like king more than most). He has an eye for dominant coverage as far as I can tell. I wanted JOK, but I will hope this guy is another Jaire because I remember Harris/Woodson. Hell, maybe we waste some capital and trade up for JOK still.

[wist43]

Gute said he ran a 4.29, so that would make sense that they timed him a touch slower than the pro day media numbers. 4.29 is so friggin fast tho. I love the idea of having two corners who can play man or zone. That opens things up for Berry to mix coverages. Hopefully this kid picks it up quick.

Does anyone have any idea what Berry is likely to do??

They ran Pettine out of town, despite the fact that our defense had become at least respectable for the first time in 20 years.

And lest anyone forget, Berry wasn't even their first choice for the job - why would he be?? Afterall, he's failed miserably everywhere he's been.

I don't think there's any doubt - our defense is not going to be improved.

[call_me_ishmael]

I am guessing there is going to be a ton of trading up. Does anyone think the Packers have room for 7-9 players on their roster in a historically bad draft class? I do not. Move on up and get try to get two #2s.

There are three OTs left. You need to get one of them IMHO. Whatever it takes. Hopefully he isn't a bitch like that lean boy from Indiana. Why would you draft a football player from Indiana when the SEC exists?

[RashanGary]

On the plus, and its really what matters, facing Jeudy, Chase, Smith and all that SEC talent and coming out pretty clean is more important than me than any track competition.

This is it. He played good ball. And it’s said he played both man and zone well.

The upside is a nice bonus with the 4.29 speed. Similar to Sam Shields.

[HarveyWallbangers]

My only worry is his subpar shuttle and 3 cone times. In the NFL an inline 40 isn't as important as the agility runs. However some of that could be training related. If he didn't practice them he likely would be subpar.

On the plus, and its really what matters, facing Jeudy, Chase, Smith and all that SEC talent and coming out pretty clean is more important than me than any track competition.

Gutes proved his chops with Jaire (I think he was behind the King pick also, but I like king more than most). He has an eye for dominant coverage as far as I can tell. I wanted JOK, but I will hope this guy is another Jaire because I remember Harris/Woodson. Hell, maybe we waste some capital and trade up for JOK still.

Shuttle was a bit below average, but his 3 cone was above average. It was right in between Samuel (who is much shorter) and Newsome. Not surprisingly for a bigger CB. You may be thinking of Campbell.

Newsome = 6'0" 192, 4.39 40, 4.26 shuttle, 6.90 3 cone, 40" vertical, 123" broad jump
Stokes = 6'1" 194, 4.31 40, 4.36 shuttle, 6.96 3 cone, 38.5" vertical, 128" broad jump
Campbell = 6'1" 193, 4.40 40, 4.45 shuttle, 7.15 3 cone, 34.5" vertical, 124" broad jump
Samuel = 5'10" 180, 4.41 40, 4.09 shuttle, 6.98 3 cone, 35" vertical, 124" broad jump
Joseph = 5'11" 197, 4.34 40, 4.34 shuttle, 7.21 3 cone, 35" vertical, 128" broad jump

[texaspackerbacker]

Based on those numbers, it appears we got no worse than the second most athletic of that group. One tenth of a second (about 2.5% deviation) in the shuttle could just be a defect in timing and regardless, isn't very significant. The only one better in that bunch is much smaller and a slower in the 40 (arguably a more important stat) by that same one tenth than Stokes. And then there's the lack of a history of injuries. I wanted Newsome, but most of all, I absolutely wanted a Corner. If I'd done more pre-draft research, I might have favored Stokes all along.

[run pMc]

I am guessing there is going to be a ton of trading up. Does anyone think the Packers have room for 7-9 players on their roster in a historically bad draft class? I do not. Move on up and get try to get two #2s.

There are three OTs left. You need to get one of them IMHO. Whatever it takes. Hopefully he isn't a bitch like that lean boy from Indiana. Why would you draft a football player from Indiana when the SEC exists?

Is it historically bad? I don't think we'll know for 2-3 years, but right now the "draft experts" think it's strong at OT, WR, and CB -- areas GB could use depth.
With their cap situation I think they could very well use all 10 picks to take some cheap depth/developmental players. There aren't really many starting spots up for grabs, so picking for the bottom half of the roster and hoping they develop while they are on cheap rookie contracts isn't a bad move. Rosters change by about 30% per season on average, so 10 picks would fit on the 53+ PS.

[King Friday]

By the numbers, he's the most impressive athlete of the group... Considering both size and speed.

In the end, I'm glad we have Stokes instead of Newsome. The Big 10 was a complete disaster last year. Being a dominant DB in that conference last year wasn't impressive to me... And the kid didn't play against the one team that had an elite QB. Stokes held his own against a bunch of guys who were just drafted yesterday. I'll take my chances with that.

[King Friday]

Is it historically bad?.

Bad isn't the right word. Undersized is better. Due to the NCAA letting seniors stay in school another year due to last year being the Covid debacle, there are fewer options to choose from. A lot of talent that would've had to come into the draft is going back to college next year. That is why next year's draft is being viewed as ultra rich.

[Zool]

Bad isn't the right word. Undersized is better. Due to the NCAA letting seniors stay in school another year due to last year being the Covid debacle, there are fewer options to choose from. A lot of talent that would've had to come into the draft is going back to college next year. That is why next year's draft is being viewed as ultra rich.

Begs the question then, why would some teams trade back? In order to trade up, someone has to go back.

[smuggler]

Probably a solid pick for the following reasons:

1. Positional value of corners has increased in the last decade to the point where they're now one of the most important positions and probably the most important when you exclude quarterbacks.
2. It's arguably the biggest need on the team and certainly a top-3 need of the team.
3. Selection value was reasonable. This is the weakest element of my argument. But Stokes was reasonably well regarded by the general evaluation community and moreso when considering athletic/metrics scouting.
4. He's a high character person, seemingly smart, and definitely trending upward/ascending.

[jmbarnes101]

Now that I'm not two sheets to the wind I can objectively look at this pick and I like it. I liked the Savage and Jaire picks, hated the King pick. If we can build up a fantastic secondary it makes everyone else's job easier. Now if we can get a good ILB and a WR like one of the Moore's or Terrace Marshall I'll love this draft. Throw some darts at offensive linemen that they're good at hitting on and a defensive linemen or two another CB and let's go.