SB Nation User Blog: Mitchell_M

This one's for Jeremy at Bucksketball.

Mitchell_M — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 03:07:33 -0000

This one's for Jeremy at Bucksketball.

Ah, the Sweet Taste of Redemption

Mitchell_M — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:15:55 -0000

Ah, the Sweet Taste of Redemption

So it turns out that staying the hell away from Andre Smith was even better than we thought. Three cheers for Raji not being a jerk!

Owning Up to Past Mistakes

Mitchell_M — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:24:43 -0000

Everybody makes poor choices now and then. If you've ever been to a bar, then you can probably imagine a person who's made nothing but poor choices since the 80's. Most of us cancel the bad out with the good, and we get on with our lives. But sometimes, we make choices that are so egregious, that we have to go back and make amends.

In March 2009, I advocated that the Packers target Alabama offensive lineman Andre Smith with their first round pick. While Cincinnatti was kind enough to take him three spots before us, I still would like to say that I am deeply, deeply sorry.

I probably shouldn't apologize so hard, because of the type of player Smith could still become. Prior to his post-college meltdown, Smith looked like he could succeed in the NFL; a big, powerful bulldozer of a football player that would overpower opposing defensive linemen and linebackers alike. That sort of potential doesn't evaporate in a few months.

But Smith certainly isn't helping matters any. According to latest reports, Smith may hold out of part or all of the Bengals' minicamp. His agent, Alvin Keels, is trying to secure a contract similar to last year's 6th overall pick (Vernon Gholston) and this year's 5th overall pick (Mark Sanchez). While every team has to deal with the out-of-control rookie pay scale, Cincinnatti is trying to avoid breaking the bank for a player that has done nothing but baffle scouts and GM's since late 2008.

In retrospect, I should have known better. I have always trusted Ted Thompson to make the right decision when it comes to the draft, and I think that after picking up B.J. Raji, most of you would agree. And it's not like Thompson ignored the gaping holes at OT, either; T.J. Lang and Jamon Meredith are the newest addition to the mid-round crop of offensive linemen that the team has collected. I think that the line will be fine as long as the best five players can take the field week in and week out.

But reading this report just blew my mind. I actually wanted Green Bay to acquire this guy. The weight problems, the weak work ethic, the ego, and the jiggling. Oh, the jiggling.

::shudder::

The only thing that will make my repentence complete is if Raji signs without the threat of a holdout. He and fellow first rounder Clay Matthews III reported to all of rookie minicamp and OTA's, so it's not like he's setting a precedent.

But that's over a month away, and I'm sure that Thompson and company are on it. I guess that leaves only one question.

Poll

Can you ever forgive me?

How the Bucks Drafted for Need

Mitchell_M — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:35:27 -0000

So I managed to get my knee-jerk reaction post out of the way on Thursday. After a longer period of reflection and meditation, I've come to the conclusion that both Brandon Jennings and Jodie Meeks filled a major need on the Bucks, even further than some people let on.

First off, Jodie Meeks may or may not have been the best player available at 41. He certainly emerged on the national stage at Kentucky, averaging nearly 24 ppg with 46% shooting. Additionally, he hit 40% of his three-pointers and 90% of his free throws. The man can flat-out score the basketball.

The Bucks easily could have drafted a big man in an attempt to shore up their depth up front. After all, besides Andrew Bogut and Charlie Villanueva, the 4 and 5 positions are pretty weak. Joe Alexander and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute need to be allowed to play their natural position more often than not, and drafting a rookie would have at least kept them from moving out of position. (Quick aside: I know that Mbah a Moute played the 4 almost more than he played the 3, and with surprising success. I know he can play the 4, I just don't think he should play it regularly.)

While a second-round pick can't exactly be counted on to provide solid bench play, I would completely understand if the Bucks went big at 41. But they didn't, opting instead for Meeks. Why? Because he fills a major need.

The Bucks' second unit is weak on scoring. While Charlie V came off the bench semi-regularly, there isn't anyone outside of Michael Redd, Ramon Sessions, and Andrew Bogut that can get consistent points. This weakness is further highlighted by the Richard Jefferson trade. If Redd gets 20, Charlie V gets 15, and Bogut and Sessions get 10 a piece, who's going to get the rest of the buckets? Alexander, Gadzuric, Ridnour, Bell, and the rest aren't scorers. Meeks is a scorer.

But he's not a scorer like J.J. Reddick, where everything came on shooting. Nor is he like Adam Morrison, who played against weak competition. Meeks can get points driving, off screens, spotting up, and from the line. If he gets enough minutes, I am confident that he would average somewhere between 8 and 12 points on the second unit.

But people don't want to wonder about Jodie Meeks and how he translates to the NBA. The hype is all about Brandon Jennings, and rightfully so. The prep-star-turned-European-pro is easily the most promising/most frustrating player coming into 2009. He's Anthony Randolph, Julian Wright, Gerald Green, or any other uber-athletic player who doesn't directly translate into the NBA.

This is not to say that Jennings will end up a two-bit rotation player that plays for five teams in six years because he's constantly being tacked onto trades as a "prospect". In fact, I think Jennings' saving grace is his position; he's a point guard, not a wing player. His ability to dribble, pass, and run the team put him above the other freak athletes that have flooded the NBA since the late 90's. But only when he puts it all together on the court. However, while he is currently no more than another unproven prospect, Jennings also fills a major need on the Bucks.

He makes them interesting.

The last time the Bucks were interesting was when Bill Simmons openly lobbied for the team's general manager vacancy. Before that, it was when ~~they were screwed out of~~ lost the 2001 Conference Finals to Philadelphia. Before that, it was in the 80's, when they were a good team that simply didn't achieve great success.

Think about the draft picks and trades that constructed the 2008-09 team. Andrew Bogut at #1 was somewhat interesting to non-Milwaukeeans, but only because of the debate between him and Marvin Williams. Bogut was the safe, smart choice, whereas Williams was the boom-or-bust pick. The Bucks played it safe. The exchange of T.J. Ford for Charlie V was widely considered a coup because they went big for small. However, Ford's injury history made him a liability, and pawning him off elsewhere was a convenient exit. The Bucks played it safe. Even last year, when they traded for Richard Jefferson, the primary motivation was to jettison the overpaid Bobby Simmons and the vastly overrated Yi Jianlian. Keeping Simmons' contract would have crippled their salary cap, and keeping Yi would have stunted the development of other young talent. The Bucks played it safe.

I have no problem with making conservative moves to slowly build a consistent winner. I hate giving big contracts to players who can't live up to them (Dan Gadzuric) or trading for players that haven't done anything in their careers on the basis of potential (Desmond Mason). But at a certain point, a team is going to need to take a risk to eventually push them out of mediocrity and into contention.

Jennings is that risk. He is that push. Look at the way he plays the game, and you can tell he's unlike anyone Milwaukee has ever had. His flair is sometimes construed as arrogance, his confidence for cockiness. Does he have a big ego? Probably. Will it get in the way of his development? Possibly. Will it make people pay attention to the Bucks?

Absolutely.

Jennings isn't even that bad off the court. He doesn't run his mouth the way a young Allen Iverson or Tyrus Thomas did. He doesn't get himself into bad situations like a young Rasheed Wallace or Jason Williams did. He's said all the right things to all the right people throughout his career. Whether it's from good judgement on his part or sound advice from his handlers, he figures to continue this trend.

But avoiding trouble off the court is easy in Milwaukee. That's likely part of the reason Gilbert Arenas hates the city so much. The best thing Jennings can do to make the Bucks interesting is take his talent and build his career here. He needs it to validate skipping college for Europe. John Hammond needs it to forge his legacy as a general manager. Scott Skiles needs it to keep his job. Michael Redd and Andrew Bogut need it to ensure their stay in Milwaukee was worthwhile. And we need it so when people learn we are Bucks fans, they will respect us.

Brandon Jennings can fill these needs. Let's hope he holds up his end of the bargain.

Brief Draft Analysis - Jennings vs. Sessions

Mitchell_M — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 04:31:42 -0000

It's been a busy few days for the Milwaukee Bucks; the RJ Giveaway Extravaganza (now featuring Amir Johnson!) rocked the NBA immediately preceding the draft. At least until Shaq and VC went to different teams earlier today and tWWL decided to focus on the Cleveland LeBrons and the Orlando Magic. The Jefferson trade itself was both a shrewd financial move and a disappointing talent loss. For 2009-10, I'm not thrilled with the way it went down, because that means another mediocre season. But I understand the corner the front office had to get out of, and I appreciate the way they got out of it. I hate myself for saying it, but the team is built for next year, not this year.

The biggest part of the trade, by most accounts, was giving the Bucks unprecedented flexibility on the issue of resigning Ramon Sessions and Charlie Villanueva. The national media regards Charlie V as the priority player, but folks around here know Memo's the main man. We should (hopefully) see news on this front by July 1st.

The draft, however, may have already given us a clue. Brandon Jennings' slide/being exactly where he belonged at 10, in addition to Jordan Hill and Jonny Flynn going to New York and Minnesota (respectively), made Hammond's choice between Jrue Holiday and Jennings a bit easier. In the end, he went with Jennings, and it may show a preference for the club to resign Villanueva first, then attend to Sessions. The fact that Jodie Meeks (who was a GREAT pick; scoring off the bench? Yes, please.) was taken in the 2nd, and there was no visible effort to acquire a PF further reinforces this sentiment.

Villanueva is a frustrating player because he's so big and talented, but insists on playing outside-in instead of the other way around. But if he leaves, Andrew Bogut is the only post presence on the team, and he hasn't shown an ability to produce consistently on offense. The Bucks can't afford to become a clone of the 08-09 Orlando Magic; Bogut is not Dwight Howard, and Michael Redd is the only Buck that can consistently hit the 3. They need to have good penetration and good passing, but most importantly, they need scoring inside. Villanueva can provide that (even if he doesn't like to), and since he's the only player on the roster who can, he almost has to stay.

Jennings has been somewhat of an enigma ever since turning down Arizona in favor of playing overseas in Italy. People know how skilled and freakishly athletic he is, but they cite his lack of production in Europe as evidence that he's just not ready for the NBA. And they're probably right.

This video shows exactly what Jennings is: an immensely skilled point guard with great speed, great passing, but an unreliable jumper. He'll blow by his man like Allen Iverson in his prime, and he'll make a pass so difficult only Steve Nash in his. But his jump shot is like LeBron James' circa 2005; the range is there, but the form is off. Great elevation, but his release point needs to be honed, as does his tendency to lean back over himself and kick out his legs. Will that ever be fixed? Perhaps not, but as long as he can hit the wide open ones, I'll be happy.

His main competition for playing time will be Ramon Sessions, if Sessions is re-signed. Sure, Luke Ridnour is still on the team, but in a season where we're almost assured a sub-.500 record, he should not be taking minutes from the two younger PG's.

Sessions is an intruiging young player who has put up some crazy numbers over his 1.5 seasons. He's not a great athlete, but has good size for the pros. His speed is adequate, as is his defense. Where he's special is when he can get penetration on the defense and use that pressure to distribute the ball or draw fouls. This is mitigated somewhat by his sub-par dribbling skills (a trait an NBA point guard should not at all have), but it hasn't really shown yet.

In a way, Jennings and Sessions are polar opposites of each other. Jennings is lightning-quick, Sessions is not. Jennings is almost tiny, Sessions is not. Jennings will often look for his own shot, Sessions does not. Jennings takes risks and makes poor decisions, Sessions does not. But what does this mean for the Bucks in both the short and long term?

If Sessions does not get resigned and is taken away by another team, then the answer is simple; let Ridnour man the point until Jennings is ready to handle more than 20-25 minutes a night. By "ready to handle", I'm not suggesting that Jennings can't play, but rather that Jennings can't play the NBA game just yet. He will start off his career by fouling too much, taking too many chances on defense, attempting too difficult of passes on offense, and generally being a pain in the neck for Scott Skiles. If he commits himself to learning the game, though, he will improve very quickly and hopefully be able to keep pace with the Derrick Rose's and Rajon Rondo's of the league.

However, if Sessions is resigned, then Jennings' role might take a different path. He'll surely start on the bench, and probably finish his first season there too. He'll compete with Sessions (and possibly Ridnour if he hasn't been traded yet), but be forced to take less than 20 minutes a night. Unless he can conform his game to Skiles' vision, he will be yanked early and often in favor of Memo if he makes too many mistakes. That sort of thing can take its toll on a player with an ego like Jennings', which will most definitely affect his standing with the team.

I want Jennings to succeed here; if he puts it all together, he can be the type of star player the city has lacked for 30+ years. He's a crazy mix of Allen Iverson, Chris Paul, and Rajon Rondo who can dish the rock and get his as well. (He's still a kid and a bit of a headcase, and I'm purposefully going to leave that issue and its potential affects on his game for another day.) But if the club is committed to resigning Ramon Sessions and unable to trade Luke Ridnour, Jennings' future in Milwaukee is cloudy.

In short, I think that keeping all three point guards (Sessions, Ridnour, and Jennings) on the team looks good on paper, but is a mistake. Somebody's going to get the short end of the stick; there's only 48 minutes to go around. Here's my ranked list of preferences of which combinations to keep (* denotes starter)

Ridnour*, Jennings
Sessions*, Jennings
Sessions*, Jennings, Ridnour

I know, it seems blasphemous to prefer keeping Ridnour to Sessions. But if letting Sessions go means that Jennings gets a chance to develop into the star he can be, I think it's a necessary sacrifice. If (and that's a big if) Ridnour gets moved and the coaching staff finds a way to make Jennings and Sessions co-exist, then so much the better. But I have my doubts.

Everybody Thank Steve Porter For Being Awesome

Mitchell_M — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:55:48 -0000

The internet has brought us a great many things. David at the dentist. Club Trillion. Scarlet takes a tumble. Zach Feinstein. NEDM.

But this may top all of them. As Kissing Suzy Kolber put it: "Joe Namath + Autotune = Post". Enjoy.

There's just so much awesome in this video it hurts.

Poll

Best part?

Wisconsin Pro Sports = Fashion Hub?

Mitchell_M — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:09:58 -0000

When people think of fashion, their mind usually jumps to places like New York, Los Angeles, Milan, Paris, and Tokyo. These are the places where wacky ideas and unorthodox clothing are combined and placed upon models who usually don't reflect the image of mass society.

When people try to combine fashion and Wisconsin, the consensus usually involves work boots, flannel, overalls, and Wrangler Jeans. To be blunt, it's not at the forefront of the fashion world. And we don't try to be; Wisconsinites are ~~assumed to have~~ well known for their taste in the more practical and sensible. I know I'm a Midwesterner when it comes to fashion. My wardrobe consists of three pairs of jeans (two nicer ones, one with holes and such), a bunch of athletic shorts, some khaki pants, and a whole bunch of football and basketball t-shirts from high school and college. Clearly, fashion is not my thing.

But it turns out that fashion is important to some of Wisconsin's highest-profile citizens: our sports stars.

I got an e-mail from someone who tipped me off to an interview that Ryan Grant did with e-Moda.com, an online lifestyle magazine. Usually, athletes do interviews all the time for all sorts of different publications, but this one had an interesting twist: there was a photo shoot involved.

Who had any idea that Ryan Grant was into the fancy threads? It's not really a total shock, considering he's a) from NYC and b) not an ugly man. So I got to thinking: does Wisconsin have any other famous athletes that are into clothes?

Why yes, yes it does. Ryan Braun, Milwaukee's All-Star left fielder and home run extraordinaire, actually partially owns REMETEE, a clothing line based in Los Angeles. Deadspin.com mentioned his presence at the company's launch party (mainly because about 80% Deadspin's coverage involves athletes wearing clothes other than their uniforms), and Braun wasn't camera shy.

Damn. Brauny's on fire. The shirts are too busy for me. Then again, I'm currently wearing one that simply says "2002 JV CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS" on it, and even that's almost too much.

Naturally, I saved the best for last. Andrew Bogut, would you please show us what you've got?

Bogut rocked this sweet suit in February during one of his many stints on the injured reserve. Thankfully, our buddies over at BrewHoop were quick to pounce on it. A lot of people had a lot of questions about the suit, like "Why?" and "No, really, why?" Bogut answered these questions in his blog:

I have been the locker room joke lately with some of my outfits. Usually I’m pretty neutral. Keep it simple you know. The consensus was 0 out of 5 after coach put a rating chart on the whiteboard before the next practice. That’s part one of the story.

Part two is that I love to wear white loafers with jeans and a casual shirt and jacket. Apparently there is a unwritten rule somewhere that White shouldn’t be worn until after Presidents day, which I believe is this Monday? So after my poor rating punk rock look, I decided to step it up a notch. Knowing that President’s day had not yet passed what better than a white hot suit in the middle of a Milwaukee winter. I think if you were at the game you will undoubtedly agree the price of admission was a bargain. On top of that the new consensus rating out of 5 from most of my team mates was 5. Not a bad average I’ll say. 2.5 is pretty steady and now I can sleep like a baby at night!

Hey, a 50% jump is certainly an improvement. I'm just impressed he found a white suit to fit his 7'0", 250+ frame.

So there you have it. Wisconsin's top three sports teams have players that are tuned in to the fashion world. But the burning question of the hour is this: who looks the best?

Poll

Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who's the most-beautiful-yet-still-retains-their-masculinity of them all?

Ryan Grant and eModa. Elegant, classy, and the clothes are nice, too.

87 votes

Ryan Braun and REMETEE. Lots of energy and style. Plus tribal symbols!

39 votes

Andrew Bogut and the all-white suit. For the 7-footer who just doesn't stand out enough.

50 votes

176 votes | Poll has closed

Collins Returns!

Mitchell_M — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:45:59 -0000

The wait is over. Nick Collins, Green Bay's Pro Bowl safety, has seemingly ended his boycott of team workouts. Collins, who was away from the team because of family and/or contract issues, returned to Green Bay an appeared at the final voluntary off-season practice today.

He did not practice, according to Greg Bedard of MJS. However, simply showing up is a big step in the right direction. Collins, who's on the final year of his rookie contract and looking for something similar to Adrian Wilson's deal, shares an agent with Ryan Grant. Grant, as we all know, skipped minicamp last year, and performed well below expectations. Collins' presence at the last practice is a good faith gesture that will (hopefully) jump-start negotiations and result in the new contract Collins wants.

I'm thrilled about this news. Collins will play a vital role in the 3-4 defense as a signal caller, and getting him in for minicamp is absolutely invaluable. Too bad for Anthony Smith, who's playing time will likely depend on injuries to the starters. But I'll take Collins over Smith any day.

Poll

On a scale of one to awesome, how happy are you to see Collins show up at the Packers practice?

Very awesome.

122 votes

Very VERY awesome.

78 votes

Only slightly awesome.

86 votes

Not at all awesome.

53 votes

339 votes | Poll has closed

Green Bay Breaks the Draft Pick Seal

Mitchell_M — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:16:18 -0000

I considered using a different, far cruder euphamism, but I decided that "break the seal" is more appropriate. Damn you, family-friendly standards that are enforced by nothing except my Midwestern sensibilities!

I had been getting a bit nervous that the team hadn't signed any of their picks, but only because the Bears had signed all of their picks. Historically, Chicago is quick to ink their draft class, and they were even faster this year because they lacked a first rounder, typically the most expensive of the bunch. Green Bay hasn't let their rookies sit around without getting them a contract for too long, and I'm glad to see that trend continue.

Jarius Wynn, Brad Jones, and Brandon Underwood are all now official members of the team. And there was much rejoycing.

Yes, that was a Monty Python reference. Next time, I'll try to fit Benny Hill in there somewhere.

According to Mike Florio (NBC's newest addition), Wynn signed a 4-year deal with a signing bonus of between $105,000 and $110,000. Underwood signed a similar deal with a slightly smaller bonus ($102,200). The terms of Jones' four-year deal were undisclosed.

Bring on the rest of the picks!

Poll

Do you forsee a problem with signing the remaining draft picks?

Yes

24 votes

No

226 votes

250 votes | Poll has closed

Who Wants Cotton Candy? The Carnival That Is The Packers' O-Line

Mitchell_M — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:49:26 -0000

"I’ve made this statement before — I want to get off this roller coaster or merry-go-round that we’ve been on of moving our offensive linemen at so many positions, but we haven’t made that decision as far as exactly where the young guys will go."

-Mike McCarthy on the offensive line

This quote from Green Bay's fearless leader leaves me torn; I love roller coasters, but I hate merry-go-rounds. But then I remember I'm not actually at the county fair, and everything snaps into focus.

The offensive line was the biggest problem for Green Bay's offensive production in 2008. Aaron Rodgers was not the problem, nor the receivers, nor the playcalling, or anything else. Green Bay's problem was creating rushing lanes; without establishing a credible ground threat, the Packers could not control the clock or safely move the chains.

Green Bay ranked 17th in rushing yards in 2008 with a sub-par 4.0 yards/carry. While Grant's injury problems hindered his effectiveness, the main issue was the constant shuffling of offensive lineman, ruining whatever cohesion the unit had developed, which lead to errors in communication and execution. I mean, check out these rushing totals from last year: 84 yards in Week 3, 28(!) yards in Week 4, 104 yards in Week 5, 102 yards in Week 9, 84 yards in Week 15, and 65 yards in Week 16.

As we can see, the run game last season was as efficient as Dunder-Mifflin, Scranton. How, then, is McCarthy going to avoid a repeat in 2009?

I like to think that Mike McCarthy is a man of his word. And since his words above point towards finding a continuous solution to the revolving door on the line, I believe that's exactly what he's going to do.

Green Bay currently has fourteen players on the roster at the three offensive line positions. Of those fourteen, only three (Chad Clifton, Daryn Colledge, and Jason Spitz) have established themselves as bonafide starters, and although Colledge and Spitz don't yet have a firm grip on any one position, they are getting extended looks at left guard and center, respectively.

From that, we can determine that Clifton and Colledge are a lock to play LT and LG, and Spitz is a good bet to win the C job. Even if he doesn't he'll just slide over and play RG. This still leaves two holes on the line, including the void left at RT with the assumed departure of Mark Tauscher, accelerated by an ACL tear late last year. Let's take a look at who might fill these holes.

Allen Barbre, as Brandon alluded to a while back, is the early favorite to win the RT job in 2009. I can certainly understand why the team is giving him a shot at the starting position, because Barbre is the physical prototype of an offensive tackle:

Has a thick upper body, with broad shoulders, thick calves, solid midsection, long arms, large hands, big bubble and natural strength … Comes out of his stance with outstanding explosion to shock a lethargic defender … Has the loose hips to change direction and plays … Generates good force behind his hand punch to deliver pop on contact.

Yikes. With a description like that, it sounds like Scout.com has some...unconventional tastes. Although who doesn't love a big bubble? Anyways, you'd think that Barbre's tools would lead to his taking the division by storm...but that hasn't happened yet. Why? Well, let's let Scout.com drop the bomb:

With some patient coaching, he could develop. It is obvious the athletic talent and quick feet are there. Now, he needs to work on the mental aspect of the game.

Well said. Barbre's numerous mental errors and failures in execution have kept him on the sidelines for most of his career. And, as Brandon said, I have a feeling they're going to keep him there in 2009.

Any Douglas Adams fans out there? Remember the part where Ford and Arthur are ejected from the Vogon ship and the narrator says this line?

"Space," says the introduction to The Hitchhiker's Guide, "is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is."

Well, replace "space" with "Breno Giacomini," and the phrase still fits. Because Breno Giacomini is big. Really big. 6'7" big. Not only that, but he's strong and, thanks to his experience playing TE, surprisingly agile.

So why hasn't he turned into Jonathon Ogden? Because he's still learning the position. Giacomini is a promising player, but he needs to learn and refine the technique needed to play offensive tackle in the NFL. I have faith in Green Bay's coaches; so long as he puts in the work, I expect to see Breno starting at RT before the end of 2009.

Scott Wells, one of the Packers' 7th round success stories, has fallen off in the last year and a half. Under Favre, Wells was a solid, intelligent center who made good calls and good adjustments as well as fending off the likes of Kevin and Pat Williams, Shaun Rogers, and Tommie Harris. He was a huge surprise and figured to be a mainstay in the interior for a while.

Unfortunately, Wells' lack of size and durability undermined his effectiveness. He's listed as 6'2", 303, but he's smaller than that. And his frame was such that he had maxed out his potential to gain muscle mass; in other words, there's no way Wells would be able to gain any weight and still retain his agility and flexibility. On top of all that, the concussion, ankle, and shoulder injuries he sustained in 2008 has transformed Wells from dependable to injury-prone.

I honestly wish Wells could keep his starting job, but he's a little like Colin Cole in that he gets overpowered far too easily, even against players of similar size. Spitz, the main competition for the center job, is much stronger at the point of attack and doesn't allow a defender to split his base as often as Wells does. Combined with the signing of Duke Preston, look for Wells to hit free agency before his contract expires.

Josh Sitton, the second-year Central Florida product, was the favorite to take the RG spot until a preseason injury sidelined him until Week 3. The fourth round pick made appearances in 2008, but never made a lasting impact. In fact, his season was so underwhelming that his Scouts Inc. grade is 20, a level described as such:

A player with very little film to evaluate ... A guy who might show "flashes" in the preseason but does not have any regular-season views ... He has very little experience but he has to be tracked due to his developmental potential.

As vanilla as this description is, it perfectly describes Josh Sitton's career to date: a skilled prospect who could contribute, but we simply have no idea whether he will or not.

In the interest of full disclosure, I love Sitton as a player. He's a strong, stout blocker who takes effective angles and manages to stay square on his blocks. He also has a "mean streak", which is something you absolutely need to have playing guard in the NFL. Additionally, his interviews (the few ones he's had) show a guy who understands his role in the larger scheme. I predict that Sitton will take the RG spot he could have had last season and, as long as he stays healthy, he should be able to stay there for a long time.

***

These four players are the ones I fully expect to be competing for the openings at guard and tackle. Other players like Tony Moll and Duke Preston are backups (at best), and shouldn't start unless in case of emergency. However, the next two players are guys who shouldn't start this year, but have a shot at starting in the future.

T.J. Lang, the first of Green Bay's two drafted offensive linemen, was widely considered an exceptional pick in the 4th round. In a draft that was positively loaded at OT (with four elite-level prospects being taken in the top 15), Lang was somewhat overlooked by most draftniks. He has all of the skills and techniques needed to succeed in the NFL, including good knee bend, pad level, footwork, balance, and work ethic. What more could you want?

According to most critics, Lang's biggest negative is his overall body strength. While he put up 30 reps on the bench press before the draft, he needs to coordinate his upper and lower body to achieve maximum results. That means improving his core strength so that he doesn't break at the waist when engaging stronger defenders.

I truly believe that McCarthy and the coaching staff will have to make a tough decision once Lang is ready to play for real. Is he a candidate for tackle? Or would he be better suited inside? If so, who do you displace? Giacomini, Barbre, Sitton, or even Colledge? This decision won't be made right away, probably not even this year...but it's coming.

Another important decision looming is that of what to do with Jamon Meredith. A great athlete with a brain to match, Meredith was taken in the 5th round when his talent merits a 2nd round selection. He's an excellent pass blocker with great fundamentals. His run blocking is above average, but he projects as a LT in the NFL, where his pass protection will be much appreciated on Aaron Rodgers' blind side.

But, of course, with a prospect who's stock falls in the draft, there's always something. With Meredith, there were questions about his motivation, work ethic, and competitiveness. One report that stands out is that his college coaches referred to him as a "locker room lawyer", whatever that means. I personally believe that Meredith, who actually fulfilled both roles as a student-athlete, didn't blindly submit to his coaches' will because he, get this, is smart. And smart people in an atmosphere where intellect is virtually irrelevant come across as arrogant and even insubordinate.

If Meredith's problems were substance-related or legal, I'd have a problem. If people question his competitiveness on the field, I'd have a huge problem. But if the source of his "character issues" is because he asked "Why?" at some point during a practice, and that's what ended up dropping him into the fifth round, then I just shake my head and say "I'll take him." The main point is that Meredith can play at a high level, and with a year or two of development, he'll have a great chance to replace Chad Clifton at LT.

***

As McCarthy said in the post-draft press conference quoted above, the key to fixing the offensive line woes (and by extension, the run game) is continuity. The best group of linemen in camp needs to stick together for the duration of the season. Last year, Scott Wells and Josh Sitton's preseason injuries, Daryn Colledge's frightening inconsistency, and Chad Clifton's overall decline scuttled Green Bay's progress up front within the first 6 weeks. And that can't happen again.

Obviously, there's no elixer to prevent a sprained knee in minicamp, nor is there a crystal ball to see if the starting RT in August will play at the same level in September. People get relatively better and worse at what they do just like the tide comes in and out. However, the crux of the issue is consistency. I'd rather plug in a player who's going to have a 75-80% success rate than one who will fluctuate between 60% and 90%. Sure, when the guy is dominant, it's great for the team, but how can you schedule when he's on and off? For the NBA fans out there, I'd rather have David Lee over Lamar Odom.

But this is just one man's opinion. I favor a conservative approach to the offensive line; I'm fully prepared to sacrifice athleticism and upside for season-long consistency. Some of you may feel that putting the biggest and baddest men out there will solve the problem. Others feel that putting the smartest players out there, ones who know the scheme and can rely on craftiness and experience to get the job done. Which path do you think takes Green Bay to success?