OL Kevin Barry

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 02:01 PM

There are alot of threads on here that are not needed but this one I think should be talked about.

The Packers, with Kevin Barry nearly 100%, are shopping him around the league for draft picks. The Packers line was young last year, and he doesn't seem to fit in the plans anymore. Thoughts on what type of draft pick we could get for him???

neko4 · 03-16-2007, 02:13 PM

Franks has developed into a good blocker and could probably be the U-71 type guy, plus we have other O-Lineman now. At the begining of last season I though Barry would start, but then he got hurt ofcourse. We should look at Houston and maybe get 7th-5th for him or KC who needed a lineman.

jackalope · 03-16-2007, 04:18 PM

Good to hear that we're shopping him. I like Barry but we don't need him anymore. He could be a good starter somewhere else so we could likely get a 4th for him, but hat's just my guess about what he'd be worth.

gbpackers0065 · 03-16-2007, 04:26 PM

He doesnt fit in the ZBS and i think we cud get somethin good 4 him so i like it

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackalope

Good to hear that we're shopping him. I like Barry but we don't need him anymore. He could be a good starter somewhere else so we could likely get a 4th for him, but hat's just my guess about what he'd be worth.

I would be very satisfied with a 4th

Vince Lombardi · 03-16-2007, 05:46 PM

I think a 4th is probably wishful thinking, even though I like Barry he hasn't done alot lately. Obviously he doesn't fit our system anymore so trading him for any pick would be a good move at this point. Maybe a team like ATL who wants to get bigger on o-line will make a move for him.

GB12 · 03-16-2007, 05:47 PM

Linked
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=578343

ny10804 · 03-16-2007, 06:25 PM

My best bet is he's worth a 6th rounder. He came in undrafted, and has started (according to NFL.com) 8 games in his 5-year career.

I put him as a sixth rounder because a guy like Tony Moll, a 5th rounder last year, has more value than Barry right now.

ds8582 · 03-16-2007, 07:04 PM

I would say at the most a 5th round pick.

bearsfan_51 · 03-16-2007, 07:07 PM

A 4th rounder?!?! Hahaha.....

Vince Lombardi · 03-16-2007, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

A 4th rounder?!?! Hahaha.....

Since we like you we'll give to you for a 3rd. ;)

M1Koter · 03-16-2007, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bearsfan_51

A 4th rounder?!?! Hahaha.....

week 17....yes, so satifying....week 17...hmmm

Empire · 03-16-2007, 08:51 PM

I have to agree with Bearsfan on this one. I think we might be able to squeeze a team out of a 6th but that probably would be stretching it too.

Shiver · 03-16-2007, 09:41 PM

Is he starting capable? If so at what positions. Give me the 411, since Atlanta is one of the teams interested in him.

GB12 · 03-16-2007, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

Is he starting capable? If so at what positions. Give me the 411, since Atlanta is one of the teams interested in him.

I think he could be he just hasn't had much of a shot. RT is his best fit, no way he could play the left side. He seems like he could play gaurd, but in 05 he couldn't beat out Will Whitaker or Adrian Klemm so probably not. He was hurt all of last year, but I think he recovered fine. His strength is as a run blocker and we had a special package, U-71, for him when Sherman was there. I haven't seen him pass block much but I don't think it's terrible just not real good.

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB12

I think he could be he just hasn't had much of a shot. RT is his best fit, no way he could play the left side. He seems like he could play gaurd, but in 05 he couldn't beat out Will Whitaker or Adrian Klemm so probably not. He was hurt all of last year, but I think he recovered fine. His strength is as a run blocker and we had a special package, U-71, for him when Sherman was there. I haven't seen him pass block much but I don't think it's terrible just not real good.

He could start at RT as long as he would return to the form that he was developing prior to the injury, but I'm sure once he gets the oppurunity somewhere he will play well b/c he'll put in the time needed to get there. Coaches have always described him as a work horse

ny10804 · 03-16-2007, 10:03 PM

* note that Barry didn't start at G in '05 because Sherman really liked the U-71 formation and felt Barry was best as that extra TE. Fat lotta good that did.

I remember a lot of people being angry that he didn't get a chance to be a starter.

GB12 · 03-16-2007, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ny10804

* note that Barry didn't start at G in '05 because Sherman really liked the U-71 formation and felt Barry was best as that extra TE. Fat lotta good that did.

I remember a lot of people being angry that he didn't get a chance to be a starter.

Yeah I was one of them. I think he could but the reason you said doesn't make much sense. I have heard it before, but why wouldn't they keep him on the feild as much as possible if they liked him there. I don't even think those 2 are still in the league. The U-71 was nice, but if that was the real reason he sacrificed 90% of his possible playing time for one package.

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB12

Yeah I was one of them. I think he could but the reason you said doesn't make much sense. I have heard it before, but why wouldn't they keep him on the feild as much as possible if they liked him there. I don't even think those 2 are still in the league. The U-71 was nice, but if that was the real reason he sacrificed 90% of his possible playing time for one package.

Sherman was never good at judging players and where they could be utilized to their highest potential.

ny10804 · 03-16-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB12

Yeah I was one of them. I think he could but the reason you said doesn't make much sense. I have heard it before, but why wouldn't they keep him on the feild as much as possible if they liked him there. I don't even think those 2 are still in the league. The U-71 was nice, but if that was the real reason he sacrificed 90% of his possible playing time for one package.

Just did some research:

Jul 14, 2005

Quote:

Barry hopes to be that guy, too, and to prove it, he dropped 15 pounds this off-season. Barry's weight ballooned as high as 350 last season and he wasn't nearly as effective in Green Bay's U-71 package as he was in 2003. But at 336 pounds, Barry looked good during the Packers' off-season minicamps. Because Barry has worked almost exclusively at right tackle throughout his career, the chance exists that he could start there and Tauscher could be kicked inside to guard.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=340473

Aug 9, 2005

Quote:

No move: The Packers are not inclined to move Kevin Barry into the lineup at tackle or guard, according to Beightol. "The reason is what we just did here at the end of practice," Beightol said Monday morning. "If you take Kevin Barry and put him in at tackle, you're not moving it 65 yards downfield in a critical, critical situation."
Operating against the No. 2 defense, the No. 1 offense killed all 7½ minutes off the clock with a 13-play, 65-yard drive. On the drive, Barry was at tight end in the "U-71" package.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=347011

Oct 9, 2005

Quote:

Clifton came out with the other starters for warm-ups and then gutted it out on a sprained left ankle, which he had suffered last Monday in the loss to Carolina. Had Clifton not played, Tauscher would have had to move to left tackle, Kevin Barry would have had to play right tackle and the Packers would have had to go without their favored "U-71" package.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index....9&format=print

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ny10804

Just did some research:

Jul 14, 2005
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=340473

Aug 9, 2005
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=347011

Oct 9, 2005
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index....9&format=print

Could I ask what the point of that was??? All the articles were a year or two ago and before the injury

GB12 · 03-16-2007, 10:35 PM

Still though, why not have him at Guard and then move him to TE to run the U-71.

ny10804 · 03-16-2007, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ny10804

* note that Barry didn't start at G in '05 because Sherman really liked the U-71 formation and felt Barry was best as that extra TE. Fat lotta good that did.

I remember a lot of people being angry that he didn't get a chance to be a starter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB12

Yeah I was one of them. I think he could but the reason you said doesn't make much sense. I have heard it before, but why wouldn't they keep him on the feild as much as possible if they liked him there. I don't even think those 2 are still in the league. The U-71 was nice, but if that was the real reason he sacrificed 90% of his possible playing time for one package.

Quote:

Originally Posted by princefielder28

Could I ask what the point of that was??? All the articles were a year or two ago and before the injury

Context clues.

princefielder28 · 03-16-2007, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ny10804

Context clues.

hmmmmm??????

ny10804 · 03-16-2007, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GB12

Still though, why not have him at Guard and then move him to TE to run the U-71.

Who knows. Apparently Beightol (o-line coach) thought the best production would be with him as exclusively the TE. That and they probably didn't want to move Tauscher to guard, and conversely thought Barry was a much better tackle than guard.