OnTheBlack

I think he could easily move over to guard and be a pretty damn good player there. That was a really good value pick, but they still don't have tackles.

Absolutely. You can't really evaluate a pick when it happens. You go back 2-3 years down the road and you see all the misses in the 1st round. Wilkins however was a near can't miss with a very high floor. Taylor was also. Gary....I won't be surprised no matter what he ends up doing. He could end up being a non-factor or he could end up being a superstar. I'm not all that confident he's going to be the later at this moment, but I think Gute deserves the benefit of the doubt.

Got stats to prove it? PFF had Fackrell rated as the #44 edge rusher in the NFL last year. Considering that there are 32 teams in the league, he graded out as a starter. Yeah, the fact that he has a total of 12 QB hits and 10.5 sacks? That's like a Baseball player having a .900 BABIP. Plus...you know...eyes. Oh, and this blurb from PFF;

Packers saying he will start his career in the OLB room. I would be more confident if they said he was an OLB. That statement seems to imply they’re not 100% sure where he fits. That's basically what Pettine does. That's what Za'Darius Smith is. He lines up as a DE on passing downs. I'm not worried about his talent, position...he's more than fine there. I'm worried a guy as talented as him didn't dominate in college. It's not that rare, but it's concerning.

When your 4th best pass rusher had 10.5 sacks last year, you've got a pretty darned good pass rush. Not when almost none of those sacks were the result of him actually beating his guy and they came in bunches as he cleaned up other guys pass rushes. A "win" is considered beating your guy in 2.5 seconds. Fackrell almost NEVER did that last year. And I think it's just as likely he won't get another 10 sacks in the rest of his career than he ever gets 5-6 sacks in a season again, much less 10.

He's not damaged goods and he's ABSOLUTELY nothing like Dahtone Jones. He's so much more athletically gifted, it's not even funny. If he lives up to his potential, he's a all pro pass rusher, a Mack type of talent. He has as much upside as anyone in the draft. I don't like that he hasn't done it in the NFL yet though. Of course when Sweat was the same age, he was moving from Michigan to Mississippi... The Packers better have some reason to believe that his motor and his technique is better than what he showed in his college career. This seems like a BIG time boom or bust type pick.

I'll stand by that statement. QB's are so overvalued at this time of the year because if you don't have one you have no chance to win. So teams reach and grab one when there are players there that have a much better chance to contribute. I did look at Matt Miller's big board and there isn't a QB in the top 12 and only 2 in the top 32. https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2832566-matt-millers-final-2019-nfl-draft-big-board#slide1 I will agree that there is no QB for the packers. the only thing that would make sense to me is getting rosen for a 2, but i doubt that will happen. I think we're talking semantics. If a QB has a 89 grade and there are Tackles or LB'ers with a 91 grade, you add a few points because of how important it is to have that QB. Murray was obvious, Daniel Jones was NOT, but Haskins seemed to me like a lock. I kinda feel bad for the kid going to such a terrible situation. He's a prototypical QB that checks ever box except he's not a running QB, but that shouldn't be a priority.

This is ALMOST like saying you wouldn't mind having an an INF of Yuni Betencourt's because...hey, we had one before and the team overall was good and despite the fact that he was a bad player most of his career, he made that good play in the SB!!!! NO! You cannot just pass on the foundation of your defense. And I might be selling Yuni B short in this comp. I mean...at least Yuni had a couple of good years early in his career. That's more than we can say for Green. Glad he hit got his hand in the air when Big Ben was backed up to force that Collins pick,but that's about all he did of substance. But...I guess you've said you know you're in the minority, so....I'd just suggest you look at the best defenses in the NFL. They almost ALWAYS had a deep front. in fact, we've seen teams win SB's BECAUSE of their deep DL. WE'd just be passing on the position group as a whole here. The Pats dynasty was built on a defensive mind set that centered around Vince Wolfork and guys like Richard Seymour(they still like those types of bodies, the long limbed, athletic DL). The Giants beat that historic Pats team with a dominant pass rush with,Osi, Tuck, Strahan. The Bears last year had Mack and Akeem Hicks as their DE's when they made a big jump. The Seahawks were able to rotate defensive linemen to just keep pressuring the passer. The Texans defense that is year in and year out elite has JJ Watt at defensive END in their scheme(along with DJ Reader playing the other DE spot). I could go on, but...man, you just don't see many teams throw out 3 guys who are on the street half way through the season and be successful with them. The Rams were in the Super Bowl this year because they had Donald playing DE...and they probably should have had Such playing DE as well, but he sacrificed a little in the way of stats to play the nose and eat some blocks for the other guys. By the way, just one more thing to point out...and I just totally missed it because of your "3 Howard Green" statements. But you realize that almost all the players we're talking about here are Defensive ENDS, right? Oliver is a DE in the NFL, Gary is a OLB'er/DE hybrid? Very possible that given how talented they are, both Williams AND Wilkens end up playing at DE for the Packers as well(if there was a shot that Williams fell to us). I think you're confusing defensive ends with NT's. And there I disagree with you. The Packers defense was extremely reliane on Ryan Pickett for years at the nose....but I would understand more your opinion to just throw out a big body who can eat up blocks there....though I'd still disagree as I think having a guy like Clark who can collapse the pocket is an extrodinarly luxury and makes life easier for everyone else. But...what you're basically saying is that if the Packers took Nick Bosa, because he's a DE(and one that's not as athletic as Oliver or Gary) you'd be livid? You have NT and then 2 ENDS. A guy who lines up on the guards outside shoulder and one who lines up on the tackles. Those are your defensive ends and the exact guys we're talking about. Kenny Clark is well established as our NT and he's probably 1st up when they start dolling out extensions and he's likely to get a big one. Just gonna guess, but I'd say 4 years 55 million with 30+ guaranteed. And he's worth every penny. He's the player you build your 3-4 around(which is why we drafted Raji desite the fact that TT had Crabtree rated as the best player in that particular draft, you NEED that 0 technique to clog things up. Although Pettine is a bit different. He likes his linemen to get penetration more...and that's nobody in his draft better at that as a 5 than Ed Oliver IMO. So long story short, you say DE is a position of need and that's what you want drafted, but then say you'd be livid if we drafted some freakishly talented ones. I don't really understand that. No. I don't want a pure 0-technique NT as a high first round pick in any given year. DE, absolutely. If the plan is to transition a smaller, athletic interior DL to DE or ILB, then great! Come on over! Kenny Clark (27th?), Ryan Pickett (drafted 30th by St. Louis?), are all great players and I was not livid to have them or pick them near the end of the first round. I'm just of the opinion that in a 3-4, I'd rather have two dynamic, fly to the ball ILB on my team than picking a 0-tech DT at #12 (or worse! = move up to take one) when we have a mighty fine DT in Kenny Clark already. The only guy in the discussion that was a 0 technique was Wilkins and he can also play DE. The rest of the guys you listed where OLB'ers and DE's.

You realize that Gary is 5'4, 280 and ran a 4.58 40, right? And that he's listed as an edge. And Oliver is a Donald-esque talent who ran a 4.7 40. I do realize the peripherals on Gary. I've seen him listed at interior DL. I'm not that enamored with Aaron Donald either. Again, I'm in the minority. They are placeholders to me in the same way as a gunner on special teams. Somebody talented can do it, but I'm not going out of my way to ignore positions of need to take the best interior defensive lineman. I do respect your opinion. And nowhere in this discussion has anyone suggested that we move up to 3-5 to pick up Oliver. I also haven't seen him mocked that high since last off-season. And Gary certainly hasn't. I think you're confusing Oliver for Williams. He's universally regarded as a top 2-5 pick. Not this discussion, no. The reason I suggested moving up is I DID see Oliver mocked at 3, 6, 9 and other places. I don't want to pick a DL in the first round, let alone move up for one. I realize there are hundreds of mocks that might better indicate Oliver will go 12 to 15 or 20 or 30, I just don't have the time to read them all. http://walterfootball.com/draft2019.php (#3 to the Jets) But the most ridiculous part of this is that you just assume that these linemen will "get you 26 tackles and 1.5 sacks." Kenny Clark got you 6 sacks and 55 tackles last year playing the nose(though I can't think of a worse way to judge a player than by tackles. Even sacks are overrated as pressures and QB hits are far more telling). If you get a guy like Oliver or Gary, you're looking at a double digit sack guy who gets you 50-60 QB pressures a year and can play the run. The only question with Gary is how consistent he can be, otherwise he'd be right up there with Allen and Bosa(the later of which would play the same position as Gary or Oliver most likely in GB). It's not so much that I'm assuming per the individual per say, it's just an average for the position and the type of scheme I would prefer for the defense for my favorite team. Suh from Nebraska for example. Dominant player at the position for a number of years, but I'd rather have "just a guy" there. If you think Gary is an edge rusher or can move to OLB, then fine, but everything I see listed is at DT There's a reason Howard Green was on the street when the Packers signed him. As I said, the single most effective way to disrupt an offense is to get a pass rush up the middle. It's just REALLY rare you find players who can do that. If a guy like Oliver falls to us at 12, I doubt we pass on him. But if you go with a fat, slow, immobile 5 or 9 technique, we'd be in trouble. We also had guys like Clay Matthews, BJ Raji at his best(not a 26 tackle, 1.5 sack season from him), Collins and Woodson. You can cover up a guy like Howard. You can't win with 3 of them along your line. Street DT. I love the concept. I think you understand my thinking and desire with your paragraph. I want to be talented and play a scheme with DB, S, LB, that I can over "deficiencies at DT" with Kenny Clark and a Howard Green lookalike. I get it's cliche, but it's cliche for a reason. Games are won and lost on on the OL and DL. Throw out Kenny Clark, a hopefully rejuvenated Mike Daniels and a guy like Ed Oliver and that's gonna make a far biggest impact on your defense than an off-ball LB'er. I didn't ask for an off the ball LB in the first round. The kid from Georgia last year that I believe the Bears took is what I would be looking for. Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels, street FA + Devin White or Joash Allen is going to be a better result than Clark, Daniels, Oren Burks, and Jeffrey Simmons/Ed Oliver. Again, I respect your opinion and realize I'm in the minority with my thoughts. Seriously? What in the world are you expecting in the NFL draft? Do you like JJ Watt? I mean...my god, what is it that does impress you if not one of the all time great interior DL who can get you 15-20 sacks a year!!!!!!! As for Gary, I've never seen him listed as a DT. He's an edge. He's always been an edge. He's strong enough that he can move inside and rush the QB, but is not a DT. And about the kid from Georgia, you realize he's the very definition of an "off ball LB'er," right? He isn't an OLB'er who plays on the line, he plays off the ball. He is a MLB'er. Smith was a guy I liked a helluva lot more than Bush and for that matter White. But he's exactly what an off-ball LB'er is. He doesn't play on the LOS, therefore, he's an off-ball LB'er.

I don't see how you can blame scheme. Not when the guy on the other side put up big numbers.

Yeah, but the opposite OLB'er put up big numbers. He's DEFINITELY a guy who could dominate like Mack has. But he's also a guy who could dominate 5 years from now, get paid and then not dominate anymore. I do not like this pick. I guess teams just weren't calling about Dwayne Haskins for whatever reasons. I mean...he's everything-everyone has talked about wanting in a QB. Big, physical, cannon for an arm, great anticipation, stand tall in the pockets, goes through his reads. Yet he's falling down the board for some reason. I'm having Jamal Reynolds flashbacks here(though Gary is just in a whole other world athletically).

Meh....I'm gonna have to convince myself to like this pick. His performance did NOT match his production.

Again, after Burns interview, him getting up and stomping out after some basic questions, I find that unlikely. Plus, I don't like him. Not very physical. Hard to argue with the other two though.

I wouldn't take Gary at 12. Too much bust potential and you still have two QB's who were supposed to be top 10 picks sitting there, and a couple teams that need a QB right behind you. I'd love Gary at ~18. Hard to complain about Taylor..though he's a little bit boring right now. But boring can easily translate to dominant running game in the future.

Clark is young, but that's the problem in two years - he will be a very expensive re-sign. Yeah, but so what? Good players are expensive. You gotta pay to keep your talent. Don't wait two years. He's shown everything you need to see. Give him an extension going into next year(as in the 2020 years). And Williams is gone now.

I’d hate to pass on a talent like that, but I’m still worried about the heart condition that may or may not exist. "Sweating" was meant as a double meaning: Anxious to get to draft him; anxious if we do draft him. I guess I'll trust the GB doctors to know better. Yeah, after hearing he had an enlarged Heart and not an arrhythmia, I'm pretty leery of him. But....I'm at a loss now. I guess you take Taylor? Solidify both the RT and LT for the next decade? I'm moving toward trading down now though. I mean, there are definitely worse things than throwing out Wilkins and Clark in the same front, but then the 3rd guy needs to be a Daniels in his prime type player.

Touche'. Often the next means that the person won't come close. It's hard to become a HOF player. Exactly. And then when it's a guy from a spread offense who made the types of plays you didn't expect him to make in the NFL....yeah, I did not think Mahomes was gonna be very good. I'm moving more towards Wilkins or Taylor at 12 unless the Packers trade back. Wilkins isn't a need with a still very young Kenny Clark(he was just 20 coming out). But Bush going here is good for me. I did NOT want a 5'10 off ball LB'er at 12.

Make them give up their 1st this year and next and we throw back a 3rd and 4th or something. With a team like the Skins, there's always a chance they end up with a top 5 pick or even THEE top pick and the top pick in the next two drafts is going to be worth pure gold. You could basically announce their names right now. The first pick of the 2021 draft, QB from Clemson, Trevor Lawrence! Team TBA.

It is...if you're the next Favre. But they just called everyone who had a strong arm and made crazy throws the next Favre. And whenever they call someone "the next" you expect them to be less than the player, but similar. To me that translated to the Rex Grossman types(who was called the next Favre). When the guy actually becomes the next Favre...but with less picks, then...yeah, that's a very-very good thing.

I'm both happy and disappointed. I want Oliver, but I want Hockenson. The guy is a all around stud though. We now have more of a need for more safeties. Iowa with Kittle, Hockenson, Fant...

I think nearly everyone would've predicted that he was available at NYG's #17 though. Maybe they know something, but this puts a lot of pressure on the youngster. I don't disagree with you in the slightest. I'm just at the point where I know what I don't know. I thought Mahomes was another "the next Favre," which is not what you like to hear about with regard to a young QB. And look at what he's done. Oliver here, right?

He's just not a great fit there. They need a pass rusher, but he's wasted a bit as a 4-3 DE. Maybe they use him like Barr, but line him up as a pass rusher more, but he's so talented in space AND rushing the passer, this is not a great fit. I think Oliver would have been a better pick here for them. I also really wish we could have nabbed him. Oliver is likely gone with so many 4-3 teams coming up.

I'm out on grading QB picks. I thought Mahomes was a ridiculous reach and the Chiefs gave up WAY too much for him. So....if you're confident in your scouting abiliity, screw the draft board, trust your people and see how it goes. Just because the guys we read say he was the 4th best doesn't mean he was.

If you think Allen is a Mack-type player or Oliver is a Donald type player, you kinda have to, don't you? Allen isn't a 4-3 DE though, so not sure if Jax is going to take him, Denver is set...it could happen.

And now JONES?????? The 4th best QB....the stars are aligning. Ed Oliver, Allen...these guys become infinitely more plausible now for the Packers. I'd guess someone moves up for the Lock and Haskins.