July 20, 2018, 05:33:59 AM

Author Topic: First 2013 Mock  (Read 10071 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Drew the Draft Guru

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Twitter: @DraftHobbyist
    • DraftHobbyist's NFL Draft Site
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2012, 07:04:44 PM »

There will be plenty of "good players" available.  I'd rather have multiple good players (if the picks turn out) than one Eifert.  Especially with Quarless, Williams,Crabtree and Taylor already on the roster.
 

Then maybe we should load up on 7th round draft picks, right? We could get like 32 of them if we trade down enough. My point is that you have been pretty heavily against Eifert even though you seem to think he's a good player yourself, and he would actually fill a need (because I'm not totally opposed to drafting needs) if Finley leaves with Quarless coming off an injury and none of the TE's really doing enough to prove they can be a #1 TE.

Except that Eifert is a TE and for a team that doesn't have a lot of needs TE is pretty low on the list. Finding a better backup QB is more important than finding ANOTHER tight end, that should put things into perspective. I have always been on the side that you can find players like Finley later in the draft and develop them. I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have another vertical threat at TE (it would be awesome,) but I don't see that in Eifert. He might be more of a downfield threat in college, but this is the NFL everybody is fast. I see him as a Heath Miller kind of TE, which isn't bad, but not really what Green Bay needs. Hell, it doesn't even fit their style of offense.

I am never opposed to drafting a WR in the second round. TT has shown time and time again that he gets it right on the money, though, maybe this is the year we have a 2nd round bust.

First round NEEDS to be a big guy. NT or OL are the biggest needs.
[/quote]

I don't think TE is a low need at all for the Packers. I think you are making it that because you don't value TE's...like at all. You point to guys like Finley that have been taking in the 3rd round, and you ignore guys like Vernon Davis that have been taken in the 1st round. You seem to think that the only way a TE can be taken highly is if he's a WR-type TE. I disagree with that. You mention that you think Eifert is a Heath Miller-type, but Heath Miller was a 1st round pick. Also, what far down the field is a "downfield threat" to you? Is 15 yards downfield? If so, I certainly think Eifert can run 15 yards downfield.
I AM NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DREW BOYLHART!!

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #16 on: December 11, 2012, 12:35:07 AM »

I don't think TE is a low need at all for the Packers. I think you are making it that because you don't value TE's...like at all. You point to guys like Finley that have been taking in the 3rd round, and you ignore guys like Vernon Davis that have been taken in the 1st round. You seem to think that the only way a TE can be taken highly is if he's a WR-type TE. I disagree with that. You mention that you think Eifert is a Heath Miller-type, but Heath Miller was a 1st round pick. Also, what far down the field is a "downfield threat" to you? Is 15 yards downfield? If so, I certainly think Eifert can run 15 yards downfield.

If Green Bay wanted to focus on TEs being more important than WRs in the passing game or at least near the same level of importance... I would consider Eifert to be logical choice. Randall Cobb is the guy for the future, and the perimeter players. Vernon Davis was legitimate stud TE/WR when he came out... how does that compare to Finley in the 3rd round? Vernon Davis was taken in the first round because of his production and an outstanding combine. You're comparing oranges to clementines, one is sweeter and smaller and the other is big and more consistent. Davis trumps Finley in every category, they don't compare.

IDK why Davis' production has dropped so much this year, I had to drop him from fantasy team.

If Jennings doesn't resign, then finding another slot guy takes the edge over TE imo. I also don't think Eifert would help us win more games, which is the bottom line to me. GB has great TEs who play STs, and do their part when called upon.

First and second rounds are all about finding guys who will help you win games and protect the future. Is Eifert going to be the next Calvin Johnson of TEs? I highly doubt it. Drafting Eifert might solidify the position for a few years, but I doubt he would create anymore impact than the ones already on the roster.

Eifert is a good player and a solid first round pick. He's just not a solid pick for Green Bay. IDC if he's BPA, Green Bay has more pressing needs than TE.

My opinion is subject to change, and if he has a good combine I would like him a lot more. He needs to run in the low 4.6s for me to like him, and not mind the pick.

Offline Drew the Draft Guru

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Twitter: @DraftHobbyist
    • DraftHobbyist's NFL Draft Site
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #17 on: December 11, 2012, 01:08:00 AM »

I don't think TE is a low need at all for the Packers. I think you are making it that because you don't value TE's...like at all. You point to guys like Finley that have been taking in the 3rd round, and you ignore guys like Vernon Davis that have been taken in the 1st round. You seem to think that the only way a TE can be taken highly is if he's a WR-type TE. I disagree with that. You mention that you think Eifert is a Heath Miller-type, but Heath Miller was a 1st round pick. Also, what far down the field is a "downfield threat" to you? Is 15 yards downfield? If so, I certainly think Eifert can run 15 yards downfield.

If Green Bay wanted to focus on TEs being more important than WRs in the passing game or at least near the same level of importance... I would consider Eifert to be logical choice. Randall Cobb is the guy for the future, and the perimeter players. Vernon Davis was legitimate stud TE/WR when he came out... how does that compare to Finley in the 3rd round? Vernon Davis was taken in the first round because of his production and an outstanding combine. You're comparing oranges to clementines, one is sweeter and smaller and the other is big and more consistent. Davis trumps Finley in every category, they don't compare.

IDK why Davis' production has dropped so much this year, I had to drop him from fantasy team.

If Jennings doesn't resign, then finding another slot guy takes the edge over TE imo. I also don't think Eifert would help us win more games, which is the bottom line to me. GB has great TEs who play STs, and do their part when called upon.

First and second rounds are all about finding guys who will help you win games and protect the future. Is Eifert going to be the next Calvin Johnson of TEs? I highly doubt it. Drafting Eifert might solidify the position for a few years, but I doubt he would create anymore impact than the ones already on the roster.

Eifert is a good player and a solid first round pick. He's just not a solid pick for Green Bay. IDC if he's BPA, Green Bay has more pressing needs than TE.

My opinion is subject to change, and if he has a good combine I would like him a lot more. He needs to run in the low 4.6s for me to like him, and not mind the pick.

Why did you completely ignore the fact that Heath Miller was a 1st rounder? Heath Miller was taken around 30th, too, which is around where we are expecting the Packers to pick. You're right: Bringing up Vernon Davis is oranges to clementines which is why Davis was picked 6th overall, and guys like Miller and Eifert go more towards the end of the 1st round. You keep bringing up Finley, but Finley would have been a 1st rounder if he wasn't so immature and have character issues coming out of college. But look at the guys picked in the middle-end of the 1st round and then ask yourself if Eifert is really a worse prospect (this is also a weak draft): Gresham, Pettigrew, Keller, Olsen, Lewis, Miller, Winslow, Watson, Clark, Graham, Stevens and Heap going back to 2001. Shockey (14th overall) and Davis (6th overall) were also taken in the 1st round.

Lets say neither Jennings or Finley is re-signed. Correct me if I misrepresent your position, but you would rather have a slot WR over a TE. I disagree. I don't think you are considering that we have Boykin yet, too, and you don't seem to value the blocking aspect of the TE position at all, and I have no clue why you don't. A better TE that can block would help Cobb's WR screens, it would help our running game, and we'd still have a guy in the passing game to help move the chains on 3rd down and get TD's in the red zone. At WR we would still have Cobb, Nelson, Jones, and Boykin. We currently have another WR that we think enough of to have on the 53 in Jeremy Ross. Obviously we would still have to get some depth, but WR is one of the easiest positions to find talent at in the NFL, and the slot WR is considered to be the least important of all the WR positions.

I don't agree with evaluating a TE based pretty much only off of a 40 time. How does that effect blocking, how crisp a route is run, or how well a player uses his hands when catching the ball? Sure, a 40 time matters, but you are putting way too much emphasis on it. Maybe you should look at things like the bench press, 10-yard shuttle, and 20-yard shuttle as well. All of these things matter.

You say you doubt that Eifert wouldn't make any more of an impact than TE's Taylor, Crabtree, or Williams but you don't explain why other than a 40 time. So if it Eifert runs a 4.6 40 he will make an impact, but if he runs a 4.7 40 he won't. That makes sense.
I AM NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DREW BOYLHART!!

Offline Donzo

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 894
  • Living the Dream
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2012, 05:22:39 AM »
Eifert is a good player and a solid first round pick. He's just not a solid pick for Green Bay. IDC if he's BPA, Green Bay has more pressing needs than TE.

My opinion is subject to change, and if he has a good combine I would like him a lot more. He needs to run in the low 4.6s for me to like him, and not mind the pick.

Eifert (sic) in the 1st or Ertz (sic) in the 2nd would be fine by me.

Eifert’s body control & hands are awesome… He’d be a fabulous pick for the Pack.

Offline vegas492

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1181
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2012, 07:29:15 AM »
Lots of teams in the NFL already have a "hybrid" or receiving type tight end on the roster.  Eifert is going to need a good combine to go in the first, IMO.  His 40 yard dash time will the one that makes, or loses him money.

I think he is going to be a fine player.  Better than Crabtree and Taylor who we already have on the roster.  But I'm not sure that he can run routes like DJ Williams.  DJ hasn't put it together on the field yet, but he is a training camp star in the receiving drills.  Maybe he just needs opportunity?

Eifert shows that he has burst and speed, now my opinion starts to be swayed.  He certainly has the size and hands. 

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #20 on: December 11, 2012, 12:58:28 PM »

Why did you completely ignore the fact that Heath Miller was a 1st rounder? Heath Miller was taken around 30th, too, which is around where we are expecting the Packers to pick. You're right: Bringing up Vernon Davis is oranges to clementines which is why Davis was picked 6th overall, and guys like Miller and Eifert go more towards the end of the 1st round. You keep bringing up Finley, but Finley would have been a 1st rounder if he wasn't so immature and have character issues coming out of college. But look at the guys picked in the middle-end of the 1st round and then ask yourself if Eifert is really a worse prospect (this is also a weak draft): Gresham, Pettigrew, Keller, Olsen, Lewis, Miller, Winslow, Watson, Clark, Graham, Stevens and Heap going back to 2001. Shockey (14th overall) and Davis (6th overall) were also taken in the 1st round.

Lets say neither Jennings or Finley is re-signed. Correct me if I misrepresent your position, but you would rather have a slot WR over a TE. I disagree. I don't think you are considering that we have Boykin yet, too, and you don't seem to value the blocking aspect of the TE position at all, and I have no clue why you don't. A better TE that can block would help Cobb's WR screens, it would help our running game, and we'd still have a guy in the passing game to help move the chains on 3rd down and get TD's in the red zone. At WR we would still have Cobb, Nelson, Jones, and Boykin. We currently have another WR that we think enough of to have on the 53 in Jeremy Ross. Obviously we would still have to get some depth, but WR is one of the easiest positions to find talent at in the NFL, and the slot WR is considered to be the least important of all the WR positions.

I don't agree with evaluating a TE based pretty much only off of a 40 time. How does that effect blocking, how crisp a route is run, or how well a player uses his hands when catching the ball? Sure, a 40 time matters, but you are putting way too much emphasis on it. Maybe you should look at things like the bench press, 10-yard shuttle, and 20-yard shuttle as well. All of these things matter.

You say you doubt that Eifert wouldn't make any more of an impact than TE's Taylor, Crabtree, or Williams but you don't explain why other than a 40 time. So if it Eifert runs a 4.6 40 he will make an impact, but if he runs a 4.7 40 he won't. That makes sense.

Does it really matter where Heath Miller was drafted? He was a solid all-around TE, and has been in the NFL end of story. Eifert has a good chance to have that success as well... end of story. I didn't ignore it. I just didn't consider it important.

"So if it Eifert runs a 4.6 40 he will make an impact, but if he runs a 4.7 40 he won't. That makes sense."- Why do you always try to skew my words into your own assumptions? - I never said it would give him more of an impact. I said I would like him more. Obviously, a 40 time alone does not translate to NFL success. I don't look at the shuttles or the bench press because they are hard to judge at this moment, and with no combine the 40 time is the easiest to project.

"The slot WR is considered to be the least important of all the WR positions."- Really... come on man. You're right. Randall Cobb isn't Green Bay's leading receiver in receptions and yards.

 You're hitting a lot of fouls balls into left field man, and you're missing the fastball, Green Bay needs big guys. They have been light in pants for the last few years, and always seem to catch the injury bug at those positions. The two previous drafts have been focused on finding those skill players on offense and defense. With exception of Sherrod they haven't taken an actual big guy in the first two rounds. Sherrod is massive... that is my definition of big. I'll settle for a "smaller big guy" on the offensive line< I really hope you understand what this means because I am not going explain it.

Eifert needs to prove at the combine he is a true athlete and not just a run of the mill average TE. I don't expect him to match up with a guy like Davis, but he needs to do better than what I think he has in the tank. I've watched ND quite a bit this year, and I like him. I don't even think he'll be available by the time GB drafts... he's pretty good. Would you trade up to get Eifert... let's see how much you really like him.



« Last Edit: December 11, 2012, 01:07:41 PM by claymaker »

Offline Eric

  • Second String
  • **
  • Posts: 70
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #21 on: December 11, 2012, 01:30:12 PM »
Didn't think Eifert would cause so much arguing.  His hands and high-pointing ability are top notch and his blocking is fine.  At the bottom of round 1, I think a solid starter is very valuable.  If DeCastro had been available last year, I would have picked him in a second even though he's a guard and the Pack needed pass rush.  I think when you can get someone that you're almost positive is a eight year starting player that's a great bottom of round 1 pick.  If they took Eifert and he had a career similar to Miller I'd be happy.  If he's more like Witten or Heap, even better.

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #22 on: December 11, 2012, 01:52:27 PM »
He and I have different views on the draft process, and butt heads A LOT. He focuses more on the numbers/value and drafting players where they should go, and rightly so. It is a proven strategy that translates into a successful team. I don't disagree with it, but sometimes you need to pull the trigger on something you need to tip the tables for want to do on offense or defense.

Green Bay has done that a lot: Raji, Matthews, Rodgers, Cobb, Hayward. Which I am more focused on THIS draft. I feel like this is the year they need to splurge a bit and grab that one or two things they're missing. And GB has no shortage of TEs.

Offline scoremore

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1495
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #23 on: December 11, 2012, 09:37:04 PM »
Needs won't really shape up for awhile yet.

Jennings season was a waste.  It is quite possible he ends up with the Pack after all.

Same could be said for Finely.

As of now most pressing needs are a run stuffing DT and help at the O-line.

Bulaga by all reports will be fine.  On the left side that's another story.

Not sure on Sherrod.  He still could be really good.  Just don't know.

Be wise to cover our bases here.  Eric Fisher is a guy I like that may be available when we pick at 32 :) ...

Really I hope Pack lands a big man on either side in the 1st.

OK on rest of D except possiblity of ILB...

On offense depending on Jennings and Finley...OL (2), WR, RB.

We don't need another TE IMO.  If we cut Fin and don't resign him that could change.  In which case draft a developmental TE 4th round or later.

What I'm looking at right now.   

Offline vegas492

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1181
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #24 on: December 12, 2012, 08:25:49 AM »
Didn't think Eifert would cause so much arguing.  His hands and high-pointing ability are top notch and his blocking is fine.  At the bottom of round 1, I think a solid starter is very valuable.  If DeCastro had been available last year, I would have picked him in a second even though he's a guard and the Pack needed pass rush.  I think when you can get someone that you're almost positive is a eight year starting player that's a great bottom of round 1 pick.  If they took Eifert and he had a career similar to Miller I'd be happy.  If he's more like Witten or Heap, even better.
But is he Miller/Witten/Heaps, or Bubba Franks or John Carlson?

That is why I won't get hyped about him until the Combine is over.

Offline Drew the Draft Guru

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Twitter: @DraftHobbyist
    • DraftHobbyist's NFL Draft Site
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #25 on: December 12, 2012, 08:54:16 AM »

Why did you completely ignore the fact that Heath Miller was a 1st rounder? Heath Miller was taken around 30th, too, which is around where we are expecting the Packers to pick. You're right: Bringing up Vernon Davis is oranges to clementines which is why Davis was picked 6th overall, and guys like Miller and Eifert go more towards the end of the 1st round. You keep bringing up Finley, but Finley would have been a 1st rounder if he wasn't so immature and have character issues coming out of college. But look at the guys picked in the middle-end of the 1st round and then ask yourself if Eifert is really a worse prospect (this is also a weak draft): Gresham, Pettigrew, Keller, Olsen, Lewis, Miller, Winslow, Watson, Clark, Graham, Stevens and Heap going back to 2001. Shockey (14th overall) and Davis (6th overall) were also taken in the 1st round.

Lets say neither Jennings or Finley is re-signed. Correct me if I misrepresent your position, but you would rather have a slot WR over a TE. I disagree. I don't think you are considering that we have Boykin yet, too, and you don't seem to value the blocking aspect of the TE position at all, and I have no clue why you don't. A better TE that can block would help Cobb's WR screens, it would help our running game, and we'd still have a guy in the passing game to help move the chains on 3rd down and get TD's in the red zone. At WR we would still have Cobb, Nelson, Jones, and Boykin. We currently have another WR that we think enough of to have on the 53 in Jeremy Ross. Obviously we would still have to get some depth, but WR is one of the easiest positions to find talent at in the NFL, and the slot WR is considered to be the least important of all the WR positions.

I don't agree with evaluating a TE based pretty much only off of a 40 time. How does that effect blocking, how crisp a route is run, or how well a player uses his hands when catching the ball? Sure, a 40 time matters, but you are putting way too much emphasis on it. Maybe you should look at things like the bench press, 10-yard shuttle, and 20-yard shuttle as well. All of these things matter.

You say you doubt that Eifert wouldn't make any more of an impact than TE's Taylor, Crabtree, or Williams but you don't explain why other than a 40 time. So if it Eifert runs a 4.6 40 he will make an impact, but if he runs a 4.7 40 he won't. That makes sense.

Does it really matter where Heath Miller was drafted? He was a solid all-around TE, and has been in the NFL end of story. Eifert has a good chance to have that success as well... end of story. I didn't ignore it. I just didn't consider it important.

"So if it Eifert runs a 4.6 40 he will make an impact, but if he runs a 4.7 40 he won't. That makes sense."- Why do you always try to skew my words into your own assumptions? - I never said it would give him more of an impact. I said I would like him more. Obviously, a 40 time alone does not translate to NFL success. I don't look at the shuttles or the bench press because they are hard to judge at this moment, and with no combine the 40 time is the easiest to project.

"The slot WR is considered to be the least important of all the WR positions."- Really... come on man. You're right. Randall Cobb isn't Green Bay's leading receiver in receptions and yards.

 You're hitting a lot of fouls balls into left field man, and you're missing the fastball, Green Bay needs big guys. They have been light in pants for the last few years, and always seem to catch the injury bug at those positions. The two previous drafts have been focused on finding those skill players on offense and defense. With exception of Sherrod they haven't taken an actual big guy in the first two rounds. Sherrod is massive... that is my definition of big. I'll settle for a "smaller big guy" on the offensive line< I really hope you understand what this means because I am not going explain it.

Eifert needs to prove at the combine he is a true athlete and not just a run of the mill average TE. I don't expect him to match up with a guy like Davis, but he needs to do better than what I think he has in the tank. I've watched ND quite a bit this year, and I like him. I don't even think he'll be available by the time GB drafts... he's pretty good. Would you trade up to get Eifert... let's see how much you really like him.

So now you are arguing against your own example of Heath Miller? Yes, it does matter where Heath Miller went in the draft because you said Eifert is like Miller, and if Miller was good enough to go in the 1st round why wouldn't Eifert be good enough? Obviously the NFL values that type of TE as a 1st rounder because they took that type of TE in the 1st round.

About the 40 time, the reason you use it is because you think it is effects a player's ability to impact the NFL, right? So sure you didn't say it but the fact that you look at a 40 time as an indicator shows that I wasn't skewing anything.

On the slot WR, if Cobb is such a great slot WR then why would we want another slot WR over a TE? I really don't understand your argument here.

You bring up big guys like I'm totally against the, but I'm not. The fact of the matter is we aren't going to have a shot at the top big guy in the draft. Eifert is considered to be the best TE in the draft. So I'm not against a big guy, but if it's between the 10th best big guy and the best TE I might want to take a TE over the big guy because he's a better player. Your philosophy seems to be to take whatever big guy is there regardless of who it is. I disagree with putting that much emphasis on need, but I don't disagree with putting some emphasis on need. The best way to put it is to find the best guy that makes sense for your football team. If we lose Finley that could very well be Eifert.
I AM NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DREW BOYLHART!!

Offline Drew the Draft Guru

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Twitter: @DraftHobbyist
    • DraftHobbyist's NFL Draft Site
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #26 on: December 12, 2012, 09:55:09 AM »
He and I have different views on the draft process, and butt heads A LOT. He focuses more on the numbers/value and drafting players where they should go, and rightly so. It is a proven strategy that translates into a successful team. I don't disagree with it, but sometimes you need to pull the trigger on something you need to tip the tables for want to do on offense or defense.

Green Bay has done that a lot: Raji, Matthews, Rodgers, Cobb, Hayward. Which I am more focused on THIS draft. I feel like this is the year they need to splurge a bit and grab that one or two things they're missing. And GB has no shortage of TEs.

To be honest, I'm not sure you have a set view on the draft process. Here are some of your quotes:
I don't see WR as a need because Rodgers has Cobb, Nelson, and Jones. TE is a bigger necessity than WR.  They might draft a WR they like, but I wouldn't agree with them spending anything less than a 4th round pick.

I like Austin at KR, truthfully. Cobb is a definite stud in this offense, so they need to limit some of his possessions. It would also be good to get some speed at RB. Austin in the 2nd round? IDK... With Rodgers at the helm skill players like that lose A LOT of value. They need big guys still.


I don't think TE is a low need at all for the Packers. I think you are making it that because you don't value TE's...like at all. You point to guys like Finley that have been taking in the 3rd round, and you ignore guys like Vernon Davis that have been taken in the 1st round. You seem to think that the only way a TE can be taken highly is if he's a WR-type TE. I disagree with that. You mention that you think Eifert is a Heath Miller-type, but Heath Miller was a 1st round pick. Also, what far down the field is a "downfield threat" to you? Is 15 yards downfield? If so, I certainly think Eifert can run 15 yards downfield.

If Green Bay wanted to focus on TEs being more important than WRs in the passing game or at least near the same level of importance... I would consider Eifert to be logical choice. Randall Cobb is the guy for the future, and the perimeter players. Vernon Davis was legitimate stud TE/WR when he came out... how does that compare to Finley in the 3rd round? Vernon Davis was taken in the first round because of his production and an outstanding combine. You're comparing oranges to clementines, one is sweeter and smaller and the other is big and more consistent. Davis trumps Finley in every category, they don't compare.

IDK why Davis' production has dropped so much this year, I had to drop him from fantasy team.

If Jennings doesn't resign, then finding another slot guy takes the edge over TE imo. I also don't think Eifert would help us win more games, which is the bottom line to me. GB has great TEs who play STs, and do their part when called upon.

First and second rounds are all about finding guys who will help you win games and protect the future. Is Eifert going to be the next Calvin Johnson of TEs? I highly doubt it. Drafting Eifert might solidify the position for a few years, but I doubt he would create anymore impact than the ones already on the roster.

Eifert is a good player and a solid first round pick. He's just not a solid pick for Green Bay. IDC if he's BPA, Green Bay has more pressing needs than TE.

My opinion is subject to change, and if he has a good combine I would like him a lot more. He needs to run in the low 4.6s for me to like him, and not mind the pick.


I don't think TE is a low need at all for the Packers. I think you are making it that because you don't value TE's...like at all. You point to guys like Finley that have been taking in the 3rd round, and you ignore guys like Vernon Davis that have been taken in the 1st round. You seem to think that the only way a TE can be taken highly is if he's a WR-type TE. I disagree with that. You mention that you think Eifert is a Heath Miller-type, but Heath Miller was a 1st round pick. Also, what far down the field is a "downfield threat" to you? Is 15 yards downfield? If so, I certainly think Eifert can run 15 yards downfield.

If Green Bay wanted to focus on TEs being more important than WRs in the passing game or at least near the same level of importance... I would consider Eifert to be logical choice. Randall Cobb is the guy for the future, and the perimeter players. Vernon Davis was legitimate stud TE/WR when he came out... how does that compare to Finley in the 3rd round? Vernon Davis was taken in the first round because of his production and an outstanding combine. You're comparing oranges to clementines, one is sweeter and smaller and the other is big and more consistent. Davis trumps Finley in every category, they don't compare.

IDK why Davis' production has dropped so much this year, I had to drop him from fantasy team.

If Jennings doesn't resign, then finding another slot guy takes the edge over TE imo. I also don't think Eifert would help us win more games, which is the bottom line to me. GB has great TEs who play STs, and do their part when called upon.

First and second rounds are all about finding guys who will help you win games and protect the future. Is Eifert going to be the next Calvin Johnson of TEs? I highly doubt it. Drafting Eifert might solidify the position for a few years, but I doubt he would create anymore impact than the ones already on the roster.

Eifert is a good player and a solid first round pick. He's just not a solid pick for Green Bay. IDC if he's BPA, Green Bay has more pressing needs than TE.

My opinion is subject to change, and if he has a good combine I would like him a lot more. He needs to run in the low 4.6s for me to like him, and not mind the pick.

I hope I got all of those quotes right. You've gone from thinking that the Packers should get a TE over a WR to thinking the Packers should get a WR over a TE. You've said that if Jennings leaves we should get another slot WR implying that he's the slot WR, but then you said that Cobb is our best WR and he's our slot guy (and you said it in a very arrogant manner I might add). I guess you can be confident in your arrogance when you know you are going to be right because you are on both sides of so many issues.
I AM NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DREW BOYLHART!!

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #27 on: December 12, 2012, 03:51:45 PM »
"Yes, it does matter where Heath Miller went in the draft because you said Eifert is like Miller, and if Miller was good enough to go in the 1st round why wouldn't Eifert be good enough? Obviously the NFL values that type of TE as a 1st rounder because they took that type of TE in the 1st round."- Never said Eifert wasn't good enough for the first round, or are you completely ignoring the fact that I am admitting he is a good player+first round lock?

"On the slot WR, if Cobb is such a great slot WR then why would we want another slot WR over a TE? I really don't understand your argument here."- There is more than one slot position on the field. I was arrogant about you saying slot WR is the least important of all
WR positions because you were dead wrong. I could drop a lot of names of slot receivers who are constant contributors to their team. That's strike one.

"The fact of the matter is we aren't going to have a shot at the top big guy in the draft. Eifert is considered to be the best TE in the draft. So I'm not against a big guy, but if it's between the 10th best big guy and the best TE I might want to take a TE over the big guy because he's a better player. Your philosophy seems to be to take whatever big guy is there regardless of who it is. I disagree with putting that much emphasis on need, but I don't disagree with putting some emphasis on need."- And this is where realizing that a TE in the first round isn't a smart idea for Green Bay. I had hoped you would have realized I am not a complete idiot, and IF Eifert is there and let's say D.J Fluker are both available, then I am on the side of trading back. You can't just pick someone off need where they don't fit, DUH. Fouled off another pitch.

"About the 40 time, the reason you use it is because you think it is effects a player's ability to impact the NFL, right? So sure you didn't say it but the fact that you look at a 40 time as an indicator shows that I wasn't skewing anything."- No, but it certainly helps. I was reiterating my point for you, YET AGAIN, that it would make him more appealing to me. You made it into me thinking the 40 time was the only important measurable, swing and a miss.

Just so you know, I look at both sides a lot. Sorry I like touching all the bases, but it doesn't mean I agree with both sides of the argument all the time. There are times where nobody is wrong. I can't just look at my own opinion as the only one that is right.

Offline Drew the Draft Guru

  • All Pro
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Twitter: @DraftHobbyist
    • DraftHobbyist's NFL Draft Site
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #28 on: December 12, 2012, 04:44:17 PM »
"Yes, it does matter where Heath Miller went in the draft because you said Eifert is like Miller, and if Miller was good enough to go in the 1st round why wouldn't Eifert be good enough? Obviously the NFL values that type of TE as a 1st rounder because they took that type of TE in the 1st round."- Never said Eifert wasn't good enough for the first round, or are you completely ignoring the fact that I am admitting he is a good player+first round lock?

"On the slot WR, if Cobb is such a great slot WR then why would we want another slot WR over a TE? I really don't understand your argument here."- There is more than one slot position on the field. I was arrogant about you saying slot WR is the least important of all
WR positions because you were dead wrong. I could drop a lot of names of slot receivers who are constant contributors to their team. That's strike one.

"The fact of the matter is we aren't going to have a shot at the top big guy in the draft. Eifert is considered to be the best TE in the draft. So I'm not against a big guy, but if it's between the 10th best big guy and the best TE I might want to take a TE over the big guy because he's a better player. Your philosophy seems to be to take whatever big guy is there regardless of who it is. I disagree with putting that much emphasis on need, but I don't disagree with putting some emphasis on need."- And this is where realizing that a TE in the first round isn't a smart idea for Green Bay. I had hoped you would have realized I am not a complete idiot, and IF Eifert is there and let's say D.J Fluker are both available, then I am on the side of trading back. You can't just pick someone off need where they don't fit, DUH. Fouled off another pitch.

"About the 40 time, the reason you use it is because you think it is effects a player's ability to impact the NFL, right? So sure you didn't say it but the fact that you look at a 40 time as an indicator shows that I wasn't skewing anything."- No, but it certainly helps. I was reiterating my point for you, YET AGAIN, that it would make him more appealing to me. You made it into me thinking the 40 time was the only important measurable, swing and a miss.

Just so you know, I look at both sides a lot. Sorry I like touching all the bases, but it doesn't mean I agree with both sides of the argument all the time. There are times where nobody is wrong. I can't just look at my own opinion as the only one that is right.

If Eifert is a good player worthy of a 1st round pick and there was no big guy worthy of taking over Eifert, why would you trade down? We've been assuming we would lose Finley so there would be a need for a TE. So you would trade down from a position to get good value, talent, and a need? Yeah, we have different draft philosophies because that makes no sense.

What is the least important WR position then? I understand that some teams like the Patriots design their offense around the slot WR, but that's the exception to the rule. In fact, the Patriots and Welker have contract issues because Welker wants to be paid like a #1 and the Patriots want to pay him like a slot WR because slot WR's get paid less since they are less important. The Andre Johnsons, Calvin Johnsons, and Larry Fitzgeralds of the world are the ones making the big bucks.

You do more than look at both sides of the argument. You take both sides of the argument.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 04:46:28 PM by Drew the Draft Guru »
I AM NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DREW BOYLHART!!

Offline Terranimal

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: First 2013 Mock
« Reply #29 on: December 12, 2012, 06:20:43 PM »
If Fiedorowicz enters the draft, I think he'll be the first TE taken.
Is he that good?  Someone on here pointed out his name to me, and Fauria's.  I can't wait to see their combine.  And to be fair, I can't wait to see Eifert's combine too.

umm that would be me......and that was because of a poster who brought him to me on another board named palmy....... ;)

To the other poster: Fido won't be first TE taken. It's not 100% he enters this year, but could go rd 3 on with rd 4 being most popular these days.