Packers draft grade

eyecatcher

Member
Member
Messages
1,175
Reaction score
567
http://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/green-bay-packers-2017-nfl-draft-grades-050117

Dieter Kurternbach of FOX Sports: A+. “Yes to everything on this board. They added two of the best secondary players in this draft in the second round, a perfect fit for them in the middle of their line in Montravius Adams in the third round, a high-floor outside linebacker in Vince Biegel and three really good running backs — Aaron Jones could be a stud. Don’t sleep on Malachi Dupre, pick No. 247, either.”
Kurtenbach also gave out individual grades of the Day 2 picks. His grades: Kevin King — B; Josh Jones — A+; Montravius Adams — A.

Chris Burke of SI.com: B+. “The defense was priority No. 1 for GM Ted Thompson, so he delivered CB Kevin King (pick No. 33, after a trade out of Round 1), versatile S Josh Jones (No. 61) and underrated OLB Vince Biegel (No. 108). He also used a third-rounder on DT Montravius Adams (No. 93), which at best is a decent—probably not eye-popping—value and at worst is a throwaway pick. Later, it was the run game on the docket, and the Packers doubled up at the RB spot with Jamaal Williams (No. 134) and Aaron Jones (182). That could be a very good duo alongside Aaron Rodgers. At the bare minimum, they’ll free up Ty Montgomery to roam the scheme more.”
Burke also issued grades for the Day 2 picks. His grades: King — B+; Jones — B; Adams — B.

Mel Kiper Jr. of ESPN Insider: B+. “Overall, Green Bay hit the jackpot with King and got a pass-rusher named after the most famous Packer ever. There’s little not to like.”

Pete Prisco of CBSSports.com: A. “Some general managers seem to always do it right in the draft, and Green Bay’s Ted Thompson is one of those guys. He had another good draft, trading out of the first round and still landing a lot of good players. He took Washington corner Kevin King in the second round, and he will be a big-time player. Second-round safety Josh Jones is a nice player who helps offset the loss of Micah Hyde. I love third-round defensive tackle Montravius Adams. Fourth-round running back Jamaal Williams will be a 1,200-yard rusher in a season at some point in his career.”

Spencer Hall of CBSSports.com graded every pick: King — A+; Jones — B; Adams B+; Vince Biegel — B; Jamaal Williams — A; DeAngelo Yancey — D+; Aaron Jones — C; Kofi Amichia — D; Devante Mays — D; Malachi Dupre — D.

Luke Easterling of Draft Wire: C. “Go ahead and put the Packers’ class in the ‘strange’ column, too. After trading out of the first round, they addressed their needs at corner (Washington’s Kevin King) and linebacker (Wisconsin’s Vince Biegel), but North Carolina State’s Josh Jones felt like a reach they didn’t need in the second round. The Packers took three running backs on Day 3, but didn’t touch the offensive line until the sixth round and reached for their only pass-catcher in fifth round. Auburn’s Montravius Adams was a solid value in the third round to bolster the defensive line, but otherwise, much of this group doesn’t make sense.”

Nate Davis of USAToday.com: A-. “The Pack’s Swiss cheese secondary submarined Super Bowl aspirations in last season’s NFC Championship Game, so GM Ted Thompson spent both second-round picks (lanky CB Kevin King and hard-hitting S Josh Jones) to address it. Fourth-round LB Vince Biegel could get Julius Peppers’ vacated role on passing downs. Jamaal Williams (Round 4) will be a nice option for a running back depth chart in flux.”


The only real outlier is the C grade from Luke Esterling and his analysis on drafting Jones in the second is dead wrong in my opinion. This team needs speed and size in the secondary. They get a little of both with Jones.
 
The only real outlier is the C grade from Luke Esterling and his analysis on drafting Jones in the second is dead wrong in my opinion. This team needs speed and size in the secondary. They get a little of both with Jones.

i agree. jones was an excellent pick. he's as versatile as hyde, but way faster.
 
I would say C+ to B- . Only cause of Jones and Biegel. The rest appear to be just guys at this point. Will see once pads go on. A or A+ is way, way out there...
 
I would say C+ to B- . Only cause of Jones and Biegel. The rest appear to be just guys at this point. Will see once pads go on. A or A+ is way, way out there...

How can you not like King? He is going to be a stud. Biegel he is just a meh pick. I can't see him being a playmaker maybe not even a starter. Jones yeah give him a couple years he should be starting in place of Burnett. Also I think Williams has a good chance to become the teams starting RB in a couple years.
 
in my opinion, the first five picks were all good to excellent. the rest don't really matter that much in the overall grade because the expectations are low for 5th-7th round guys. but i'm willing to bet that at least one of those last five guys (5th to 7th round) ends up being a starter or primary backup eventually. in my mind, that's a good draft.
 
On paper, King and Jones and the first two RB were picks that took advantage of very strong areas of the draft, CB, S and RB. It made sense to make these picks. We didn't grab a legit OG prospect but it was a poor year to begin with and though letting Lang walk will always be an error, it would've compounded the error to overdraft a potential replacement out of need. So we cross our fingers and hope Evans and Barclay just go unnoticed at RG the way Lane Taylor played last year at LG.

Dupre is about as intriguing a 7th round pick as we've had in years, since Charles Johnson.
 
I never grade a draft right after... to be 100% honest you should grade them 3 yrs after the fact. Just me

I can't argue with this statement. About all we can do at this point is see who shows up and has potential when they hit the field in preseason. I've seen guys step it up and become starters on day one, and I've seen guys take 1, 2, & 3 years to develop into NFL level competitors. With others, I watch them disappear into the sunset, unable to be part of the game, because they lack something to get there.

I think the broad range of grades from A to C shows exactly what Mark said. It's all subjective, and in the eye of the person ranking the players on their "personal evaluation" level.

Right now, I'm anxious to see how 2015 & 16 players do when we hit camp. They're the ones that should be showing us something.
 
Back
Top