Packers Huddle

I don’t know, new DC, but we love playing 3 safeties.

All of them would be physical enough to play on the box, can man the slot and play deep. 3 amazing chess pieces.


I would absolutely love another quality safety, that said, I don’t love Moehrig as much as I love the idea of him.

I really really Minkah Fitzpatrick when he was traded to Pittsburgh, did not want to give up what the Steelers, but add a guy like that, this D will be next level.

All you need for Thursday night.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 10:35

I don’t know, new DC, but we love playing 3 safeties.

All of them would be physical enough to play on the box, can man the slot and play deep. 3 amazing chess pieces.


I would absolutely love another quality safety, that said, I don’t love Moehrig as much as I love the idea of him.

I really really Minkah Fitzpatrick when he was traded to Pittsburgh, did not want to give up what the Steelers, but add a guy like that, this D will be next level.

Playing 3 safeties was.... not good? Also, like you just said: new DC. Last year's trends are worthless for comparison. We should not draft based on the previous DC's trends and preferences.

A DC coming from a team that used dime half as much as we did. We used dime 50% of our snaps. It was TERRIBLE. It's a big part in why we fired our DC, most likely. He kept putting Will Redmond on the field. The answer isn't "we need a better 3rd safety." The answer is "hey, why are you playing half the game with 3 safeties."

That's why our run defense stunk. We certainly didn't make up for it by being really good against pass-catching RBs, who ostensibly should be more contained by a safety in a dime than a linebacker, but according to Sharp analytics, it was perhaps our worst aspect of defense.

You draft a 3rd safety, sure, we'll play lots of 3-safety defense and the WRs we face will pick on our CBs... again. You draft a good CB and you can play regular old defense a whole heck of a lot better.

Stop playing dime. It is not the answer. Don't draft for dime defense. No one, ever, will or should run dime defense as much as we did last year.

I frankly like the idea of playing 3 safeties more than I do 2 LBs. But they gotta be physical safeties.

And yes, you throw out Will Redmond and Raven Greene as safety #3, what do you think will happen? Get someone decent and I think the flexibility and speed you could have as your base D could be revolutionary.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 10:44

I frankly like the idea of playing 3 safeties more than I do 2 LBs. But they gotta be physical safeties.

And yes, you throw out Will Redmond and Raven Greene as safety #3, what do you think will happen? Get someone decent and I think the flexibility and speed you could have as your base D could be revolutionary.

Ok, or or or.... hear me out.

Get a Cornerback who can consistently play well opposite Jaire.

Look, it's just a thought.


I'm fine with 3 safeties if one of the safeties is primarily the slot defender we need--meaning actually capable of covering the slot WRs, which requires insane change of direction ability, which usually is what you sacrifice when going from CB to S. If that's the case, I don't care what his college position label was--a guy who can man our slot position better than Sullivan and actually be a playmaker there is fine.

But... I don't love Savage going there and potentially making two positions worse, so get a guy who can play the nickel defender role and getting a guy that can play outside are both on my priority list., If the nickel defender used to go by "safety," sure. But dime is a terrible defensive personnel unless there are 4-5 WRs on the field or it's 3rd/4th and long.

It's so dumb how much we used it. It'd be one thing if we had this really great defensive scheme, but the personnel held us back. But we didn't. We fired the defensive schemer. And look, he had some positives and I like him just fine, but when the head coach explicitly says "I want our defense to be more aggressive and the DC is like "yeah, 6 DBs, assuring a below-average run D full of players who don't tackle well should do it" then you move away from that guy/scheme.

Sure, put a gun to my head right now, I'll take an elite CB or an elite S, just even on a generic roster, not even considering our current makeup which makes it more.

But I don't wanna pass on Nick Collins to take Kevin King and I would be really excited to add a safety to this defense, personally.

But of course in a perfect world, another Jaire caliber CB happens to be on the board for our pick or even a small trade up.

And I'm not saying there's NEVER a reason to play 3 safeties. If you're in a split safety look--especially with man under--and the offense is in 21 and instead of having 3 CBs and a LB to cover 2 WRs and 2 TEs you want to put some matchup players on the field to avoid a TE mismatch against a CB, go for it. Throw that 3rd safety in the game.

But if you're playing dime against 3 WR sets on the regs (and we were), like, maybe take that down a notch.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 09:27

If we wind up taking Moehrig I'll get it; I'll talk myself into it. It will work out, and long term, we'll be in good shape.

But UGH god, just take CBs to play CB. There are plenty of them. We don't need to be too creative here. We have good safeties and need good CBs. So just do the thing that needs to be done and move on.

teams have to play a lot of 5 DB coverage, there is a shortage of 4 dn lbers, and they use safety's because they are normally better tacklers, have you forgotten all the platooning we did with Hayward and Hyde, Hayward was simply to small to play in the box, and Hyde was to slow to react in box coverage.

there are a couple of big corners in this class that might work as a STAR defender, I know you love speed at FS, but some of the best FS where/are no faster the 4.5 which is about what Moehrig runs, the goal I think is to do less platooning with the ability to move the main 11 guys around, the 3 safety scheme makes that easier to do imho.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 11:05

Sure, put a gun to my head right now, I'll take an elite CB or an elite S, just even on a generic roster, not even considering our current makeup which makes it more.

But I don't wanna pass on Nick Collins to take Kevin King and I would be really excited to add a safety to this defense, personally.

But of course in a perfect world, another Jaire caliber CB happens to be on the board for our pick or even a small trade up.

Gun to the head is not a good thing to say these days

sure, this all depends how this first round plays out, if one of the top corners drops or maybe one of the lbers then ya have to consider the positives they bring to our defense too, but if there all gone as I expect and we want to go defense, well then Moehrig imo would be a good choice.

Trying to come up with some trade options, mostly centered around the 1st round pick. Gutey has traded in the 1st round every year and I think he could again this year. I used both trade charts to come up with options.

I think trading down will be difficult this year as NO and Balt could both look into doing it as well. A lot of competition around our selection and there probably isn't a QB that is likely to be wanted there.

Trade up scenarios...
GB gets 1.21
Indy gets 1.29 + both 4th rounders.

GB gets 1.16
Ari get 1.29 + 2.62 + 4.135 (may have to throw in another 4th or 5th)
*Big jump up, would have to be for some significant.

GB gets 1.27
Balt gets 1.29 + 4.135 + 6th rounder

GB gets 2.56
Sea gets 2.62 + 4th rounder

Trade down scenarios...
GB gets 2.33 +4.106
Jax gets 1.29 + 5th rounder
*Jax has a lower 4th too that we could work a deal with

GB gets 2.35 + 4.108 + low 5th or high 6th rounder
Atl gets 1.29

GB gets 2.46 + 3.96 +4.120 + 5.177
NE gets 1.29 + 6.214
*This is obviously a big jump back. But would give us a lot of ammo to jump back up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

GB gets 4.135 + 6th rounder
Se gets 4.129
*I fully expect to do some deal with Seattle. We have a history and Seattle needs picks.

Hard to predict other trades later on, but they'll happen. I expect us to make 3 or 4 trades this year.

paco wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 11:33

GB gets 4.135 + 6th rounder
Se gets 4.129
*I fully expect to do some deal with Seattle. We have a history and Seattle needs picks.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 12:09

paco wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 11:33

GB gets 4.135 + 6th rounder
Se gets 4.129
*I fully expect to do some deal with Seattle. We have a history and Seattle needs picks.

yeah, those should be reversed obviously.

BF004 wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 12:09

paco wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 11:33

GB gets 4.135 + 6th rounder
Se gets 4.129
*I fully expect to do some deal with Seattle. We have a history and Seattle needs picks.

I don't know what you're talking about. I love that trade!!!

Thanks [mention]paco[/mention], I do enjoy looking around and seeing how has draft capital that is compatible with moves for us; just handy in a pinch to think about.

One thing I like to look at is how far each pick can move us up in the first round.

Like 29 + 62 gets us to about pick 17 or 18 (LV and MIA)

29 + 92 gets us to about 22 or 23 (TEN and NYJ)

and 29 + 135 gets us to about 27 (BAL)

Obviously, if there's some in-demand asset dropping and there's a bidding war to move up, it costs a bit more. If there's some team desperate to move down and increase their draft capital and no one is biting, you could maybe get a bargain. And the charts are guidelines, not rules-but guidelines most teams use, including us. So it's a good starting point.

paco wrote: ↑

22 Apr 2021 11:33

GB gets 2.46 + 3.96 +4.120 + 5.177
NE gets 1.29 + 6.214
*This is obviously a big jump back. But would give us a lot of ammo to jump back up in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

Assuming we miss out on Greg Newsome, Zaven Collins, Rashod Bateman, and maybe Elijah Moore before 29... this trade is my dream scenario.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

21 Apr 2021 09:50

I mean, everyone expected Smith to be like 168-170 from what I could tell, so his isn't far off.

Atwell was listed at 190, which everyone knew was a lie; some went off of his first year or two at Louisville listing at 175. But most expected/predicted around 160. Recently reported to be 155. And then confirmed weight even 5 pounds lower below 150? Yikes. You can at least find guys Smith's size playing in the NFL. Atwell? He's useless to me at the next level. Totally off my board. (This has been true). Smith? He can still be Isaac Bruce (a great player comp for him I recently heard and really like) or Marvin Harrison, even if he's a little lighter.

the Slim Reaper I saw this article on Yahoo, he does so much very well, I think they have him slotted about right, early teens.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/2021-nfl-d ... 27375.html

My Zaven Collins draft crush is peaking today. Seems unrealistic, so I hope it's fleeting.

from Warren Sharp, what are the safest positions to draft, based on 5th year options exercised ?

https://twitter.com/SharpFootball/statu ... 3343339521

top "hit" rates:

TE: 100%
DB: 70%
OT: 68%
C: 67%
DT: 67%
LB: 61%
QB: 55%
DE: 55%
WR: 54%
OG: 45%
RB: 44%
.

PFF mock draft I really liked, traded up actually twice.

29
Greg Newsome II CB • Northwestern

Trade
Received
42
201
Received
62
92

42
Jamin Davis LB • Kentucky

98
Josh Palmer WR • Tennessee

Trade
Received
98
Received
135
173
256

142
Kendrick Green G • Illinois

178
Khalil Herbert HB • Virginia Tech

201
Bryce Thompson CB • Tennessee

214
Chauncey Golston ED • Iowa

220
Mark Gilbert CB • Duke



Dug more into Josh Palmer, thought I liked him, but I really really do. Gotta dig more on him, but that might be my Terry McLaurin, Jarvis Landry style draft crush this year.

While I don't follow Breer too closely anymore, there has been a lot of talk about Jamin as of late being a 1st rounder. But this is the first I've seen someone mention top 20.