Yeah, I probably will have a Clif bar or two. But yes, they provide meals, they'll have dinner tonight and tomorrow, and lunch and dinner Saturday if I remember correctly. The meals are pretty good.
I'd have to think King is a real possibility. Jackson would surprise me because he's 5-10 on the nose, and they generally don't even consider CBs who aren't at minimum 5-10 1/2.
I highly doubt it. I don't get the sense they think he's worth a first-rounder. Would they trade a second-rounder for him? Not sure, maybe. But you'd also have to satisfy him contractually, because you're not going to trade for him for only one season, so you'd have to work out a long-term deal. So they'd have to think he's worth the money he'd want. I suspect they don't think he'd be worth the contract it would take to get it done.
Yeah, I've been thinking about this. Because of his age and slight drop in his play last year, I wouldn't trade a first-rounder. Not sure if I'd trade a second-rounder, tough call there. Maybe, but as of this moment I'd lean against it. I'd have to talk to some scouts in the league on that to get a better read. Pretty sure I'd trade a third. But I doubt Seattle would do it for a third. Don't even know if they'd do it for a late second.
Haven't heard anything and see that as very very unlikely. For one, teams looking to trade for him just don't have much to go on. There's his preseason tape from two years ago, but last year he played a little in the first game and not after that because of the injury (ankle if I remember correctly) that sidelined him the rest of camp. So I just don't see another team giving up all that much to get a guy with such minimal track record. Second, the Packers drafted him so they'd have a good backup in case Rodgers has to miss a chunk of the season. So they have to be reluctant to do a deal at this point. Next year at this time is when you have to think it will happen, if it does. He presumably will play a lot this preseason, so teams will have more tape to go on. He'll be in the last year of his contract, so they could then trade him rather than let him leave the following offseason in free agency, which basically is a given. Or they could keep him the fourth year and just take the compensatory pick when he leaves in free agency.
Have to assume they're just waiting until close to the deadline. Maybe they're working on a contract extension with him and might get it done before the deadline. If they don't have a new deal, they'll be exercising the option, he's one of their best defensive players.
It just makes a lot of sense because of the need there plus the draft is strong at those positions in the first couple rounds.
Not sure, but he started 16 games last season. There's always the chance he will hit the wall, but I thought it was a smart signing to take the pressure off the draft.
No, I think there are plenty of scouts who agree. I don't know if the Packers have a first-round grade on him. But if you pick this late in the round, you can end up with a guy with a second-round grade. When teams set their boards, they usually have anywhere from about 16 to maybe 22 players with first-round grades. Different teams have different guys in that group, so you can pick at 29 and still get a guy you've graded in the first round. But it's also possible for all your first-rounders to be gone, so if you sit and pick, you're getting a guy with a second-round grade. But back to your point, no, I think there are plenty of scouts who don't see a first-round players. I think some event think Biegel is the better prospect of the two.
I talked with a scout early this week who loves King, sees a really talented guy who's going to get a lot better with NFL coaching and experience. I'm sure he's not alone. He's a really big CB (6-3) whose tests like a small CB. So he's more than viable at No. 29. In fact, my guess is he doesn't make there. As for Watt, he looks like he has Ted Thompson written all over him with his measurables, testing, love of FB, played OLB in college, etc. But maybe Thompson sees something on tape that makes him think he's not worth picking at No. 29, that maybe he tested better than he plays. Or maybe Thompson likes Willis or Lawson or Bowser better at OLB. You never know.
Lots of really good reporters lost jobs. Bad for the industry, bad for people who follow sports closely.
Thompson is pretty conservative on those things. But I'm not convinced they'll have taken him completely off their board. A lot depends on what they've found out in the last two days. The uncertainty of possible chargers, a trial, even jail, that makes it really tough to take the guy, especially in the early rounds, even if it turns out the accusation is bogus, it's nearly impossible to know now unless the police or the victim share something either to teams or publicly. In the later rounds, though, maybe for Thompson, depending of course on what his scouts and security people have found out.
I wouldn't be surprised if he's on their board. Still skeptical about the first three rounds, though I could be wrong.
The media covers this from the Packers' media auditorium. They show the TV broadcast on a big screen in the front. Not long after the Packers pick, Thompson will come down for a press conference, maybe followed by an area scout and/or coordinator and/or position coach. And the player does a teleconference. That's how it goes Friday as well. On Saturday it's more fluid because of all the picks. But after the picks somebody or a couple different people (scout, position coach, coordinator) eventually make their way to a press conference, and all the picks do teleconferences.
The system is starting to glitch, so couple more questions and we'll wrap this up. The previous answer is for whether I think one of the Packers' starting CBs is in this draft. As for character, they all have different thresholds, and a lot of times it comes down to the owner when off-field problems are a big issue. Thompson is the decider in GB, and he leans on the conservative side compared to the rest of the league, though he's taken his chances too (Koren Robinson, Guion, Lyerla).
That's probably right. I'm not sure ILB is all that much more important than guard even with the Evans signing. Burnett is going to play a decent amount of ILB this season, it sounds like, so the urgency isn't that high there. But they still could use an upgrade athletically.
You can make a pretty good argument that Clinton-Dix is the best of the group. Bucannon was moved to ILB, that's kind of the way the league is going, and he's doing well there. So those two have been the best of the group. Clinton-Dix has turned out to be a good pick.
I would think not. You never know, and different guys handle things differently, so there's always the chance some guys in the gray area will sit. But they're pros and most want to play. And if they play through the injury, that can help their value in free agency too, most teams will have done enough research to know.
That's definitely played a part in his decision-making before this year, and I'm sure still does to some degree. Evans was cut by New Orleans so he won't count against the formula.
I'd think if they could do it over they'd re-sign him. But at the time I thought it was the right move. Randall and Rollins showed enough promise as rookies to justify letting Hayward walk. But then they played poorly last year. We'll find out this year how much the injuries contributed to their performance, and how much was their own deficiencies.
History shows that drafting players is really, really, really tough. Ron Wolf used to say it's like hitting in baseball, you bat over .300 you're doing well. It's still as much or more art than science. Luck is a big factor too. But many scouts are very good at their jobs.
In my opinion, the signings of Bennett and Kendricks at TE make the offense better than at the end of last year even after losing Lang. They didn't have Lacy for the final two-thirds of last season, so chances are very good that any RB they add in the draft will help them as well. So I think the pieces are there for improvement on offense over last season. Defense, it depends on how much improvement they get from Randall/Rollins/Gunter/Clark/Brice/Fackrell etc. I'd agree they need immediate help from this draft at OLB and CB to make much of a jump. We'll see whether it happens. But on offense, yeah, I think they have a chance to be better because of what the two new tight ends bring, plus a running back to go with Montgomery.
Scouts I talked to like him a lot. Sounds like he'll probably be gone by 29. Read a really good article yesterday, can't remember who wrote it but it was a national outlet, about how scouts research players. An interesting part of the story is how a GM or scout will have an especially trusted source at a school, someone who over the years they've found to be really honest about guys, and that's why sometimes you see a team take more guys from a given school. Now that might explain UCLA for the Packers but not all the Pac-12 players. I've asked around and still am not sure if the Pac-12 thing is Thompson or Seale or something else. But back to your starting point, if McKinney is on the board he's a really bet for being the pick unless the injury risk (he had shoulder surgery after the combine and might not be ready for the start of the season) scares Thompson off in the first round.
That wasn't my interpretation, because there's no extra pick there in the second round. You can just pick someone at 29 and someone with your second round pick, that's better than picking early in the second and then late in the second. Maybe I misinterpreted, but I thought they were assuming the Packers could get an extra second-round pick for moving back.
The fifth-round option is nice, but if you like the guy you can extend his contract in his fourth season anyway. So I'd guess he'd value the extra pick more. He suspect he usually just stays and picks because there's a guy there he wants.
The Packers' OLBs almost always rush standing up, even in nickel (two OLBs, two interior rushers). The vantage point and takeoff are different standing vs. hand on the ground, and some guys who are used to rushing with their hand down don't do as well when they stand up. Capers wants them standing up so they also can drop into coverage more easily.
That's a possible. He could improve, maybe a lot, though I personally wouldn't be counting on it if I'm them. They've had a chance to see him up close for the last couple weeks in the offseason program, so they have a little more info to work with.
Hate to do this but have to wrap this up. Thanks to everybody for coming by, so many questions, so little time. We'll have live blogs all weekend long with Tom Silverstein, so you can ask him questions, and we'll be doing chats next week so we can revisit some of your questions then (plus all the new ones of course). Apologies for all the questions I didn't get to, just ran out of time. As for Cook and McCaffrey, sounds like there's basically no chance of McCaffrey being there, he's like to go in the first 15 picks. Cook would be interesting if he's there at 29. Might be hard to pass up. Depends entirely on the Packers' grade for him. If they think he's special, like an Ezekiel Elliott impact, then I'd think they'd have to take him. That's the kind of offensive player who can help your defense. If they think he's really good but not special, then I'd think they'd go defense. That's my guess. Maybe Thompson will have to make the decision and we'll find out. Thanks again everybody, great fun talking with you. Enjoy draft weekend and we'll talk again next week.