Sizing up the Packers' draft on the Web

I like this draft class. Seemed very efficient; they didn't get too cute and seemed to take a deliberate approach to addressing needs.
Needed to get better in the front 7 and they took 4 guys; one at each position group in the front 7.
Needed depth this year possible replacements next year and got that in the two olinemen they took. Spriggs could be a steal if he can translate his athletic ability.
Needed more speed at wr and got one.
I would have like a fast 3rd down type back but with only 7 picks you can't have it all and rb is the easiest position to find so not too upset about this
 
A very blah draft.....Spriggs is the only one I feel was a good pick where taken. The rest of these guys are rather plain, average guys who may turn out as the solid guys, but nothing special. Taking Clark in the 1st still baffles me and alot of others, especially with all the guys who were on the board yet. Ted never ceases to surprise in the draft...... Overall maybe a C for this draft.....
 
I give this draft a B. Were there guys that Ted could have taken a risk on that could have give a much bigger impact? Yes but Ted is not known to taking risks. He likes to play it safe. That's what he did in this draft. Very unlikely he got any play makers here but he did help what many was saying was the big weakness on this team and that was adding some quality depth to this team. He added 2 OL one of which could be a starter next year in case Ted decides to move on from some of the guys in FA. Also LB was another area were depth was not good. Right now it's way to early to tell if the guys he took will be anything more then backups but will wait and see. The WR he took was reported to have maybe the best hands in the draft. Sounds like he needs work on his route tree but if he learns it could be a guy with speed which the team needs more of.
 
I am good with this draft except Clark in the first round. I think that will be a mistake. TT continues to not do very well with first round picks. I know some of you will say he picks in the 20's every year but he needs to start hitting much better on these guys. We will see with Clark.
 
I also think we went too much for need in this draft. That usually comes back to bite you later. Just feels like we could have gotten better overall players this draft.
 
Assuming Jack was a medical decision and off the board, I think I probably would have gone with Reed over Clark, but can't comment too much about the rest of the draft. Based on positions drafted there's nothing to complain about - we needed DL depth, OL depth and some new blood at LB and got all of it. Also got a shot in the arm for the underachieving/inconsistent bottom WR group. I think Reed over Clark because, while both guys have leadership qualities, Reed seems nastier and that's what the D needs. I'm sure Clark will step in day 1 and competently play the nose, would have just preferred an attitude adjustment for the D.

Spriggs is a boon, maybe he's raw but athletic OT's with legit LT feet don't grow on trees and with time on the bench and the weight room he should be our future LT.
 
The Clark pick was initially a downer because of the bigger names out there. But the whole league let the big two 'Bama boys slide to round two. There is a belief out there that most, not all, 'Bama players are topped out. That Saban's staff gets the most out of them and they there is not much improvement after their college days. I said most NOT all. HaHa seems to be getting better. Another perception is that west coast kids don't get the exposure that the National press gives the SEC and Big Ten.
The two LBs we picked are solid and smart football players, the kind Capers loves. The two OTs were the sweetest surprise IMO. In fact, Murphy might start sooner than Spriggs. I could easily see Bulaga moving inside with Murphy becoming the RT. Whether injuries or contracts this seems a real possibility.
I can't remember a more satisfying draft in recent years. Needs filled, depth addressed. There were NOT many playmakers in this draft and most of those few had injury flags. IMO.
 
The draft addressed needs and added depth. I don't think you can give a draft a grade before any player has even seen the NFL field yet. So I rate the draft satisfactory for now. Some solid players and some future starters. I actually feel better about this draft than some past drafts.
 
When I first started following the draft more than a decade ago, it seemed reasonable to put a grade on a draft, but now I find it more an exercise for casual fans so they have some bragging rights or a reason to be ticked-off at their GM.

Agree with above, about all you can say before camp starts is that they picked players who generally sort of fit their needs and scheme, and no pick seems completely out of place from a value perspective. I'd say this draft met those criteria so on a pass-fail grading scale, I'd give it a passing grade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top