RB & WR Prospects In the First Round
Chris Squire, in the second article of his Cheesehead TV NFL Draft series, breaks down the different possibilities that could present themselves to the Packers when they are on the clock with the 23rd overall pick in this months draft.
By PackerAaron
Cheesehead TV is proud to present the second in a series of draft articles from long time CHTV reader Chris Squire. Big thanks to Chris for doing this and we hope you’ll let him know what you think in the comments section.
Let me preface this by saying I’m not a draft expert. I don’t have access to coaches’ film nor do I have the access to former coaches and teammates throughout the interview process. I am an unrepentant football geek and my wife a self-described ‘football widow’. A not-so-endearing, self-appointed identity she tolerates both Saturday and Sunday every fall (she’s a saint, I tell you). Take these discussions for what they are, a well-informed guessing game with as much integrated factual information as possible.
NFL teams will deem 256 prospects to be draft worthy from April 22nd-24th; with roughly 300 undrafted free-agents signing tenders shortly after the draft concludes. History shows that roughly 20 – 25 of those picks will be running backs and 30 wide receivers.
Top 5 running backs (in order):
Mel Kiper: C.J. Spiller, Jahvid Best, Dexter McCluster, Ryan Matthews, Anthony Dixon.
Mike Mayock: C.J. Spiller, Ryan Matthews, Jahvid Best, Toby Gerhart, Joe McKnight, Dexter McCluster (tie).
Top 5 wide receivers (in order):
Mel Kiper: Dez Bryant, Arrelious Benn, Demaryius Thomas, Jordan Shipley, Eric Decker.
Mike Mayock: Dez Bryant, Demaryius Thomas, Arrelious Benn, Golden Tate, Eric Decker, Damian Williams (tie).
Every team, every evaluator has an emphasis or preference in what they’re looking for: Lateral agility, speed, burst, explosion, strength, foot-speed, ‘wiggle’, even a nasty disposition or ‘arriving angry’ at the point of contact. Personally, I believe straight-line speed is grossly overrated (people obsess over the 40 yard dash for some reason) and the bench-press itself isn’t important (the reps are more indicative of the prospects commitment to the weight-room and self-discipline than anything). Lateral agility and burst are ‘underrated’ in my book. You manufacture yards as a wide receiver and running back if you possess both.
Today’s NFL places a premium on the quarterback, left tackle, getting to the quarterback (rush end/OLB) and taking away the quarterbacks options (DB). Signing a draft pick in the 1st round requires a lot of coin. The most disposable positions in modern football are running back and wide receiver. Unless you see a Calvin Johnson or Adrian Peterson clone in round one you don’t touch the position. Ryan Matthews is frequently mocked to the Packers depending on what ‘draftnik’ you choose to follow. When Kiper was asked, ‘What’s the distance talent wise between Ryan Matthews (1st round projection) and Montario Hardesty (late 2nd – 4th round projection)’ he replied, ‘not much' . Also, there’s now buzz about a potential Dez Bryant slide. Sorry, we already have his equivalent on the roster and his name is James Jones. I believe Dez Bryant is a dominant possession guy, not the skill set you take in round 1 for the money.
Spiller is that one special player that possesses almost every attribute I mentioned previously. To me, he’s special and you take him if he slides. Everybody else, see you after day one has concluded.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Comments (79)
April 02, 2010 at 08:29 am
agree in all...being from fresno (and having to hear some locals that the chargers might draft mathews-well good luck!), i think spiller is as good as it can get...anyone else is just pure champ stuff made up from the media mocks trying tirelesly to sell a fragment of purely fictitious enterteinment...forgive all the typos, i am drunk as a yooper*
April 03, 2010 at 12:08 am
Fredo,
Did you WATCH Mathews last year? He's definitely a more "complete" back than spiller (not to mention, much more sturdy).
April 03, 2010 at 12:38 am
Where did you get to see him? There were only two Fresno State games televised nationally last year. I had the college package and recorded his games. Still don't see what seperates him from mid-round prospects like Hardesty and Tate.....among others.
April 03, 2010 at 01:56 am
"Where did you get to see him?"
Dude, I like to have, shall we say "interest" in many college games. EVERY college game is available online, if you need more help... lemme know. I'd be happy to point you in the right direction.
"Still don’t see what separates him from mid-round prospects like Hardesty and Tate".
It's the little things, the intangibles. Ryan Mathews WILL be a better pro than Hardesty, yep, that's just my opinion (hard to back that up at this time, I admit it)... from what I "observed".
Time will tell
GBP 4 LIFE
April 02, 2010 at 03:38 pm
Funny you use Kiper's examples. I don't understand what he's done to think everyone should bow to his draft knowledge. My favorite part of draft day is seeing him get all upset because his expected picks aren't going like he "predicted" at all, and listen to him pout and talk about how said teams are basically stupid and making the wrong choice. All hail Kiper in Kiper's world.
April 02, 2010 at 06:46 pm
I only use Kiper and Mayock because they are the most recognized. Mock drafts are almost impossible and few if any get them right. Where analysts and draftniks should be scrutinized are on their 'Big Boards' where they're telling the world, based on their assessments, who the most talented prospects are in the draft. Mock drafts are just for fun, the 'Big Boards' and 'Top 5' by position becomes a matter of credibility for these guys. How silly do many now look by placing Glenn Dorsey on top of their list of draftable players, as an example.
Also, their 'Big Boards' should reflect how good they will be over the course of their respective NFL careers, not in year one. You draft the kid for his career, not his rookie season.
April 02, 2010 at 03:39 pm
Nice to see Golden in your list, though. I think he can be something special.
April 02, 2010 at 06:48 pm
Not my list, I will post one of my own in the future. My only point by posting the 'authoritative' list was to show how little any of the 'skill position players have done in this years draft class to truly differentiate themselves among their draftable peers. In other words, there's no 'oh wow' WR or RB this year that necessitates a 1st round choice. Spiller maybe, but that's not to say I'm advocating it.
April 02, 2010 at 05:03 pm
We don't need a WR. As far as what sort of back I like, it's the type that we need. A guy who can catch passes out of the backfield (without first tipping the football up in the air) MAKE THE FIRST GUY MISS, and who then has enough speed to take it to the house. LOL.
We got tons of thunder. We need some lightening at the position. Great article, dude.
I agree, I think TT picks somebody up in a mid round. I do think he addresses this issue.
PackerAaron
April 02, 2010 at 09:47 pm
"We don’t need a WR" - that doesn't matter. At all.
April 02, 2010 at 10:06 pm
Actually, it does matter, a lot. If not, Crabtree would be on our team.
Obviously, TT isn't ignoring the WRs. It'd be dumb to do so.
But he's not going to pick one unless it's a HUGE, HUGE value.
PackerAaron
April 02, 2010 at 10:31 pm
The point of the draft is to collect talent. If a talent at the WR position falls to 23, TT should seriously consider taking him, regardless of needs elsewhere.
April 02, 2010 at 11:50 pm
U R WRONG.
Sorry dude.
No way TT considers a WR in the 1st, even if Bryant slides, and rightfully so.
I'm well aware of the BPA approach, a bit of common sense has to be involved as well (like RS said, Crabtree would be wearing the G&G today had Ted not used a bit of common sense last year). There will be far to much talent at positions of need to even have a thought of going WR in the 1st. No way. NEVER happen.
April 03, 2010 at 01:30 am
It was Ron Wolf who stated, "There is a shortage of large, athletic men in the NFL. Covet them", (or something to that effect), and Ted Thompson got the message loud and clear.
If there are two players that are about equal on the Packers' draft board in terms of overall talent, and one of them is a Defensive / Offensive lineman who's athletic, I believe TT will go for the big man, regardless of need.
I don't believe CrabTree was passed on because we didn't need a WR, but because Raji is a big, athletic man. There aren't many guys that big with the type of short-range quickness and agility which he displayed in college.
April 03, 2010 at 02:00 am
Absolutely correct Oppy.
Ted said last year, "the good lord just didn't make that many big men that can move like that".
If there is a tie, SIZE is the tie-breaker... great call.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 07:21 am
LOL, touche.
April 02, 2010 at 06:03 pm
No RB and WR early. Late rounds or Undrafted FA for these positions.
April 02, 2010 at 06:07 pm
nerdmann
we don't NEED a wr but we certainly could very shortly. DD is 35 and JJ is set to be a free agent. DD could easily hit the wall or retire anytime and JJ could want to leave for a bigger role or more money (if Burleson can get 25 million on the open market JJ could see a nice payday next year). That very well could mean we go into next year with just GJ85, Nelson, and Swain as our top 3 WRs. That scares me a little bit. Now granted that's an aweful lot of COULDs but something TT will certainly have to consider a possibility IMO. Ron Wolf has repeatedly said his biggest mistake was not getting BF enough elite receiving options. I would think it's logical to expect TT to do a lot to try and make sure he doesn't make the same ''mistake'' as his mentor. Learning from one's own mistakes is a good quality. Being able to learn from someone else's is a great quality. It appears TT has made WRs a high priority with his draft history and I wouldn't be surprised at all if he continues that this year.
April 02, 2010 at 07:14 pm
TT wants AR12 to look as good as possible. That's for sure.
April 02, 2010 at 07:47 pm
Completely agree with you.
Being a ND fan, I can tell you that Golden Tate is special. But we're so stacked at WR, that I wouldn't touch him with the 1st rounder.
But if he somehow falls to the 2nd, we should get him.
There's not a single thing that Harvin does that Tate doesn't do better, I tell you.
PackerAaron
April 02, 2010 at 09:49 pm
"...we’re so stacked at WR" - again, this is not how you approach the draft. Yes, the team has good depth RIGHT NOW at WR. But age an injury could change that in one snap. With as many multiple WR sets as McCarthy runs, you can bet Thompson will be drafting a WR almost every year.
April 02, 2010 at 09:57 pm
But not at 1.
April 02, 2010 at 11:51 pm
Nope. 3rd, sure. Not @ 1.
April 02, 2010 at 10:03 pm
Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Finley all under 28. DD still playing ball.
You got 5 receivers capable of starting in almost any team in there. Yes, Finley is a WR in a lot of sets we use.
TT already got a WR last year in Brett Swain, and got Charles Dillon this year.
I'd be pretty pissed if he got anyone before round 6. He's probably only going to get some rookie FA later, like he did last year.
April 03, 2010 at 12:00 am
I wouldn't be surprised or pissed if Ted went after a guy like Shipley in the 3rd.
April 03, 2010 at 02:27 am
I would. We have already 2 possession guys in JJ and Nelson. Why another one?
Unless he can cover, no thank you. There's plenty of prospects with quality at other positions, we don't have to take a WR so early.
April 02, 2010 at 09:51 pm
I wouldn't mind a TE in the later rounders, because Donald Lee keeps dropping the ball. However, when people are talking about a need for another WR, don't forget Finley. He is being used as another WR.
April 03, 2010 at 07:25 am
I bet Havner becomes #2 this year. Anyway, I could see TT nabbing a kick returner, and if he plays WR, so be it.
April 02, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Anybody want Flozell Adams before the Bears get him?
April 02, 2010 at 11:52 pm
Do you remember how CM3 worked his ass last year? I hope the bares get him.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 06:15 am
I must admit that I am continually tickled by your diverse spellings of da Bears!
April 03, 2010 at 09:34 pm
Haha, thanks. I try.
April 02, 2010 at 11:58 pm
RB...
I'm really starting to think Mathews would be a great fit. Looking at him (he's a pretty stout kid)you wouldn't think he'd have much versatility... he does. He's got great hands, great in the screen game (which we so sorely miss), and he's got wheels.
4.45, 19 reps, 5'11", 220.
Mathews would look great in the G&G.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 12:06 am
You draft a kid for the long-haul, not his rookie year. There's little to nothing physically seperating Matthews from Tate from Hardesty. He isn't elite and certainly not worthy of #23 overall.
I like Matthews at running back, no way I think he's worthy of round 1 considering the DB/OLB talent on the board.
April 03, 2010 at 12:20 am
"He isn’t elite and certainly not worthy of #23 overall."
You may be right, but he will be gone in the 1st (quite possibly before 23).
As for nothing Separating Mathews from a guy like Tate, how about 20 lbs AND the fact that one plays WR and one plays RB... not sure I'm following the logic on that one boss?
Regarding the 1st round... I'd be pissed if we don't go OLB/OT/DB. This topic HOWEVER was about RB's/WR's, I was simply putting in my 2 cents about Mathews, I don't wanna go there @ 23. BUT, if Ted did go RB there, that's who I would want, that's all.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 12:23 am
"You draft a kid for the long-haul, not his rookie year"
And?
Is somebody disputing that?
April 03, 2010 at 12:42 am
Not what I'm saying. I'm telling you that I completely agree with Mel Kiper when he says there is very little seperating Matthews from several other running backs in the draft. Yet Matthews is getting round 1 attention because so many 'draftniks' think he's the most well rounded player NOW. Sorry, but the echo-chamber known as the 'draftnik' community over-value players like Matthews thinking only of his impact next year, not the next three years. Therefore, they over-value him when the talent in round 2 and beyond is just as good. People obsess about the product they see now (Matthews) and take them far too early in the draft.
April 03, 2010 at 12:56 am
Gotcha.
But, the thing with 1st rounders is, generally teams don't draft "projects" in the 1st round (granted there are exceptions, but by-in-large...). 1st round talent "generally" infers that this guy can come in and "contribute" NOW (which Mathews most certainly could).
So while a Hardesty may be the equivalent or even the superior RB in 5 years, this is a "NOW" league, and the "NOW" is what separates the 1st round talent from the 3rd.
I think it's only fair.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 01:06 am
You're using an extreme when you say '5 years'. I believe Hardesty and Tate have just as much talent and will equal or surpass Matthews productivity by year 2 if not sooner. Here's the kicker: for substantially less money.
April 03, 2010 at 01:43 am
@ Fitzcore:
"But, the thing with 1st rounders is, generally teams don’t draft “projects” in the 1st round (granted there are exceptions, but by-in-large…)"
I think it may be more accurate that FANS and MEDIA TYPES generally believe teams don't draft projects in the first round, and that 1st round talent infers come in and contribute now ability.
GMs and coaches, I believe, see the bigger picture and realize the value of a player with more potential who's maybe not as far along in development than let's say a player who's more ready NOW but has nearly hit his talent ceiling already.
April 03, 2010 at 01:28 am
I really like Ben Tate a lot (but then I am an Auburn fan too). He may be more 2nd round than 3rd or 4th after his combine though, unfortunately. I think his running style fits here, though there is an argument to be made for trying to get contrasting styles. Not a lot of dancing around from him, he looks to make the one cut and take it upfield. Has enough speed to hit the corner and keep defenders on their toes and staying honest with assignments. He was in a gimmicky spread offense (like everyone else these days), but their freshman tailback was the guy running most of their playground stuff. Still, he didn't see a ton of conventional defenses out there (as an upperclassman) so it is a concern.
Regarding receivers, you don't just write off the position because you don't think you need them. Your concerns about a team in January aren't always what your concerns were in August. In other words, you never know what the heck is going to happen regardless of the certitude we all speak with in the offseason. Talent is talent. If you think you're getting top ten talent late in the first round, you take it regardless of position or need. Case in point, Aaron Rodgers.
April 03, 2010 at 01:30 am
^^^^^^^^^
I don't know why I didn't get the "reply" button after your last post (maybe Nagler finally cut me off).
We will agree to disagree there.
I think 3 years from now Ryan Mathews will be an "ELITE" back in the league.
I think Hardesty will be a "back" in the league.
And last but not least, I think that Tate will be an above average "slot" guy (still don't know why we're talkin' Tate and RB's... but it's your world) in the league (though I think he could make a name for himself in the return game).
Mathews is gonna be good, real good. If that kid goes to the Texans, watch the puck out...
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 01:41 am
Ben Tate most likely is the subject. You talking Golden?
April 03, 2010 at 01:47 am
I'm talkin' the top 5 "HE" has listed up top.
Yes, I'm talkin' Golden. Don't know how Ben could've worked his way in the top 5 conversation, though he is a RB, sooo, maybe that's who "HE's" talking about?
Whatchoo talk'n 'bout CSS?
Good lookin' out Dave
April 03, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Talkin' Ben Tate, not Golden Tate. Though you can make the arguement that Dez Bryant's accesion has more to do with the other receiver prospects not differentiating themselves. Deep class, but no 'oh wow' kid there.
April 03, 2010 at 02:13 am
Oppy, Refer to last years top 10:
Matthew Stafford QB Detroit Signed 6 years, $72 million ($41.7M guaranteed)
2. Jason Smith OT St. Louis Signed 5 years, $61.775 million ($33M guaranteed)
3. Tyson Jackson DE Kansas City Signed 5 years, $57 million ($31M guaranteed)
4. Aaron Curry LB Seattle Signed 6 years, $60 million ($34M guaranteed)
5. Mark Sanchez QB N.Y. Jets Signed 5 years, $60 million ($28M guaranteed)
6. Andre Smith OT Cincinnati Signed 4 years, $26 million ($21M guaranteed)
7. Darrius Heyward-Bey WR Oakland Signed 5 years, $38.25 million ($23.5M guaranteed)
8. Eugene Monroe OT Jacksonville Signed 5 years, $35.4 million ($19.2M guaranteed)
9. B.J. Raji DT Green Bay Signed 5 years, $28.5 million ($18M guaranteed)
10. Michael Crabtree
Oppy,
Forget the $$$ (I'm to lazy to delete it)... Look at those names. Barring injury or hold-out... ALL STARTERS.
The 1st round is for the "NOW", that's not just the "FANS and MEDIA TYPES" sayin' it... it's right there (yes, that's a small sample size, but it's representative, and applicable).
If you can find #'s to refute that, I'd love to see them.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 02:59 am
If you are talking about the top 10 of the draft I then I would certainly agree with you. You expect those guys to step in from day one and start andexcel. At 23 though thats definitely not always the case. Many if not most aren't expected to jump in from day 1. I'll use last years 23-32 picks as examples....
Oher started all 19 games but 13 of them at RT....
Jerry started week 1 (then got injured).....
Davis started 9 weeks but not until the 7th game....
Matthews started 14 weeks but not until the 4th game....
Brown started 1 game.....
Wood started week 1 at RG....
Nicks started 6 weeks but not until the 8th game...
Britt started 6 weeks but not until the 9th game.....
Wells didn't start a game...
Hood didn't start a game
Only three of the players drafted at 23 on started week one... If you consider Oher was likely drafted as a LT and Wood as a C then only Jerry started week 1 at the position he was drafted for.
Most of the players drafted in the taile end of round one last year were expected to contribute right away but very few were started and almost none were immediately "plugged into" role where they are expected to in the future.
April 03, 2010 at 03:14 am
"Most of the players drafted in the taile end of round one last year were expected to contribute right away"
Yup.
Sure, not all week 1 starters, but most 1st rounders WILL SEE ACTION in their 1st year. In my eyes, that equates to "Contributing NOW". Thank you for solidifying my point.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 03:22 am
You're welcome....You had capitalized ALL STARTERS and NOW in your previous post so I was thinking you expected ALL STARTERS in week 1 in the first round which is not reasonable but you are IMO correct when you say that most are expected to contribute some in year one.
April 03, 2010 at 03:27 am
Haha, don't mind me. I know I come off as a know-it-all dick at times, just know, I respect your takes.
Have a good weekend.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 03:19 am
Do you see how many of the players you listed say "started" next to them? At some point their rookie season. You don't have that consistency/see that trend after the 1st.
The 1st is for "NOW"... kick dead horse, again.
April 03, 2010 at 03:23 am
And I only went top 10 because I'm lazy.
What about Cushing, Orakpo,Freeman, Maclin,Harvin, Moreno... all started @ some point.
1ST = "NOW"
It's been fun fellas, I'm off for the night... It's all love.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 12:42 pm
That is not true of DT's. Go back a decade and show me how many 1st round DT's transition well in their 1st year. YOu're going to come up with an extremely short list. Even your top 10 guys in the draft (at DT) do not have the light go off until well into their 2nd year, often 3rd.
April 03, 2010 at 06:12 pm
Sorry for basically double posting the other poster, I didn't see his/her reply until after I fouled up the page with my typical, overly wordy reply! My bad, apologies.
April 03, 2010 at 06:08 pm
I won't refute your statement, but maybe I should clarify my own.
I think that the likelyhood of a player drafted in the 1st round being a starter is high for a number of reasons, but I don't know that NFL front office guys feel that they 'have' to get a rookie who can start today, especially if that means passing over a guy they think will be a star with a year or two under his belt. Obviously, Justin Harrell is the poster boy for this going very, very wrong :) That said, two main reasons I think it's likely 1st rounders start and contribute heavily:
1) They are the best players in the draft class (Or, at least, the teams picking them think they are!) So they should have the best chance of ousting a incumbent starter. OBvious, I know :)
2) a number of teams draft for need, which often gives a 1st rounder a golden ticket to the starting job
that being said, I don't think GM's are going into the 1st round pick saying to themselves- "If he can't be a starter in year one, he's not worth a 1st roun pick". I think because of those factors above, it's just likely to work out that way. And I think it is the fans and the media who pressure and panic when a 1st round pick doesn't start or heavily contribute, not the teams, who are realistic and realize guys are young and developing. I don't think the Texans are looking at Mario Williams thinking it was a wasted pick because he didn't produce in year one.. But the fans and media did.
Again, not to refute your statement, but to show that even the first rounders need development to usurp incumbent starters- these 1st rounders from 09 all 'started' less than half the games they played in (They still were good contributors, of course):
Raji 1/14
Maybin 0/16
M. Jenkins, 6/14
English 2/16
Ayers 1/15
Brown 1/11
Nicks 6/14
Hood 0/16
That's 25% of the 1st rounders (all outside of the top ten, exception Raji) who weren't ready to take over the starter job, per se. Of course, some guys who don't start are on the field as much as the 'starters' anyways.
April 03, 2010 at 02:58 am
I just noticed you said Dez Bryant is already on the GBP in the form of James Jones...
I gotta say, had I caught that before our back-and-forth happened... it wouldn't have happened.
I don't know what color the sky is on your planet, I'm sure it's beautiful (for you anyway).
Let me be clear, I DON'T WANT A RB or WR in the 1ST. But, You say Mathews and Bryant aren't 1st round talents... WHO THE HELL DO YOU HAVE GOING IN THE 1ST??? Please enlighten us with a 1st round mock... I'm glued to my seat!
Pffft.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 03, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Bryant has no deep speed, terrible concentration but extremely strong hands. Question to you and the draftnik community: Why do people feel there HAS to be a high 1st round WR pick to round out the draft. Bryant is nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year. He's a powerful possession guy. Why would any GM invest top 20 money in round 1 receiver that won't stretch the field vertically?
Draftnik community plagerizes one anothers boards, I don't agree about Bryant. He creates mismatches within a 10-12 yard range because he's powerful. Someone will reach for him, I don't get why he's top 20 when he has all the attributes of a middle of the field possession receiver.
Curious why I get called out because I don't regurgatate what all the rest of the web echos about a prospect.
Sorry, I just don't see him well rounded enough to be a top 20.
PackerAaron
April 03, 2010 at 03:24 pm
I agree w/your take on Bryant. I also think he'd be a great fit for what the Packers do on offense.
April 03, 2010 at 09:30 pm
"Bryant is nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year."
Really?
What #'s are you basing that on?
'Cause from the #'s I'm looking at he's every bit the talent of Crabtree last year. No, check that... BETTER.
CAREER #'s:
Crabtree:
231 receptions
3127 yards
41 TD's
That's a 13.5 yard career avg.
With 1 TD every 5.6 rec
Bryant:
147 receptions
2425 yards
29 TD's
That's a *16.5* yard career avg.
With 1 TD every *5.1* rec
So while he wasn't "targeted" as frequently as Crabtree, he did more with his receptions.
Do I think Bryant is better than Crabtree was last year? Toss up, a case could be made for either. But to say "Bryant is nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year", is in a word, WRONG.
Also did a little research on your boy Hardesty. Perhaps it's the T-H-R-E-E knee surgeries he's had that separates he and Mathews. The 560 carries (2nd most in Tennessee history) could also be a factor. That's a lot of wear and tear on some surgically repaired wheels.
GBP 4 LIFE
PackerAaron
April 04, 2010 at 12:04 am
You don't scout college football players by #s. You judge them by their play on the field. Period.
April 04, 2010 at 12:56 am
"You don’t scout college football players by #s".
Wow dude, you're having a rough weekend.
You're generally well informed, but, if you're telling me all of your buddies from the combine only go by what they see on film and pay no attention to what N-U-M-B-E-R-S a kid put up in college... well I guess I'd lose a bit of respect for your football acumen.
No way I think you really believe that. Funny, if #'s don't matter, why have a combine... the tape's already out there. Hmmm
Scouts watch the tape AND look at the #'s. They'd be stupid not to.
Period.Period. (see I said it twice, so my Period trumps yours).
So, you obviously have your boy CSS' back (which is cool), but if you're gonna throw the #'s to the wayside (which is quite an interesting thing to do), please tell me what Crabtree did "on the field" to classify Bryant as being "nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year".
I watched both quite a bit in college, you obviously saw something I didn't... enlighten me
I'm all ears
PackerAaron
April 04, 2010 at 02:01 am
The only thing that matters at the Combine is the medical and the interviews. The drills are mostly worthless. Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith had some fantastic numbers in college. Did them a lot of good... Numbers are nice, but the tape is all that matters.
April 04, 2010 at 02:23 am
"Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith had some fantastic numbers in college. Did them a lot of good… Numbers are nice, but the tape is all that matters."
A-A-R-O-N,
Do you think, maybe, just maybe, Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith had some AWESOME f'ing TAPE TO "BACK UP" THEIR NUMBERS? Or did the scouts just look at the #'s for those two and disregard "the tape" (how convenient)? No, something tells me the scouts watched plenty of tape and still got fooled.
#'s and tape dude, you know it's true.
GOD I LOVE FOOTBALL
On a side-note - Everyone have a happy Easter
April 04, 2010 at 01:06 am
Oh, and don't forget...
My whole post was in response to this statement - “Bryant is nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year.”
I simply threw some #'s out there that clearly make that a false statement. Not claiming to be a scout.
If you can give me examples of how “Bryant is nowhere near the talent of Crabtree from last year.” is true, I would appreciate it.
April 05, 2010 at 12:48 am
College stats mean very little in a players transition to the NFL. It's just an opinion, and why is it yours is any more right than mine?
Mike Mayock recently made the same statement on NFL Network, his professional opinion. Just an opinion as well, but he actually watches coaches tape which is vastly different than what most people watch on You-Tube.
April 03, 2010 at 04:42 am
I tried to read through all the post to find this but I didnt see it?? Then again it is late, worked 12 hours, drank some beers, maybe I missed it?
Anyways...
Isnt Dez a punt/kick returner? I think we all would agree that is someone we can use..
So if he is there at 23, what if they draft him to be a special teams guy and bring him along to take over for DD?
Not saying I LIKE/LOVE that idea, just does make some sense when considering that option
April 03, 2010 at 06:09 am
I understand what you're saying LT, but you're automatically excluding JJ and Nelson to be heirs of DD. Not to mention that Finley will probably take over right next year as the de facto #2 receiver.
And about kick returners, we can get some great guys later. I'm keeping an eye on McCluster, Jacoby Ford and specially Trinton Holliday, which is also are WR, but can be gotten later, bring another dimension to the team, and are better KR than Bryant.
Not to mention that almsot every CB in this draft has returned kicks... Wilson, Cox, McCourty to name a few...
April 03, 2010 at 09:30 am
I like Jahvid Best as the best back in the draft. the only reason you dont hear that more is that he's had a couple of injuries and a major cuncussion (adrian peterson, anyone?). however, put on the tape. there is no one better. ryan matthews doesn't bring anything to the table that ryan grant doesn't. they're the same player. (they even look related). If we have Best, we'll be the best offense in the NFL. hands down...
April 03, 2010 at 03:50 pm
I agree with Jack,
Ryan Mathews is almost identical to Ryan Grant. Deceptive strait line speed mediocre lateral agility. Really is a one cut and go kind of a back.
Offensively if we can get a recieving back or a shifty hard hitting wr in the 3rd or 4th would be ideal. But whoever they like has to be an upgrade over Jackson. I really like Golden Tate and think he could be the type of player we need in the slot, however he won't be around when the packers will consider the position.
April 04, 2010 at 02:11 am
"Ryan Mathews is almost identical to Ryan Grant".
Nope. No way.
In body type, yes. BUT, Ryan Mathews has something that adds a whole other dimension to his game... feathery soft hands. He has shown a natural ability to catch the ball out of the backfield.
Grant has hands of stone. Mathews has hands of pillowy soft goodness.
"mediocre lateral agility"
"Deceptive strait line speed"
From the USA Today Sports Weekly -
"Good lateral agility to elude in open space"... HUGE difference between being good at something and mediocre.
"Can turn the corner and is quickly moving downhill"... A bit more than just a straight line guy (which was what stuck out to me when I watched him).
If you must compare him to a Packer, he is much more Levens than Grant.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 04, 2010 at 04:30 pm
Matthews might have nicer hands than Grant. But Best has better hands than Matthews. Go pull up the 2009 J. Best highlights on youtube then do the same for Matthews. What you will se is one back (Best) making amazing plays out of nothing. His best one is a 93 yard TD on what should have been a 4 yard loss. The Packers haven't had a player who can do that as long as i've been watching them. When you put Matthews on, you'll see a guy follow his blocks to daylight, but won't make anyone miss. Dont take my word for it, look for yourself. you'll see Best catching 40 yard wheel routes for TDs, not sure Matthews can do that. I get very excited thinking what Jahvid could do for us, I hope i'm right. Go Pack!
April 04, 2010 at 05:00 pm
"Dont take my word for it"
Oh, I wont. I also wont go by a "highlight" tape, they tend to focus on all the positives... weird. I doubt it's gonna show Best wiffing on a blitz pick up. I think I'll stick to what I saw of them with my own eyes.
Best is a good back (he would be a welcome addition to the G&G), but, he's got concussion and durability concerns and I don't think he will be an every down back at the next level, Mathews will. Mathews is more "complete".
"When you put Matthews on, you’ll see a guy follow his blocks to daylight, but won’t make anyone miss."
Sorry dude, you don't rush for 1,808 yds at 6.6 per, with a long of 77 and 19 TD's without making anyone miss. Oh, and look who he carved up, Boise St., Wisconsin, stout Rush D's.
Just because you didn't see Mathews do certain things in college, doesn't mean that he's not capable (maybe he wasn't asked to).
GBP 4 LIFE
April 04, 2010 at 06:10 pm
Dude, look at Matthews runs. 'how' he got them is important. i challenge you to find a nice juke move in his big runs. of course highlights focus on the good, thats what they do. but they show you what type of player you have when they're "A Game" is on. Best is a beast. in my dream scenario we use Best on 1st and 2nd down and Grant on 3rd sonce he's bigger and probably better in pass-pro (but some say Best is great there too). Matthews is Ryan Grant, we don't need another. here is a nice support for my argument: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/front-office-total-access-stats.html...
love ya'll!
go pack!
April 04, 2010 at 09:00 am
AArons last comment is right....I have said it for a while now..
Put these players in pads and have them do the actual football moves they would do at their respective spots
April 04, 2010 at 08:23 pm
Jack,
Here are 4 links that support my argument...
Mayock - http://www.nfl.com/draft/story?id=09000d5d817178e3&template=with-vid...
Scouts Inc. - http://www.draftkid.com/scoutsinctop32.htm
profootball.scout.com - http://profootball.scout.com/a.z?s=127&p=9&c=12&nid=83&l...
Walterfootball.com - http://walterfootball.com/draft2010RB.php
All have Mathews ranked ahead of Best.
But, my whole beef with your take is you say "Matthews is Ryan Grant", that's just not an accurate statement, Jack. Mathews brings a great screen game to the table, something Grant has ZERO ability to do, which make them backs with different skill sets.
Links are fun.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 05, 2010 at 09:35 am
I figured you'd counter-link my link.i know there aren't a lot of people who agree with me out there, thats why I put out an opposing view. I called NFL Radio one night and told Gil Brandt that I couln't understand why anyone would have Matthews ahead of Best. He told me that there are doubts about Best's size. Can he carry the load 25 times a game? (nevermind the fact that he and Spiller are the same size and no one seems to be asking those questions about him!) So, trust me, I know i'm on an island here, but i believe in my argument.
Re: Matthews = Grant. Pull up his clips. Tell me what YOU see. I see Grant, but we all have a point of view, thats what makes this stuff fun.
The last thing I'll say is: when was the last time you saw conventional wisdom proven wise?
We'll see, won't we?
Go Pack!
April 05, 2010 at 11:58 pm
Jack my man, we will agree to disagree.
BUT, not by much.
I said above that I would like to see Best in the G&G, just not quite as much as Mathews (though I don't want either in the 1st and that's where we'd have to grab 'em).
I'm gonna make a mental note and compare Best' and Mathews' careers, you do the same... hit me up in 7 years.
Time will tell friend, it's been fun.
GBP 4 LIFE
April 06, 2010 at 02:01 am
Will do. Thanks for the debate.
Go Pack!
April 08, 2010 at 11:55 am
I’ve been thinking about it a little bit, and the more I do the more I think Taylor Mays sounds like a good pick if a solid LT is not available. I know he had an unspectacular pro day and leaves many questions unanswered, but it seems to me that he would be a perfect fit for our defense, because we do a lot more zone, which requires more straight-line speed and harder hitting at the point of attack (which we know is his biggest strength) and less change of direction. Combine that with the fact that Dom Capers sure as hell knows what he’s doing and could definitely find multiple spots and incorporate many packages for him on the defense to utilize his talents, including linebacker and other spots on the field, and a mentor in charles Woodson who already does all of that, and we could have one hell of a player on our hands in about a year, if not immediately