Green, Alex RB-GBP @ the 3.32, Pick #96 (1 Viewer)

[Toads]

For those of you not acquainted with Alex Green, or (*) What The Bleep, Down The Rabbit Hole:

1) The former is from Hawaii and gained 8.2 yd/carry in 2010, benefiting from the spread offense used by Hawaii.

a. At the #96 pick, he represents at large leap of faith for the usually reliable GBP brain trust.

2) The RSP places him at the #25 RB slot and notes that he's reliable from the injury standpoint and is an ace receiver out of the back field. He's a high fumble risk (8 fumbles out of 271 carries in '09-'10) and is good at the GL and as 3rd down back. He's a lousy blocker so he's a unlikely candidate for those "protecting the QB" assignments.

3) PFW assigns him a grade of 5.22 and places him between the #150-160 player ranking.

This is why evaluating NFL players is the hardest job in the world. Imagine hanging your hat, and future employment possibilities, on Alex Green?

So, let's here (hear) it for this guy: why does the Pack take this guy this early in the draft? What do they see that no one else sees?

And, where does he fit in: as a 3rd down specialists that doesn't do much accept catch passes and score TD's?



(*) What The Bleep, Down The Rabbit Hole, Deluxe Edition (3-CD set) is available from Net Flicks. It's a discourse on Quantum Physics, aka "What The Bleep Do We Know". This series of experiencial date is presented by eleven noted Quantum scientists and includes some real nice topics that apply to picking NFL talent, such as "Parallel Universe" theory. Quantum Physics is also the study of energy fields and small particle theory. This 3CD set is a must view for all that are interested in alternate descriptions of "WAS HAPPENIN".

 

[coolnerd]

32 teams have 32 diferent evaluations on players down????

 

[sho nuff]

32 teams have 32 diferent evaluations on players down????

Or even better...32 teams have different evaluations than many draft publications.As for his blocking...not sure its terrible...from what I have heard they really didn't ask him to do much of it.I think they wanted that 3rd down yardage guy and a guy who could catch.But I don't know enough about the guy. What kind of speed does he have. I was hoping for a guy who could catch and had some speed out of the backfield. I guess they could use Cobb for that from time to time. Or someone with return skills (again, now they have Cobb for that).

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I thought it was a great pick.

I watched him play a lot this year, he's much more than a 3rd down specialist.

 

[Packers]

I'd trust the GBP Brain trust. It looks as if Brandon Jackson is gone to FA. So they need a 3rd Down back, plus Grant will be gone after this year. He is big, durable, fast and is a natural receiver out of the back field.

If all he does is Catch passes and scored TD's, then I'd say he is a good pick. Remember, the PACK throw a lot. So this kid could be getting a decent number of ball out of the back field. His fumbling is a concern as you mentioned, but that can be tweaked if the Packers see something there.

Of course I like the pick and it is higher than most had him, but reading the bio's of the other RB's left, it really isn't that big of a reach.

Blocking can be taught. Starks wasn't very good when he started out last year, but by the playoffs he was just fine. He is big enough to handle the job and GB like big athletic RB's. Starks, Grant, now Green. All over 220.

Wait and see. He probably doesn't get drafted in rookie drafts, but I'd say he gets picked up during the year by a considerable amount of teams.

Plus if he is good around the GL, then you have a faster better more athletic player so you don't have to use your FB anymore like they were doing last year with Kuhn.

 

[adrenaline]

Any RB you get in the 3rd isn't considered a surefire starter. The Pack saw a guy they like & took a shot on him, I have no problem with that. Pretty sure the Super Bowl Champs aren't hanging their hats or jobs on him.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Green is the type of player who can develop into a starter. As I mentioned in the draft thread last night, Green Bay has a history of having an overlap of startable RBs dating back to when coach Edgar Bennett was a player.

Bennett-Levens

Levens-Green

Green-Grant

Now I think it's going to be Grant-Starks and eventually they hope it will be Starks-Green.

I think Green is a pick that demonstrates a desire to replace the Brandon Jackson-Kuhn-Nance part of the depth chart with one player.

 

[sho nuff]

Any RB you get in the 3rd isn't considered a surefire starter. The Pack saw a guy they like & took a shot on him, I have no problem with that. Pretty sure the Super Bowl Champs aren't hanging their hats or jobs on him.

Exactly...and its the end of the 3rd round. Your taking a crap shoot on some upside with a guy who fits what you want to do.And Ted has shown he is pretty good at this stuff and his job is definitely not on the line.

 

[eaglesfan7]

His blocking may keep him from seeing the field but he has upside. Looks like RBBC. Tough situation for fantasy owners.

 

[Toads]

32 teams have 32 diferent evaluations on players down????

Exactly: as in "What The Bleep Do We Know?That's why we're not evaluating talent for these teams to spend large $'s to acquire players (see Newton, Cam).

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Maybe this will slow down the Starks hype train.

 

[smackdaddies]

Maybe this will slow down the Starks hype train.

Hope not. Good for those of us smart enough to take Grant after some fool drafts Starks first

 

[Mr. Retukes]

"What The Bleep Do We Know" is a propaganda film for a cult.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramtha's_School_of_Enlightenment

 

[Burning Sensation]

Good pick for the Packers, and even better pick for Starks.

 

[Toads]

"What The Bleep Do We Know" is a propaganda film for a cult.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramtha's_School_of_Enlightenment

Google at it's very best (or worst).Don't confuse the two. The three set CD is a stand alone document not related to your reference.What We Don't Know is **** about picking NFL draft talent.

 

[smackdaddies]

Trivia -

Who was the last Packer RB drafted (before Alex Green) that averaged over 8 yards per carry?

Brent Fullwood. Now doesnt that bring back some fine memories

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

When TT cut Wahle and Rivera, I was pissed. Terrible move!

When TT signed Woodson instead of Arrington, I was pissed. Terrible move!

When TT cut Favre, I was pissed. Terrible move!

When TT drafted Jordy Nelson, I was pissed. Terrible move!

Then the Pack won the Super Bowl. TT can do whatever he wants. I won't second guess because I don't know jack.

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

Green is the type of player who can develop into a starter. As I mentioned in the draft thread last night, Green Bay has a history of having an overlap of startable RBs dating back to when coach Edgar Bennett was a player.

Bennett-Levens

Levens-Green

Green-Grant

Now I think it's going to be Grant-Starks and eventually they hope it will be Starks-Green.

I think Green is a pick that demonstrates a desire to replace the Brandon Jackson-Kuhn-Nance part of the depth chart with one player.

Good posting Matt.Green is 6'0" and 220lbs. He ran a 4.52, and is a talented pass catcher. After the elite talents are gone in rookie fantasy drafts, this guys has as good of a chance as anyone. Just because he wasn't top 100 on all the mock draft lists doesn't mean he isn't a top 100 talent. I'll take Ted Thompson's opinion over all the other mock drafters combined.

As far as his situation goes, Grant has 1 year left. So after that its Green and Starks with the RB touches in GBs offense. Is it really that ridiculous to think he may be the lead back in GB as soon as 2012?

What NFL scouts told the Journal Sentinel's Bob McGinn about the Packers' third-round selection.

AFC scout: "Big, strong kid. Very, very good receiver. More power than elusive. Would be a good, solid guy. The third round wouldn't surprise me."

NFC scout: "Down the line. He's got some talent. In fact, Green Bay was all over him (at pro day). Ted (Thompson) was there. He's a big, tall, one-cutter, kind of like the guys the Packers like. He caught it pretty good. He's probably a fourth-rounder but could slide into the third, I guess."

Tom Heckert, Cleveland: "I like Green. He's big and he ran halfway decent. He can catch the ball. Not a great blocker. He's not bad. He's a third-rounder."

AFC scout: "Third or fourth round. Bigger back. Like him."

NFC scout: "I'm not as high on him as a lot of other people are."

AFC scout: "Good back but has a huge fumbling problem. He's the definitive third-day (Saturday) guy. He's got good feet and eyes. Had a lot of production. He's either one or two in our fumble (study). He's put a lot of balls on the ground."

NFC scout: "He's solid. He played in that wide-open offense where he has lanes to run through, so it's really hard to see him make those NFL-type runs in tight quarters. It's the spread offense, and he's going to be productive in that. You give kids those lanes to run through and they're going to be productive. The hardest thing for him will be when he gets in tight quarters."

AFC scout: "He catches the ball extremely well. He looks like a one-cut-and-go guy. Looks good physically. He's basically a one-year player, but he gained 1,200 yards. Thing that worries me is 350 (327) of those yards were in one game. They ran a "pistol" this year. I gave him a third-round (grade)."

NFC scout: "Better feet for a thick guy than you would expect. And he's actually got pretty good vision. We like him."

 

[sihaokills]

Alex Green could really be something good. He is a natural receiver and is big. Blocking won't be a big problem and is easy to learn

 

[smackdaddies]

Alex Green could really be something good. He is a natural receiver and is big. Blocking won't be a big problem and is easy to learn

really.

 

[Novice2]

Is this a commercial for what the bleep do we know?

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Good pick for the Packers, and even better pick for Starks.

really ?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Good pick for the Packers, and even better pick for Starks.

really ?

I assumed the Packers were going to draft a RB(or two) in this draft. Starks has yet to prove he can sty healthy, Grant is old, and BJax was/is likely a goner. There were a few RB's in this draft i thought were good enough to take the starting job from Starks, Green isnt one of them. He is a good player, but i dont see him as an every down back, he actually is a perfect back to replace Jackson.

 

[jurrassic]

So everyone, including me somewhat, is questioning how this kid will translate to the NFL due to his having played in the spread offense in Hawaii. Well, guess what, the Packers run alot of spread offense. If James Jones is back they have Jennnigs, Driver, Jones, Nelson, Finley, Quarless and now Cobb and Williams. They also have both Grant and Starks out of the backfield. If the Packers want to go 4 wide and run draws, swings or motion him out of the backfield, with the hands he has, I'm all for it. It gives this offense another dimension and more weapons to operate with.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Green is the type of player who can develop into a starter. As I mentioned in the draft thread last night, Green Bay has a history of having an overlap of startable RBs dating back to when coach Edgar Bennett was a player. Bennett-LevensLevens-GreenGreen-GrantNow I think it's going to be Grant-Starks and eventually they hope it will be Starks-Green. I think Green is a pick that demonstrates a desire to replace the Brandon Jackson-Kuhn-Nance part of the depth chart with one player.

While I understand your broader point:- Levens was 30 years old when the Packers traded for Ahman Green. Levens was already headed downhill, so it's not like they really had 2 startable RBs- Green left the Pack after the 2006 season and signed with the Texans. Grant joined the Packers in 2007. Other than training camp (my memory isn't clear here - they might not have overlapped in camp at all), they weren't even on the same roster.Given the above, you might be overstating your case.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Trivia -Who was the last Packer RB drafted (before Alex Green) that averaged over 8 yards per carry?Brent Fullwood. Now doesnt that bring back some fine memories

Do you remember Brent fumbling on a kickoff return during preseason of his rookie year? Running toward the endzone after a great return and......Fumblewood was born!

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

You Packers fans know your team unlike any other lol

 

[Iron_Far]

For those of you not acquainted with Alex Green, or (*) What The Bleep, Down The Rabbit Hole:

1) The former is from Hawaii and gained 8.2 yd/carry in 2010, benefiting from the spread offense used by Hawaii.

a. At the #96 pick, he represents at large leap of faith for the usually reliable GBP brain trust.

2) The RSP places him at the #25 RB slot and notes that he's reliable from the injury standpoint and is an ace receiver out of the back field. He's a high fumble risk (8 fumbles out of 271 carries in '09-'10) and is good at the GL and as 3rd down back. He's a lousy blocker so he's a unlikely candidate for those "protecting the QB" assignments.

3) PFW assigns him a grade of 5.22 and places him between the #150-160 player ranking.

This is why evaluating NFL players is the hardest job in the world. Imagine hanging your hat, and future employment possibilities, on Alex Green?

So, let's here (hear) it for this guy: why does the Pack take this guy this early in the draft? What do they see that no one else sees?

And, where does he fit in: as a 3rd down specialists that doesn't do much accept catch passes and score TD's?



(*) What The Bleep, Down The Rabbit Hole, Deluxe Edition (3-CD set) is available from Net Flicks. It's a discourse on Quantum Physics, aka "What The Bleep Do We Know". This series of experiencial date is presented by eleven noted Quantum scientists and includes some real nice topics that apply to picking NFL talent, such as "Parallel Universe" theory. Quantum Physics is also the study of energy fields and small particle theory. This 3CD set is a must view for all that are interested in alternate descriptions of "WAS HAPPENIN".

As my meager mind understands it, this is some sort of post about Alex Green, the RB picked by the Packers...... or some CD (we still use CDs?) compilation of some quantum physics thing....?

 

[sho nuff]

Good pick for the Packers, and even better pick for Starks.

really ?

I assumed the Packers were going to draft a RB(or two) in this draft. Starks has yet to prove he can sty healthy, Grant is old, and BJax was/is likely a goner. There were a few RB's in this draft i thought were good enough to take the starting job from Starks, Green isnt one of them. He is a good player, but i dont see him as an every down back, he actually is a perfect back to replace Jackson.

Grant is 27. Not really that old.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Grant is 27. Not really that old.

Grant is 28 already; his b-day is in December. He turns 29 during the 2011 season.

 

[footballsavvy]

Starks is a good receiver and can do things in space. I felt more like Green could take over Grants role and Starks would ultimately fill Jackson's role. I know Starks did much more than that towards the end of last season, but he is really injury prone and has that tall build and takes a lot of risky hits. I think he could be more dangerous out of the backfield in space and as far as I know he is a good blocker. Green I could see handling Grants early down duties but could also be a threat on designed screens on non-passing downs.

 

[sho nuff]

Grant is 27. Not really that old.

Grant is 28 already; his b-day is in December. He turns 29 during the 2011 season.

Sorry, must have looked wrong...thought it said 83.Still...29 not that old at this point with not a ton of carries on him.However...not sure how much longer he will be around anywhere more so because its the last year of his contract isn't it?

 

[eaglesfan7]

Grant is 27. Not really that old.

Grant is 28 already; his b-day is in December. He turns 29 during the 2011 season.

Sorry, must have looked wrong...thought it said 83.Still...29 not that old at this point with not a ton of carries on him.However...not sure how much longer he will be around anywhere more so because its the last year of his contract isn't it?

Ryan Grant is toast. I see him being relegated to third down duties if his blocking is on par or better than Starks (which it is) and Alex Green (I have no idea about his blocking in all honesty).

 

[sho nuff]

Grant is 27. Not really that old.

Grant is 28 already; his b-day is in December. He turns 29 during the 2011 season.

Sorry, must have looked wrong...thought it said 83.Still...29 not that old at this point with not a ton of carries on him.However...not sure how much longer he will be around anywhere more so because its the last year of his contract isn't it?

Ryan Grant is toast. I see him being relegated to third down duties if his blocking is on par or better than Starks (which it is) and Alex Green (I have no idea about his blocking in all honesty).

Just how again is the guy toast?Seriously...where do some of you people come up with this?Are you just throwing crap at the wall to see what sticks...that way if somehow he does not come back to his previous form you can say "I told you so"?

 

[Steed]

Why would Ryan Grant get third downs when he can't catch?

 

[sho nuff]

Why would Ryan Grant get third downs when he can't catch?

Not sure he can't catch...just has never been used as a receiving back. Perhaps because they think he can't...perhaps because Jackson was always the better blocker so he played on 3rd downs.

 

[eaglesfan7]

Sho-nuff

It's just an opinion. Agree with it, don't agree with it. It doesn't make much of a difference to me. You don't have to take everything someone says as fact. I thought i read that Brandon Jackson will be a free agent. If so, who will be the running back to come in and block? Definitely not Starks. Rodgers said last year that blocking was what kept Starks off the field (along with injury) until late in the season. And I don't post stuff to come back later and say "I told you so". Geez, relax.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Why would Ryan Grant get third downs when he can't catch?

Not sure he can't catch...just has never been used as a receiving back. Perhaps because they think he can't...perhaps because Jackson was always the better blocker so he played on 3rd downs.

We've seen Grant play enough the past few years that we know he isn't natural catching the ball. He's serviceable at best as a receiving back.

 

[eaglesfan7]

Let's try again.

IMO Starks will be the primary ball carrier with either Green or Grant coming in on third down for blocking duties. From what I remember, Green Bay likes to throw the ball a little bit so the running back must be an experienced blocker. Throwing the ball + Brandon Jackson going bye-bye = someone must take over on 3rd downs.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Let's try again. IMO Starks will be the primary ball carrier with either Green or Grant coming in on third down for blocking duties. From what I remember, Green Bay likes to throw the ball a little bit so the running back must be an experienced blocker. Throwing the ball + Brandon Jackson going bye-bye = someone must take over on 3rd downs.

If Brandon Jackson moves on, then the Pack will absolutely need a new 3rd down RB. Still not sure who that is....nor is it clear who the primary ball carrier will be....but your premise on 3rd down is solid.

 

[sho nuff]

Sho-nuffIt's just an opinion. Agree with it, don't agree with it. It doesn't make much of a difference to me. You don't have to take everything someone says as fact. I thought i read that Brandon Jackson will be a free agent. If so, who will be the running back to come in and block? Definitely not Starks. Rodgers said last year that blocking was what kept Starks off the field (along with injury) until late in the season. And I don't post stuff to come back later and say "I told you so". Geez, relax.

My point is...saying something like "Grant is toast" is all well and good...but back it up with something.Same conversation I had with people in the draft thread just proclaiming a guy a bust. At least bring a reason.Why is it not Starks? Because earlier in the year that is what was keeping him off the field? By the end of the year and in the playoffs he was out there...he was not perfect in blocking...but he did pretty well at times.I think Starks and Grant will be splitting the duties and they will "go with the hot hand". I don't see either as any dedicated 3rd down back. Green will be in the mix also in all liklihood with his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield.I just don't think saying something like "Grant is toast" and not backing it up is very worthwhile.

 

[sho nuff]

And I think everyone agrees that if Jackson is gone (and he likely is), that someone will have to develop into being used on 3rd down. But I don't see Grant just taking any backseat to Starks just yet.

Lets not forget his seasons in 2007, 2008 and 2009. The guy has been pretty productive in this offense.

 

[TheFanatic]

I don't think Grant is toast. I think Grant has a year or two left in the tank, but the end may be nearer than that if this beast can rumble like he did in college, except hold onto the ball. I don't think Green has the blocking ability to be a 3rd down back, so I'm seeing this guy as a potential 1st and 2nd down guy as well as goal line with his size. Where Grant fits in, probably as the starter this year if he can stay healthy. Starks? Who knows right now. I don't think he has guaranteed himself anything yet beyond a roster spot.