Assessing the potential impact of the Packers' draft picks – Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Green Bay — Three of the first four players that the Green Bay Packers selected from the Southeastern Conference in the 2011, ’12, ’13 and ’14 drafts made the NFL all-rookie team.

Randall Cobb, Eddie Lacy and Ha Ha Clinton-Dix are three of the team’s top players, and Casey Hayward recently departed for $6.8 million guaranteed during free agency.

Given those bull’s-eyes and the superiority of the SEC, it’s astounding that not one of the Packers’ 15 picks in the 2015 and ’16 drafts came from the conference.

Despite something of a down year, the SEC still led in players drafted (51) and first-round picks (eight). You don’t hear scouts talking so much in the last two or three years about college football being the SEC and the minor leagues, but there’s a reason some teams still assign their best regional scouts to the South.

Instead, the Packers have chosen to mine the Pacific-12 Conference. They took a league-leading four from there over the weekend, making it seven of their 15 selections the last two years and 15 in all over the last six drafts compared with seven for the SEC.

Nose tackle Kenny Clark of UCLA was the club’s fourth first-round pick from the Pac-12 in the last five years, joining Nick Perry, Datone Jones and Damarious Randall.

“I know the guys upstairs are, like, ‘Why are we going to the West Coast so much?'” said Sam Seale, who has scouted the West for the Packers since 1995. “We ought to go down to the SEC, but to me football is football. If you’re a player, you’re a player.”

Any organization would be hard-pressed to stay ahead of the game without a steady influx of draft choices from the SEC.

Other than geography, the Packers’ 12th draft class for general manager Ted Thompson might be best remembered for its overall intelligence.

The seven choices averaged 25.4 on the 50-question Wonderlic intelligence test, about five points better than the NFL average. Green Bay’s selections averaged 22.6 a year ago, 23.2 in 2014 and 20.8 in ’13 (Charles Johnson’s score unavailable).

Last year, Thompson drafted extraneously, taking chances on nonessential pieces that a weaker team could not.

The Packers didn’t need another wide receiver (Ty Montgomery) in the third round, a quarterback (Brett Hundley) in the fifth, a fullback (Aaron Ripkowski) in the sixth or an undersized interior rusher (Christian Ringo) with no base position, also in the sixth.

Remarkably, just one of the eight choices last year weighed as much as 250 pounds.

In dramatic contrast, this was a meat-and-potatoes draft defined by need and size.

The Packers’ first five selections all fit what might be considered the team’s five positions of most need. If Dean Lowry were to eat a big steak dinner, then four would weigh at least 300 and two more are in the 240s.

The strong suspicion is that Darron Lee was the Packers’ guy in the first round, but he went seven slots before Clark to the Jets.

Myles Jack, regarded as an even better inside linebacker than Lee, was there at No. 27 but the Packers passed, presumably because their degree of medical risk was too great to warrant a first-round choice and the first three years of guaranteed base salaries that go with it.

Rather than resort to superficiality and assign a letter grade on this draft overall, let’s dig into the Packers’ choices. Much of the information stems from countless interviews with general managers, personnel directors and area scouts in the last five months on more than 350 draft-eligible players.

Following each pick are two numbers. On a 1-to-10 scale — with 10 being the highest — the first number is the player’s chance to make a significant contribution as a rookie and the second number is his chance to make a significant contribution during his career in Green Bay.

Kenny Clark, NT, UCLA (9, 9): Several personnel people said they would have taken Louisiana Tech’s Vernon Butler with the 27th choice rather than Clark. Butler, they say, has more versatility and pass rush due in part to his much longer arms (35 inches to 32 1/8) and better quickness.

Be that as it may, for what the Packers need now and in the foreseeable future, it’s hard to quibble with the decision to pick Clark.

Clark is better against the run as a nose tackle than Butler. Minus B.J. Raji, the Packers needed to exit this draft with a suitable replacement.

“Butler does struggle with double teams,” one scout said last week. “He gets his pads up and doesn’t drop to a knee and split the double team. He shows a tendency to get driven back at times. He has a little laziness about him.”

The fact Clark played in the Pac-12 and not Conference USA, as did Butler, should be another comforting factor for the Packers.

Clark plays with a burning intensity not unlike Mike Daniels, according to one executive in personnel. Besides the fire, he seems to be one of those interior players that gains natural leverage and is difficult to move.

Maybe Clark, at least early in his career, can provide pass rush on nickel downs. Raji played an exorbitant amount of snaps in years two, three and four, primarily because he was too valuable to rest.

Raji’s pressure totals of 33 1/2 in 2010, 191/2 in ’11 and 19 in ’12 fell precipitously in ’13 and ’15. The sense is that Clark doesn’t have quite the movement of the youthful Raji, but one scout warned that the talent difference between them might be less than imagined.

The Packers spoke about Clark’s maturity, especially for a 20-year-old. In my conversations with scouts, his intangibles were off the charts.

Could Clark be an effective 5-technique? Ryan Pickett was the same height but did an adequate job playing opposite the tackle from 2010-’12 when Raji was riding high over the center. Clark probably could, too, but nose is his best position.

In the previous 10 drafts, seven pure nose tackles were selected in the first round. The jury remains out on Danny Shelton in Cleveland, but five of the other six at least were solid starters.

No one is suggesting Clark will become the next Dontari Poe in Kansas City. However, he’s equipped to be effective. Plus, he has never had a serious injury.

Jason Spriggs, T, Indiana (5, 8): If the Packers traded up for Spriggs as leverage in upcoming contract negotiations with LT David Bakhtiari, LG Josh Sitton or RG T.J. Lang, it was the wrong reason.

They need more good players, not less. Odds are that injuries will settle the money issues, but if they don’t the Packers should structure their salary cap so there is money to pay their top players.

Spriggs was a wise selection because injuries have been the bane of Bryan Bulaga’s existence and because there is an overriding need to protect Aaron Rodgers.

The Packers didn’t draft an offensive lineman a year ago and, in the words of one scout, “They paid the price for it.” Don Barclay was routinely destroyed as the swing tackle, allowing 33 pressures (nine were sacks) in just 32.6% playing time.

When the Packers’ second-round board was about to get wiped clean, Thompson traded up with the Colts for the last tackle that scouts said had starter’s ability.

Spriggs was the most athletic offensive lineman in the draft. He’s a four-year starter in a solid league (Big Ten), although Indiana football has been a perennial weakling.

He’s not a grooved pass blocker like Notre Dame’s Ronnie Stanley or a go-for-the-throat finisher like Michigan State’s Jack Conklin. He ducks his head a bit too much in pass protection and drives some scouts batty with what they maintain is his passive approach.

Regardless, coach Mike McCarthy and his quarterback now know they have three tackles that can play. That must be a comforting feeling indeed.

Kyler Fackrell, OLB, Utah State (5, 6): This was a strong inside pass-rushing draft but average to below in terms of outside rushers.

Why the Packers aren’t going to re-sign hustling Mike Neal makes little sense. But, partly because of that decision, they felt compelled to draft an outside rusher high even though Fackrell was the 11th outside linebacker selected.

Although Fackrell played outside in a 3-4 scheme for his entire career, he seems better cast as a strong-side linebacker playing over the tight end in a 4-3.

One scout likened him to Scott Fujita, a fifth-round draft choice in 2002 by Kansas City. He started 125 of 143 games as a 4-3 “sam” in an 11-year career, registering 598 tackles and 23 1/2 sacks.

Fujita’s height-weight-speed numbers as a rookie were 6-5 1/2, 248, 4.71. Fackrell’s are 6-5, 245, 4.65. Like Fujita, Fackrell is athletic and smart.

Of the 10 pass rushers taken before him, Fackrell’s speed trails only Leonard Floyd and Emmanuel Ogbah. At 6-5 1/2, Floyd is the only one taller.

Almost all of the prospects, however, are stronger than Fackrell.

In order to win rushing against capable tackles, Fackrell won’t be able to rely on his nifty feet and good burst alone. Tackles will just push him wide if he doesn’t develop more power.

The Packers can only hope that Fackrell will be a more robust player the longer removed he is from his reconstructive knee surgery in September 2014.

Finding pass rushers has forever persuaded decision-makers to gamble, and it appears Thompson took one here.

Blake Martinez, ILB Stanford (6, 6): Last year, Jake Ryan (6-2 1/2, 240, 4.65) arrived as the 129th pick in the fourth round. On Saturday, Martinez (6-1 1/2, 240, 4.67) was drafted as the 131st pick in the fourth round.

How to differentiate between the two?

On Sunday, one personnel man said Ryan was more physical but Martinez would have the edge in short-area quickness and coverage ability, both running the seam with tight ends and man assignments underneath.

“It’s too close to say who will have a better career,” the scout said. “But I’d take (Sam Barrington) over those two.”

As the 12th player selected at inside linebacker, Martinez’ speed and instincts make him interesting. He probably plays the pass better than the run, and in the NFL of today that’s a good thing.

Dean Lowry, DE, Northwestern (4, 5): The two tallest 5-techniques in seven seasons of 3-4 defense under coordinator Dom Capers were Datone Jones and Mike Pennel. At 6-4, they’re 1 1/2 inches shorter than Lowry, who can go eye-to-eye with those massive right tackles.

The question is, can Lowry, with abnormally short arms (31), extricate himself from tackles whose average arm length is at least 34?

It’s possibly safe to say that the Packers took Lowry a round or three earlier than the NFL consensus. It’s a reach, but that doesn’t necessarily make him a bad pick.

Khyri Thornton (6-2 1/2, 312, 5.04, 32 1/2 arms), their third-round choice in 2014, was a bust at 5-technique largely because he played without aggressiveness.

Lowry (6-5 1/2, 296, 4.85) won’t have that problem. He’s a hard charger all the time.

As a fourth-round pick, and with Pennel suspended for the first four games, Lowry could play a lot early. It remains to be seen if Big Ten production translates to NFL production.

Trevor Davis, WR, California (4, 6): It’s unlikely Davis has the strength or ruggedness to make a tackle on special teams. His ticket to employment will be speed, where he ranks alongside Jeff Janis at the position.

The best measure of Davis’ speed is 4.41. Of the 16 wideouts selected before him, the only ones faster were Corey Coleman (4.38) and Will Fuller (4.33) in the first round and Ricardo Louis (4.40) in the fourth.

Davis isn’t nearly as strong as Bill Schroeder (sixth round, 1994) but his speed is in the same range. He isn’t as athletic as Schroeder, either, but obviously is far more polished entering the league.

There’s mixed opinion about Davis as a kickoff returner, and his experience on punts is minimal.

Davis will have to make the team from scrimmage, and with that speed.

By trading one of their three fourth-round draft choices (No. 125) for Spriggs, the Packers lost the chance to take a change-of-pace running back such as Devontae Booker, who went 136th to Denver.

They then took Lowry at No. 137 over DeAndre Washington (No. 143), Paul Perkins (No. 149) and Jonathan Williams (No. 156), three more backs with intriguing qualities.

Kyle Murphy, T, Stanford (1, 3): Talk about the bottom of the barrel. When Murphy went in Round 6 as the 200th pick, he was the 21st tackle selected. Fifty-three more players would be drafted but nary another tackle.

Murphy started for one season at right tackle and another at left tackle. Competent swing tackles have value, as the Packers discovered last year.

Looking far ahead, it could be Murphy vs. Barclay for the No. 4 tackle job.

At 6-6 1/2, Murphy is 2 1/2 inches taller. However, Barclay’s 33 3/8-inch arms are a tad longer than Murphy’s and his massive hands (10 7/8) are more than an inch longer.

Several scouts said Murphy can’t play guard, although the Packers certainly will experiment with him inside in training camp.

Considering the league-wide shortage of reliable offensive linemen, maybe Murphy was a worthwhile selection. The Packers will know sooner than later if the list of tackles that can play ran out before Murphy.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)