Packers Huddle

.
Andy Herman comments on the Packers 2024 draft:

"Your goal in each draft is to get a stud (Edge Cooper) two good starters (Williams & Bullard) and a solid rotational player (Morgan).
If you can come out of every draft with that you’ve done amazing. Anything else is gravy. Draft position be damned.
And there’s still a ton of upside on the entire draft class. (Well maybe not for Pratt) But still - well done by Gute"

BSA wrote: ↑

18 Dec 2024 19:46

.
Andy Herman comments on the Packers 2024 draft:

"Your goal in each draft is to get a stud (Edge Cooper) two good starters (Williams & Bullard) and a solid rotational player (Morgan).
If you can come out of every draft with that you’ve done amazing. Anything else is gravy. Draft position be damned.
And there’s still a ton of upside on the entire draft class. (Well maybe not for Pratt) But still - well done by Gute"

For as bad as Gute sucked in the 2021 draft...he is absolutely killing the 2022, 2023, and 2024 draft.

go pak go wrote: ↑

18 Dec 2024 20:30

BSA wrote: ↑

18 Dec 2024 19:46

.
Andy Herman comments on the Packers 2024 draft:

"Your goal in each draft is to get a stud (Edge Cooper) two good starters (Williams & Bullard) and a solid rotational player (Morgan).
If you can come out of every draft with that you’ve done amazing. Anything else is gravy. Draft position be damned.
And there’s still a ton of upside on the entire draft class. (Well maybe not for Pratt) But still - well done by Gute"

For as bad as Gute sucked in the 2021 draft...he is absolutely killing the 2022, 2023, and 2024 draft.

Hitting on consecutive drafts combined with hitting on your top money FAs and finding your QB is a thing that can set up a franchise for a long SB window. One more good offseason and sky is the limit.

.
When I listen to Hafley and MLF, it leads me to believe they like CB Valentine more than the fan base does
Valentine is young and needs reps, and he's getting them. ( 362 snaps so far).

IF he can be a starter- then you've got Jaire and Valentine outside with Nixon and Bullard handling slot snaps. The Packers will surely draft a CB or 2, but that's already a decent CB room. Add some competition. I'll be curious to see if Halfey wants a bigger/longer CB for his Cover-3 calls.
Dick Sherman at 6'3 was the prototype for that system and there are several CBs with length in the '25 draft

For fun, I looked up some PFF coverage grades, not that I necessarily trust PFF mind you:

Alexander = 78.3 (14th of 216)
Valentine = 66.5 (64th)
Nixon = 63.9 (83rd)
Stokes = 58.8 (131st)
Ballentine = 50.4 (171st)

Kevin King = 80.5 (7th)
Rasul Douglas = 59.2 (128th)
Shemar Jean-Charles = 58.2 (135th)

McKinney = 90.6 (2nd of 161)
Williams= 72.1 (19th)
Bullard = 48.6 (132nd)

Right now the Packers do not have many holes. A top CB can be found in any round and I would hope they take 3 of them. A top Olineman is similar and the sweet spot is the 4th round. I would hope they take a guard and a center.

Maybe spend a 7th on a long snapper.

So far I think the two Texas boys are my early draft crushes.

Jahde Barron is my current favorite. Just a physical DB who can play all positions. Sounds like people like him most as a slot corner in the league but he also played outside in 2024 and had great production. I am very attracted to his slot ability.

Alfred Collins has exploded in the scene this year. Dude just looks like a monster and moves well inside as well.

Both guys are currently in that 30 - 60 range. We will see how that holds but the players look awesome and it absolutely fits a need.

Going into next year the Packers absolutely need to look into getting 2 CBs. One that needs to start and one to develop.

After that they really only need a C if Monk doesn’t develop. I still think the best move is to play Tom at C and Morgan at RT but I know some are completely against that because Tom is an established RT. That guy would be a god at C with his movement ability.

When you are for some reason reminded the Packers last had the 1st overall pick in 1959...


I've been a fan since 1997, and the highest pick we've had was no. 5 (AJ Hawk), and we've picked in top 10 only thrice (Jamal Reynolds, Raji)... No wonder I haven't had many mock draft hits...

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

28 Dec 2024 14:39

Going into next year the Packers absolutely need to look into getting 2 CBs. One that needs to start and one to develop.

After that they really only need a C if Monk doesn’t develop. I still think the best move is to play Tom at C and Morgan at RT but I know some are completely against that because Tom is an established RT. That guy would be a god at C with his movement ability.

I think it's very possible the developmental CB is already on the roster.

Bogey wrote: ↑

03 May 2024 12:42

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

03 May 2024 09:19

I did find this: https://packerrvparking.com/

I put in a request to see what their plan is.

That's the only one I know of.

Also try giving Stadium View a call. They have an adjacent lot with RV parking. They sell weekend passes. Good luck

APB wrote: ↑

29 Dec 2024 07:31

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

28 Dec 2024 14:39

Going into next year the Packers absolutely need to look into getting 2 CBs. One that needs to start and one to develop.

After that they really only need a C if Monk doesn’t develop. I still think the best move is to play Tom at C and Morgan at RT but I know some are completely against that because Tom is an established RT. That guy would be a god at C with his movement ability.

I think it's very possible the developmental CB is already on the roster.

I do really like King but I think you want to create competition. I actually love him as a nickel or dime because of how physical he is against the run.

Can’t move on from Ja unless you get a good trade offer for him. $20M in dead cap isn’t worth moving on for nothing IMO. Stokes has played better but his injury history plus inconsistent play isn’t worth it. Nixon is fine but he’s aging and his value as a returner isn’t the same. Valentine is also fine but kind of dumb and idk if you can ever trust him as an every down guy.

You bring in 2 CBs for sure in this draft. Gutenbumst has really proved when there is a weakness he is going to attack it and CB is the most unstable position we have due to injury. For all his flaws and making some of the dumbest GM decisions in the Rodgers championship era he has really come through in the Love one.

Getting an early round CB seems logical.

I want to improve at the WR position. I think right now its overrated. Wicks isn't a natural pass catcher and will eventually burn our ass. Looks like Davante coming off the line and cutting but after that its downhill. Watson could stub his toe at any given time and miss half the season even if his Hammy's are good. Reed is a nice slot, gadget/ jet sweep receiver who drops too many, but he is a more gifted ball catcher than Wicks. Doubs is a good #2. Bo Melton has a nice 40 time. That's about it. I am a bit cynical but my opinion is different than a year ago concerning this group of WR's. Maybe another 2nd round WR in the draft?

Would I take Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, James Jones and Randall Cobb in their reasonable prime over this group? Hell yes. IN a heartbeat.

IN fairness to Wicks/Reed, history shows a WR should get 3 years to show/breakout.

Assuming that CB is the weakest spot, what should the Packers do about Stokes? He had a bad injury and he was not the same player after that injury, but if you look at PFF stats, he is improving lately. The full stats are not out for the Vikings game, but Stokes was neither in the top 5 nor the bottom 5.

IMO he is worth keeping if no one else pays him big bucks, which is unlikely. But even if he stays, drafting a CB high is a good idea.

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2024 06:10

Assuming that CB is the weakest spot, what should the Packers do about Stokes? He had a bad injury and he was not the same player after that injury, but if you look at PFF stats, he is improving lately. The full stats are not out for the Vikings game, but Stokes was neither in the top 5 nor the bottom 5.

IMO he is worth keeping if no one else pays him big bucks, which is unlikely. But even if he stays, drafting a CB high is a good idea.

All depends what is happy with Alexander

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2024 06:10

Assuming that CB is the weakest spot, what should the Packers do about Stokes? He had a bad injury and he was not the same player after that injury, but if you look at PFF stats, he is improving lately. The full stats are not out for the Vikings game, but Stokes was neither in the top 5 nor the bottom 5.

IMO he is worth keeping if no one else pays him big bucks, which is unlikely. But even if he stays, drafting a CB high is a good idea.

Honestly evaluating Stokes is above my pay grade, especially with not having access to the all-22.

He's been super invisible as of late, which can be a good thing and a sign he's tight to the WR. Corners who don't get thrown at don't show up on the TV screen. But I can't remember ANY plays where he's tested and outright wins. He had no stats in the Vikes game. Heck, he has ZERO PDs or INTs all season, which is downright mind-boggling.

Clearly he's no playmaker. I doubt he makes bank in FA. I wouldn't be opposed to a non-guaranteed prove-it deal, but that should be just insurance if the other expected investments at the position fail.

salmar80 wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2024 06:34

Heck, he (Stokes) has ZERO PDs or INTs all season, which is downright mind-boggling.

I think Stoke's is really bad at route recognition and identifying receiver route concepts. He's very reactive in his play. You rarely see him challenge a receiver. He'd rather play off and react rather than challenge. Call it being a bad student of the game or poor instincts, Stokes just ain't that playmaker guy.

Compare that to, say, Valentine. Valentine will recognize routes and jump them or he'll see a combination route concept and be proactive/challenge the offense in his coverage. He puts himself in position to make a play rather than waiting for the play to come to him. He's the anti-Stokes. Sure, he'll get beat from time to time but he'll also win more downs than lose.

If it's me, I say adios to Stokes once his contract expires. He's an easily replaceable type player. You don't sign those guys to second contracts. You draft them in rounds 5-7 and hope they develop into something more than what Stoke's has shown.

I'm definitely not in favor of competing with anyone else to give Stokes a contract, but I am in favor of giving him a contract an allowing him to compete with whoever else we bring in to camp next year.

I think we're in need drafting 1-2 in the first 4 rounds and likely a FA DB signing next year. Jaire is great, but it's a trend that he's not on the field year after year it seems and is very expensive. Maybe he's not gone next year, but I don't see him here past that. Nixon is just a guy and one I'd be trying to upgrade, the 'Tines were nice additions but only one is probably starting material if he continues to develop.

If we can't rush the passer we need sticky coverage. Right now we have neither and even with Jaire we need at least 1 or 2 more.

APB wrote: ↑

30 Dec 2024 09:24

If it's me, I say adios to Stokes once his contract expires. He's an easily replaceable type player. You don't sign those guys to second contracts. You draft them in rounds 5-7 and hope they develop into something more than what Stoke's has shown.

Makes sense.
Stokes' potential is hard to let go, Stokes reality isn't

Part of my draft evaluation is looking at the DB coaches on staff. I was a huge fan of Jerry Gray; great DB coach, knew how to teach technique and if you have that teacher on staff, you can look at later round CBs and develop them. Right now GB has Hafley, Ansley and Ryan Downard so I'd think they would be in good shape for developing CBs, Valentine has certainly shown improvement above & beyond his draft status. Nixon too.

If I’m a vetting man we take a CB in the 1st and a WR in the 2nd. I think they will look to add to edge in FA.

This organization has shown they don’t give a shot about offensive players in the first round unless it’s an OT or a QB. I think they’ll want to move on from Jaire sooner than later but with the current group you really just don’t have the bodies to do it.