A few short hours ago, we asked you to give your opinion on who we should select on behalf of the Green Bay Packers with the 55th overall pick in the SBNation Blogger Mock Draft. We have made our selection and chosen a player who we believe will be a force in the trenches for years to come. Acme Packing Company has selected...
Travis Frederick, Center, Wisconsin
Ultimately, this pick comes down to a few factors, including both depth of the talent pool and the ability of the draft pick to contribute immediately. While Brian Schwenke might still be available for the Packers in round three, we felt that the odds of finding a top center would be less likely than finding an upper-level nose tackle a round later.
Frederick can come in and compete with Evan Dietrich-Smith for the starting center job from day one. Then whichever one doesn't earn the job can be a solid backup at any of the three interior line positions, which currently have very little depth behind the starters. We did consider the fact that Frederick is more of a power blocker and therefore may not be an ideal fit in a zone-blocking scheme like the one the Packers tend to run, but we are confident that his intelligence, strength, and technique would make him effective in any system.
Dan Kadar of Mocking the Draft echoes these concerns, however, in his comments on our pick:
Frederick is somewhat of an odd choice for the Packers. It does fill a need. But Wisconsin interior linemen have generally been immobile power blockers. That includes players like John Moffitt, Kevin Zeitler and, to a lesser degree, Peter Konz. Frederick comes out of the Wisconsin program with similar questions about his movement skills. A player like Brian Schwenke of California would be an optimal fit and likely available in the third round.
This leaves us with two picks and two offensive players, one at tight end in Tyler Eifert and one on the interior of the offensive line with Frederick. Should we have been more focused on the defense, was choosing Frederick instead of Schwenke a poor fit, or do you agree that the need and value met up well? Let us know in the comments below.