Packers Huddle

NCF wrote: ↑

22 Jan 2023 12:57

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023 13:35

1st round TEs are just bad positional value for a 1st round pick. Looking at all the best TEs we have seen over the years they are rarely 1st round picks. In fact they’re more likely to bust.

You have done a lot of scouting. Why is that? Why aren’t these guys more predictable in the NFL. I generally think it is more scheme fit than talent, but plenty of guys seem to end up in good situations and still don’t produce. I still think it is such a transformational position to an offense that it should be valued higher.

100% agree. I don't think many offenses these days appreciate a TE or scheme with the TE in mind. Instead they are simply an extra blocker with some pass catching ability. In my opinion the TE can be transformational as you say. Mark Andrews, Travis Kelce, George Kittle, and T.J. Hockenson are probably the concensus top TEs right now.

Andrews:
Height: 6051
Weight: 256
40 Yard Dash (ET): 4.58
40 Yard Dash (HH): 4.65
20 Yard (ET): 2.75
20 Yard (HH): 2.63
10 Yard (ET): 1.54
10 Yard (HH): 1.66
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 17
Vertical Jump: 31
Broad Jump: 09'05"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.38
3-Cone Drill: 7.34

Hockenson:
Height: 6045
Weight: 251
40 Yard Dash (ET): 4.70
40 Yard Dash (HH): 4.70
20 Yard (ET): 2.75
20 Yard (HH): 2.72
10 Yard (ET): 1.63
10 Yard (HH): 1.66
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 17
Vertical Jump: 37 1/2
Broad Jump: 10'03"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.18
3-Cone Drill: 7.02

Kelce:
Height: 6047
Weight: 255
40 Yrd Dash: 4.61
20 Yrd Dash: 2.72
10 Yrd Dash: 1.61
225 Lb. Bench Reps:
Vertical Jump: 35
Broad Jump: 10'04"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.42
3-Cone Drill: 7.09

Kittle:
Height: 6036
Weight: 247
40 Yard Dash (ET): 4.52
40 Yard Dash (HH): 4.51
20 Yard (ET): 2.65
20 Yard (HH): 2.52
10 Yard (ET): 1.59
10 Yard (HH): 1.55
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 18
Vertical Jump: 35
Broad Jump: 11'00"
20 Yrd Shuttle:
3-Cone Drill: 7.00

Just as a comparison this is Tonyan:
Height: 6045
Weight: 236
40 Yrd Dash: 4.58
20 Yrd Dash: 2.60
10 Yrd Dash: 1.53
225 Lb. Bench Reps: 16
Vertical Jump: 35
Broad Jump: 10'05"
20 Yrd Shuttle: 4.34
3-Cone Drill: 7.12

NCF wrote: ↑

22 Jan 2023 12:57

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023 13:35

1st round TEs are just bad positional value for a 1st round pick. Looking at all the best TEs we have seen over the years they are rarely 1st round picks. In fact they’re more likely to bust.

You have done a lot of scouting. Why is that? Why aren’t these guys more predictable in the NFL. I generally think it is more scheme fit than talent, but plenty of guys seem to end up in good situations and still don’t produce. I still think it is such a transformational position to an offense that it should be valued higher.

TE to me is the slowest developing position in the NFL because they’re required to learn so many skills. You also have to consider a lot of college TEs we’re just big high school WRs so blocking is almost always under developed.

It’s also a huge mental position. Typically it’s their job to read the zones and find the soft spot. Catches are often difficult because the speed of the NFL defenders means they’re always making contested catches.

It is a lot of fit too though like you said. Evan Engram was an awful fit for the Giants but Pederson knows how to use his TEs like when he had Ertz and that other TE whose name escapes me and played for the Bears. The Patriots made a living using two tight end sets with Gronk and Hernandead.

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2022 15:02

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

07 Nov 2022 14:47

If it were my decision, Love would start every remaining game.

I mean, we are 3-6 and SF is currently sitting at 4-4 in the 7 seed. 100% we are still going to be trying to win games. You really don't get better by benching the back to back, reigning MVP.

Excuuuuuuse me!

Man, did TDN screw up their site. Completely unreadable.

NCF wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2023 16:02

Man, did TDN screw up their site. Completely unreadable.

https://thedraftnetwork.com/big-board/tdn100-2/

Talk now on compensation for Rodgers. Media folks are speculating if 2 1st rounders are enough... I say more than enough. I would honestly take 1.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2023 16:07

NCF wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2023 16:02

Man, did TDN screw up their site. Completely unreadable.

https://thedraftnetwork.com/big-board/tdn100-2/

Yeah, I found that. It's still terrible. Doesn't copy/paste nicely. Some of the colleges I don't even know because they use the mascot instead of the campus. Just seems more and more, these sites are catering to the endless coverage of the top prospects and to hell with the rest.

IF Rodgers really wants a trade, I could see all his talk of retirement to be just part of that plan. The more he talks about how he may be done, or may only play another year or what not, the less teams will give up to get him. He knows this and probably doesnt want his new team to have to give up all their picks or good players.

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 08:23

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2023 16:07

NCF wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2023 16:02

Man, did TDN screw up their site. Completely unreadable.

https://thedraftnetwork.com/big-board/tdn100-2/

Yeah, I found that. It's still terrible. Doesn't copy/paste nicely. Some of the colleges I don't even know because they use the mascot instead of the campus. Just seems more and more, these sites are catering to the endless coverage of the top prospects and to hell with the rest.

Ya, that they do the mascot instead of the school is just stupid. I will keep this updated periodically, with other sites too:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

Drj820 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 08:25

IF Rodgers really wants a trade, I could see all his talk of retirement to be just part of that plan. The more he talks about how he may be done, or may only play another year or what not, the less teams will give up to get him. He knows this and probably doesnt want his new team to have to give up all their picks or good players.

At this point (end of January) the only “posturing” that Rodgers is doing is claiming that the Pack might or might not want to roll with him. At this point, he is willing to return to the Pack and the Pack has clearly informed that they want him to return. If anything else develops, we’ll find out soon enough.

5 and 2 7s for compensatory picks is the speculation this year.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 12:17

5 and 2 7s for compensatory picks is the speculation this year.

The beauty of having all those 7th rounders is that it gives you a chance to land some of the priority UDFAs that wouldn't normally pick Green Bay
Last year GB did that with Jonathan Ford - his draft grade was "UDFA" - but the Packers knew he'd never choose Titletown so they used a 7th to snag him. GB likes to find these 7th round/UDFA types with (1) outstanding feature.

Super tall, super fast, super strong, elite hands or elite feet. Something exceptional
These UDFAs all have holes in their game, but have at least one exploitable characteristic
( as opposed to an all- around guy who doesn't excel at anything)

BSA wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 18:29

The beauty of having all those 7th rounders is that it gives you a chance to land some of the priority UDFAs that wouldn't normally pick Green Bay
Last year GB did that with Jonathan Ford - his draft grade was "UDFA" - but the Packers knew he'd never choose Titletown so they used a 7th to snag him. GB likes to find these 7th round/UDFA types with (1) outstanding feature.

Super tall, super fast, super strong, elite hands or elite feet. Something exceptional
These UDFAs all have holes in their game, but have at least one exploitable characteristic
( as opposed to an all- around guy who doesn't excel at anything)

Blessing and a curse though, gotta carry them on the 53 if you really like them and they’re not ready. Could be a lot of roster spaces needed for maybe futures rosters.

BF004 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 19:13

gotta carry them on the 53 if you really like them and their not ready.

I think that's what has happened a couple of times already - another team comes calling and GB moved em up from PS to 53 to protect em
I think that's a good thing though , it means they're deemed worthy of investment by both the Packers and another NFL team

BF004 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 19:13

BSA wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 18:29

The beauty of having all those 7th rounders is that it gives you a chance to land some of the priority UDFAs that wouldn't normally pick Green Bay
Last year GB did that with Jonathan Ford - his draft grade was "UDFA" - but the Packers knew he'd never choose Titletown so they used a 7th to snag him. GB likes to find these 7th round/UDFA types with (1) outstanding feature.

Super tall, super fast, super strong, elite hands or elite feet. Something exceptional
These UDFAs all have holes in their game, but have at least one exploitable characteristic
( as opposed to an all- around guy who doesn't excel at anything)

Blessing and a curse though, gotta carry them on the 53 if you really like them and their not ready. Could be a lot of roster spaces needed for maybe futures rosters.

Not necessarily. If you cut them late in camp teams will fall in love with their own guys. Unless they absolutely love the player you can sneak them into a practice squad.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2023 08:01

Talk now on compensation for Rodgers. Media folks are speculating if 2 1st rounders are enough... I say more than enough. I would honestly take 1.

Only way I could see a team giving two 1s is if they were truly very desperate.

Raiders? Hahaha.

A 1st and a lower pick are more like it.

Should a trade take place, I’d expect value similar to Davante Adams, however that might look.

Some of the value might be 2024 or 2025 conditional on Aaron playing.

BF004 wrote: ↑

25 Jan 2023 12:25

Should a trade take place, I’d expect value similar to Davante Adams, however that might look.

Some of the value might be 2024 or 2025 conditional on Aaron playing.

I imagine it being a 1st this year and a conditional 1st next depending whether he plays and how the team performs.

Idc if it’s the Bears or Lions offering the most for him. You take the best deal available. Who cares about PR? Get what is going to help you best rebuild this team.

I wouldn’t be opposed to maybe working out something where say you trade him to the Colts and we swap 1sts and get more compensation next season. That could be a great way to get a strong pass rusher and move on from this bad Preston Smith deal.

I keep hearing people mention the Colts. They do go after QBs, for sure. But who in the heck thinks that Rodgers would approve that? I don’t see it at all.