go pak go Post FA Mock Version 2.0

[YoHoChecko]

WR #2 - #6 on our roster is literally all Higgins type players. Why would we need another one?

Agreed. I like Michael Pittman better than Higgins, anyway, even if we were to go after the exact same guy we have 3 of already. I don't see any reason why Higgins would be better than what we have, especially early.

[YoHoChecko]

I think everyone commenting on Shenault (especially comparing him to MVS) has the totally wrong idea about what he is as a player.

It is true and fine to point out that he does not have a precision route tree right now. But he out-weighs MVS by about 20 pounds, and his strength is in his versatility.

Someone said, once upon a time in this thread or another, that Shenault wasn't a "fit" because he doesn't have the precision route-running or isn't a downfield threat. First, the latter is incorrect; as noted, he had a huge number of big plays.

But more importantly, the guy is a perfect fit for our system because he's already running the types of versatile, mis-direction, pre-snap movement kind of plays we see in L.A. and S.F. and we tried to do a decent amount of here. This guy can be a receiver or runner out ot the backfield, on jet sweeps, on bubble screens. He's got the size and willingness to block. He fits PERFECTLY in this scheme.

Now, is he fast? He looks pretty fast on tape, but he aggravated an injury running the 40, had a 4.58 and we won't get to see him again; that hurts him. Will he need to improve on his routes? Yeah, probably.

But a creative offense will make him a WEAPON right away. You don't have to wait for him to put everything together to be a dynamic threat.

This guy is nothing like MVS. MVS was a downfield outside receiver and that's it. This guy is someone who is only being used well if he's doing a little bit of everything. He's like a gadget guy who, when healthy, can actually play like a starter.

Van Jefferson is a guy I like, totally. Precise route runner, good ball awareness, will help the team. But comparing these two on a "would you rather" is absolutely silly. They're nothing alike. Jefferson looked slower on tape and also wasn't/won't be able to run before the draft, and Jefferson is never going to be asked to line up in the backfield and sometimes carry the ball. He won't be as physical, either, as a blocker or a runner.

Guys who compare to Shenault are Antonio Gibson (RB/WR hybrid), Joe Reed, Lynn Bowden. Maybe you can say "I'd rather wait and grab those guys on Day 3 than Shenault at 30 or 45." That's fine. But guys like MVS and V. Jefferson are looking at completely different roles in this offense. If we take Shenault early, I'd want to grab one of those route running dynamos like Van Jefferson or KJ Hill a little later. If we grab Justin Jefferson or Jalen Reagor early, I'll want a more versatile, thicker hybrid gadget guy later in the draft like the ones I mentioned above.

There's room for both kinds of players, but acting like Shenault isn't a "fit" for us is insane. This is exactly the kind of offense he should thrive in. In my view, the playmaking gadget types for whom MLF could install packages are the most likely to make an immediate impact, rather than a regular guy working their way through the depth chart without much of an offseason.

(P.S. I wrote this like 3 hours ago and then forget to submit it before doing some yard work. Sorry for the delayed reaction)

[bud fox]

WR #2 - #6 on our roster is literally all Higgins type players. Why would we need another one?

Agreed. I like Michael Pittman better than Higgins, anyway, even if we were to go after the exact same guy we have 3 of already. I don't see any reason why Higgins would be better than what we have, especially early.

He is a better prospect than any of our wrs.

I like pittman as a 3rd round option.

[Raptorman]

Mims at 30?

A Safety in rd 2?

gpg, you are a brave soul. Having Mims at 30 seems like it would be a coup of grand scale. That would almost be like getting Aaron Rodgers at 24 (but not quite). But maybe teams who realize the plethora of very solid WRs will be lazy and not notice Mims slipping down the draft until we snatch him. We can hope!

As for the Safety in 2nd, I'd hope that he would be stout enough to actually play on some of the run downs too.

Now go and get Snacks!

I'm picking for the Packers in a mock draft on a Rams board, and I got Mims for the Packers at 30. There will be a good WR available at 30.

[YoHoChecko]

WR #2 - #6 on our roster is literally all Higgins type players. Why would we need another one?

Agreed. I like Michael Pittman better than Higgins, anyway, even if we were to go after the exact same guy we have 3 of already. I don't see any reason why Higgins would be better than what we have, especially early.

He is a better prospect than any of our wrs.

I like pittman as a 3rd round option.

Have you watched both or are you just looking at mock drafts? What makes Higgins a better prospect than Pittman?

Back in the combine/all star game timeframe, I saw from some media scouting types I know reports that Higgins was one of the guys that the media likes more than the scouts--that makes sense because he was a high profile, east coast player on a national championship-contending team; you saw him every week if you wanted to. He was talked about all season. Meanwhile Pittman was dominating at 10 pm in games against fine teams that didn't really matter much.

We don't know about Higgins' long speed and he opted not to run; that's an unanswered question. Meanwhile, Pittman went out there and ran a 4.52 and a 6.96 3-cone at 6'4" 223 lbs. He also turned some heads during the all-star circuit. I like Pittman better than Higgins, both better than Chase Claypool, and hope we don't draft any of these power forward types because we're swimming in them

[go pak go]

My post about the strengths and weaknesses between Shenault and MVS was NOTHING about comapring Shenault and MVS.

I mean they couldn't be anymore of a different player. That post was strictly responding to a yoop comment where he stated you only need to look at the strengths on scouting reports and not the weaknesses because they are written only a few spotted plays written by scouts.

Now I'm not arguing that yoop may not be onto something there as I see report after report of Tyler Johnson from MN having poor hands because of one poor game against South Dakota State (he has amazing hands actually).

But I just wanted to point to him that his statement of you can't look at the weaknesses of a scouting report made zero sense because for the 6 months he has only touted the weaknesses of MVS and EQSB and how they can't run routes and be on the same page as Rodgers. So I found it funny how we would be looking for a player who has the same route running concerns when we know we have a quarterback who is ultra picky about where his players are at on the route tree.

I wouldn't touch Shenault before 62. I would take Shenault at 62 begrudgingly if guys like Aiyuck are still on the board.

Basically I would not want Shenault Round 1. I would want Aiyuck before Shenault. I would want Shenault before Claypool. And probably Shenault before Pittman.

I also feel like a guy like Reagor or Aiyuk could do the same jet sweeps and creative plays that Shenault could do because of their play speed and feet while at the same time having perceivably a better route running ability. The only thing Shenault brings is the ability of being a "running back".

I don't think it is wrong for me to be a bit gun shy though when by and large Cobb and Montgomery were those and we maybe got 2 years of quality play out of those investments.

[go pak go]

Michael Pittman is so much better than Higgins. His speed is no joke.

I actually was in love with drafting Pittman before the combine because most mocks I saw him were largely Day 3. Now he's probably a top 2 round guy. I just don't think it makes sense for us to get another "that type" for that high of compensation.

[go pak go]

Van Jefferson is a guy I like, totally. Precise route runner, good ball awareness, will help the team. But comparing these two on a "would you rather" is absolutely silly. They're nothing alike. Jefferson looked slower on tape and also wasn't/won't be able to run before the draft, and Jefferson is never going to be asked to line up in the backfield and sometimes carry the ball. He won't be as physical, either, as a blocker or a runner.

Maybe it's because I watched MM for 10+ years and MLF can do way more. But I just have a hard time getting excited about a WR occasionally being able to run the ball.

We were so excited about Randle Cobb and Ty Montgomery getting to do that and what did we get? A below-average RB running the ball. It didn't do anything for us. Our running attack was night and day after we went from Montgomery/Starks to Williams/Jones and we all knew it. If you're going to run the ball, give the ball to a running back.

Now what does make me excited are players who are lined up in the running back position who can actually run a good route, track the ball well, and make a good down-the-field catch because those are tall asks for RBs. I can see an advantage there but that's why I am inclined to more of the Antonio Gibson types.

I guess my point is I don't value the "swiss army knife" to the level you do for a WR who can be lined up anywhere.

[YoHoChecko]

I wouldn't touch Shenault before 62. I would take Shenault at 62 begrudgingly if guys like Aiyuck are still on the board.

Basically I would not want Shenault Round 1. I would want Aiyuck before Shenault. I would want Shenault before Claypool. And probably Shenault before Pittman.

I also feel like a guy like Reagor or Aiyuk could do the same jet sweeps and creative plays that Shenault could do because of their play speed and feet while at the same time having perceivably a better route running ability. The only thing Shenault brings is the ability of being a "running back".

Yeah, in another thread, I mentioned trading back from 30 to 45-50 to put us in a good range for Shenault, Reagor, and Ayiuk. That's where I like all three. I LOVED Shenault before his injury lingered throughout the season and his inability to work out left too many unanswered questions. TheSkeptic back in January told me he was going to go way too high for us at 30. I seriously doubt he goes in the first round now. Justin Jefferson, probably Mims, possibly Ayiuk and Reagor... they've all likely passed him.

But we seem to be close to agreement on where those guys should go... and that those guys can all be great gets for our system.

[go pak go]

I wouldn't touch Shenault before 62. I would take Shenault at 62 begrudgingly if guys like Aiyuck are still on the board.

Basically I would not want Shenault Round 1. I would want Aiyuck before Shenault. I would want Shenault before Claypool. And probably Shenault before Pittman.

I also feel like a guy like Reagor or Aiyuk could do the same jet sweeps and creative plays that Shenault could do because of their play speed and feet while at the same time having perceivably a better route running ability. The only thing Shenault brings is the ability of being a "running back".

Yeah, in another thread, I mentioned trading back from 30 to 45-50 to put us in a good range for Shenault, Reagor, and Ayiuk. That's where I like all three. I LOVED Shenault before his injury lingered throughout the season and his inability to work out left too many unanswered questions. TheSkeptic back in January told me he was going to go way too high for us at 30. I seriously doubt he goes in the first round now. Justin Jefferson, probably Mims, possibly Ayiuk and Reagor... they've all likely passed him.

But we seem to be close to agreement on where those guys should go... and that those guys can all be great gets for our system.

I think for the most part yes. Ultimately you and I would probably make to close the same decision. Except I think you would be ranting and celebrating on Day 2 of Draft Day where I would be a bit more bummed because it was our last option. So the result would probably be the same. The emotion would vary a little.

[bud fox]

Michael Pittman is so much better than Higgins. His speed is no joke.

I actually was in love with drafting Pittman before the combine because most mocks I saw him were largely Day 3. Now he's probably a top 2 round guy. I just don't think it makes sense for us to get another "that type" for that high of compensation.

I don't see what people are seeing wrong with Higgins tape.

I haven't seen the combine numbers but his tape looks better than Pittman and I like Pittman.

[YoHoChecko]

Michael Pittman is so much better than Higgins. His speed is no joke.

I actually was in love with drafting Pittman before the combine because most mocks I saw him were largely Day 3. Now he's probably a top 2 round guy. I just don't think it makes sense for us to get another "that type" for that high of compensation.

I don't see what people are seeing wrong with Higgins tape.

I haven't seen the combine numbers but his tape looks better than Pittman and I like Pittman.

You haven't seen the combine numbers because Higgins didn't work out. So it's tough to compare. And we didn't say Higgins' tape was BAD, we just said Pittman's was better.

[go pak go]

Higgins did do a Pro Day and his 40 was better than was I expecting. It was in the mid 4.5's.

[YoHoChecko]

Higgins did do a Pro Day and his 40 was better than was I expecting. It was in the mid 4.5's.

I thought all pro days were canceled! It's good that he got one in. That's about what I was expecting, really; 4.55 - 4.6ish.

M.Pittman: 4.52 40, 4.14 ss, 36.5" vert, 10-yard split: 1.61
T. Higgins: 4.54 40, 4.53 ss, 31" vert, 10-yard split: 1.66


So, Pittman ran his 40 a hair faster, and depending on the source, had a c.o.d short shuttle that was faster by a range of 0.11 to 0.39 faster, had a vertical jump that was 5.5 inches taller, was just as productive on the field this year (more catches, more yards, a couple fewer TDs).

They're the same height, Pittman is heavier and slightly faster, while Higgins has longer arms. They both have great body control and ball skills. Pittman is more agile.

[bud fox]

Higgins looks more agile (quicker feet) on tape than Pittman. Also uses his body better. Pittman moves heavy whilst Higgins has lighter feet.
Just my observations guess we will just have to wait and see.

[YoHoChecko]

But we seem to be close to agreement on where those guys should go... and that those guys can all be great gets for our system.

I think for the most part yes. Ultimately you and I would probably make to close the same decision. Except I think you would be ranting and celebrating on Day 2 of Draft Day where I would be a bit more bummed because it was our last option. So the result would probably be the same. The emotion would vary a little.

I'll tell ya what I would be STOKED about and you would, too.

Trade back to 40/45, take Jalen Reagor, then use the extra pick in the 4th to grab Antonio Gibson.

[go pak go]

But we seem to be close to agreement on where those guys should go... and that those guys can all be great gets for our system.

I think for the most part yes. Ultimately you and I would probably make to close the same decision. Except I think you would be ranting and celebrating on Day 2 of Draft Day where I would be a bit more bummed because it was our last option. So the result would probably be the same. The emotion would vary a little.

I'll tell ya what I would be STOKED about and you would, too.

Trade back to 40/45, take Jalen Reagor, then use the extra pick in the 4th to grab Antonio Gibson.

Oh. Trading back and getting Reagor....absolutely I would be stoked.

[Yoop]

My post about the strengths and weaknesses between Shenault and MVS was NOTHING about comapring Shenault and MVS.

I mean they couldn't be anymore of a different player. That post was strictly responding to a yoop comment where he stated you only need to look at the strengths on scouting reports and not the weaknesses because they are written only a few spotted plays written by scouts.

Now I'm not arguing that yoop may not be onto something there as I see report after report of Tyler Johnson from MN having poor hands because of one poor game against South Dakota State (he has amazing hands actually).

But I just wanted to point to him that his statement of you can't look at the weaknesses of a scouting report made zero sense because for the 6 months he has only touted the weaknesses of MVS and EQSB and how they can't run routes and be on the same page as Rodgers. So I found it funny how we would be looking for a player who has the same route running concerns when we know we have a quarterback who is ultra picky about where his players are at on the route tree.

I wouldn't touch Shenault before 62. I would take Shenault at 62 begrudgingly if guys like Aiyuck are still on the board.

Basically I would not want Shenault Round 1. I would want Aiyuck before Shenault. I would want Shenault before Claypool. And probably Shenault before Pittman.

I also feel like a guy like Reagor or Aiyuk could do the same jet sweeps and creative plays that Shenault could do because of their play speed and feet while at the same time having perceivably a better route running ability. The only thing Shenault brings is the ability of being a "running back".

I don't think it is wrong for me to be a bit gun shy though when by and large Cobb and Montgomery were those and we maybe got 2 years of quality play out of those investments.

I have my doubts that Shenault, Reager, Ayuik will be around after about slot 50, Yoho is spot on with Shenault, if a GM is OK with him physically he could easily go mid 20's, right with Jefferson.

you really play down what Cobb was for this team, and how many games he won for us, it doesn't mean as much about total yards, it's what those yards accomplish that matters, I'am giving ya gems her boy and your just not listening
all we talk about is getting a guy that can do more then just run, or that can catch, or more of what Aaron Jones was able to do last year, and Shenault is as close to that guy as we could probably hope for, but thats not good enough for you.

and I said I pay more attention to the positive reviews about players because over the long haul of doing this stuff it is my opinion that the people doing the reviews spend more time writing up the positive aspects of a player then they do the negatives which often are simply down grades of the positives they just finished writing about.

as to montgomery, injury riddled rookie season curtailed what looked like a promising career, and Cobb was a bit small and couldn't hold up to the punishment, Laviska is bigger and a more accomplished runner then either of the two anyway.

[go pak go]

I guess I'm confused because I have heard the last 7 months that the Packers have had only JAGS behind Adams for the last 4 years and how much of a disservice the GM provided to the Packers for not making WR a priority.

So I just thought we should try and get WRs who are different than Cobb and Monty.

Now I'm hearing Cobb and Montgomery were actually good talents and both were on the team in 2018. So I guess I'm just confused what to think anymore about our WRs up to this point and what we should be looking for.

[Yoop]

I guess I'm confused because I have heard the last 7 months that the Packers have had only JAGS behind Adams for the last 4 years and how much of a disservice the GM provided to the Packers for not making WR a priority.

So I just thought we should try and get WRs who are different than Cobb and Monty.

Now I'm hearing Cobb and Montgomery were actually good talents and both were on the team in 2018. So I guess I'm just confused what to think anymore about our WRs up to this point and what we should be looking for.

well I don't mean to confuse, obviously I also want the best WR we can get, Juedy would make me do hand stands, but Yoho makes a great point, of all the receivers that will be available at slot 30 or later, Shenault might be the most ready to contribute because he does more then most receivers, RB's are a very quick transition.

can you imagine the night mare it is to defend a backfield of Jones and Shenault, both are great runners as well as receivers.


this will be a interesting draft, GM's will have to rely more on scouting reviews taken last year, and thats about it, no pro days, or even private workouts, getten real old school now