Packer Draft Needs and 1st Round

[Pokerbrat2000]

I also feel that without a trade up, we'll end up with the 4th or 5th best guys at the positions we're looking at.

I think we could first trade back out of the first round and then trade up with our 2nd pick in the second round.

Trade back: I think we can still get one of the players we would want at #29 at #33-#35 and pick up an addition 4th round pick by trading back.

Trade Up: Use that 4th round pick with our #60 pick to trade up to around 50-52 to possibly get ahold of one of the players who was regarded as a first tier player in a position of need.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He is an idiot and don't want him anymore whether he is innocent or not. Days before the draft and is out messing around and taking risks.

"10 cent head"

You proved my point Whether it did or didn't happen.....people are talking.

 

[PackerDNA]

I think we could first trade back out of the first round and then trade up with our 2nd pick in the second round.

Trade back: I think we can still get one of the players we would want at #29 at #33-#35 and pick up an addition 4th round pick by trading back.

Trade Up: Use that 4th round pick with our #60 pick to trade up to around 50-52 to possibly get ahold of one of the players who was regarded as a first tier player in a position of need.

If the guys in the range you posted are roughly equal on the Packers board, then a trade back is likely. To get the next level guys I fear will be too far of a trade up, like into the mid-upper teens.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If the guys in the range you posted are roughly equal on the Packers board, then a trade back is likely. To get the next level guys I fear will be too far of a trade up, like into the mid-upper teens.

Yes, I don't see the need to trade up in the first, at least for what it would cost. As long as 3-4 QB's get taken, the predicted O-lineman, 1-2 TE's, sprinkle in a few safeties, RB's, WR's and D linemen, the Packers should have a pretty good pool of guys considered to be somewhat "equal" to choose from at #29 -#37ish.

 

[PikeBadger]

Yes, I don't see the need to trade up in the first, at least for what it would cost. As long as 3-4 QB's get taken, the predicted O-lineman, 1-2 TE's, sprinkle in a few safeties, RB's, WR's and D linemen, the Packers should have a pretty good pool of guys considered to be somewhat "equal" to choose from at #29 -#37ish.

You seen Thompson's draft board?

 

[packfan1]

Evan Engram round 1. 6-3 1/2 235 4.39. Can play TE or WR in slot or wide or H-Back. Adds another dimension to the offense... and for the future. FA for Jordy and Cobb and Adams coming up and Jordy is getting older. I think this would be a very good pick and is the route I would go. I know we need defense, but look at Atlanta's offense.... we can go CB and OLB rounds 2 and 3.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Evan Engram round 1. 6-3 1/2 235 4.39. Can play TE or WR in slot or wide or H-Back. Adds another dimension to the offense... and for the future. FA for Jordy and Cobb and Adams coming up and Jordy is getting older. I think this would be a very good pick and is the route I would go. I know we need defense, but look at Atlanta's offense.... we can go CB and OLB rounds 2 and 3.

Probably a good player, but IMO a luxury pick we can't afford at this point. Had we not signed Bennett and Kendricks, maybe someone like Engram would have made sense. I'm not even sure if OJ Howard slipped to #29, I would be all that excited, especially since Bennett is under contract for 3 years and Kendricks for 2.

Unfortunately, Free Agency lost a lot more guys than it gained, couple that with the needs from last year and I have to think that BPA won't be a luxury mantra that TT can operate under for the first 3 -4 rounds. Unless it is someone who made a major tumble down the board, TT is going to almost have to be picking to address immediate needs (this and next years).

 

[packfan1]

I also like Watt, but I honestly think he will be gone by 29. I think Watt would be the only player I would consider over Engram. McKinley is good, but with his shoulder injury not sure about it. Did we learn anything from Justin Harrell? I think we need depth at CB, but not necessarily picking one in round 1.

I see Engram (other than possibly Watt) as BPA for the Packers in the first and I think adding him would take the offense to a superior level. Not sure it is a 'luxury pick' with age and impending WR FA. I know we NEED more depth on defense, but if Watt is gone Engram should be the pick imo.

I think in most years Engram is a top 25 pick based on production and measurables (Howard and Njoku rated higher this year). Believe he was leading receiver in SEC and team captain for a couple of years. Could be looked at as a luxury pick, or a pick that takes our offense to another level. Look at Atlanta's offense... they just couldn't be stopped. I see him providing not only solid depth but versatility and big plays. Big productive target with speed over the middle and he is young. Really can line him up anywhere. Not every year a player like that is available at 29. He is a playmaker and in today's league it seems to me offense is the way to go.

 

[packfan1]

I take it back, not the leading reciever in SEC but would be a fine addition.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Could be looked at as a luxury pick, or a pick that takes our offense to another level. Look at Atlanta's offense... they just couldn't be stopped. I see him providing not only solid depth but versatility and big plays. Big productive target with speed over the middle and he is young. Really can line him up anywhere. Not every year a player like that is available at 29. He is a playmaker and in today's league it seems to me offense is the way to go.

I understand you like him and to be honest, I don't know much about him, but only because TE's are one position that I have way off "my" draft board for the Packers. Whatever you want to label it, luxury or whatever, I just don't see how you could justify using a #1 on a TE with so many other glaring needs that are of more immediate concern to me than trying to mix in a 3rd TE to what is already a talented group.

 

[packfan1]

Adams 4.56 speed. Cobb 10M overpaid-needs others to create so he can operate underneath. Nelson-age/injury. Bennett-very good but starting to age. Kendricks-good 2nd TE. Several FA WR coming up... $$

Engram 6-3 1/2 235 4.39 could play either (or both) TE or WR. Played a lot in the slot, but could also move outside or really anywhere. Solid college production, great YAC, great pick for immediate and future with impending FA at WR imo. I see your point that Pack has other needs on defense, but if Watt isn't there why reach? CB can wait til round 2. I see Engram as great value at 29 for the immediate and future of the offense. I think given what I outlined above with our current players there is a need that is being overlooked. IMO great value there at 29.

 

[Dantés]

Engram is an exceptional F tight end prospect, but I don't see the physicality at the catch point or in using his size to box out defenders to make him the transcendent pass catcher that you're describing. He's finesse, and not just as a blocker (which I don't really care about).

Definitely a very good prospect, but I can't envision a scenario where he would be BPA in my opinion. Add that he's at one of the lowest positions of need, and I'm firmly out on Engram.

 

[Sky King]

As a non-fan of college football I enjoy reading everyone's player evaluations, projections and any rationale they can give for formulating their guesses. There's been some really good stuff posted here.

But as a Packer fan who lacks any interest in following college football, I am simply limited to focusing on the positions of most need. I have no personal favorites as far as individual players would be concerned. Predicting exactly what TT will do is a crap-shoot to me. Therefore, based upon what I've been reading here and elsewhere I'm leaning towards OLB being his first pick. Therefore, watch TT opt for a Safety or TE instead.

 

[brandon2348]

According to a source in Packer scouting Mixon is in play for second round.

Also looks like the Falcons are trying to jump in front of us to get the best pass rusher in the draft Charles Harris. We're not gonna get Harris.

http://draftanalyst.com/da-draft-buzz-falcons-seahawks-set-swap-picks

 

[PikeBadger]

I think we could first trade back out of the first round and then trade up with our 2nd pick in the second round.

Trade back: I think we can still get one of the players we would want at #29 at #33-#35 and pick up an addition 4th round pick by trading back.

Trade Up: Use that 4th round pick with our #60 pick to trade up to around 50-52 to possibly get ahold of one of the players who was regarded as a first tier player in a position of need.

Love this strategy. Really hope there is some desperate craziness from teams wanting to trade up that would allow us to pick up 2 more top 100 picks.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Love this strategy. Really hope there is some desperate craziness from teams wanting to trade up that would allow us to pick up 2 more top 100 picks.

I wasn't implying we could pick up 2 more top 100 picks, my strategy was merely to trade back out of the first if there are enough guys still on the Packers board that they would have picked at #29. After that, use the 4th round pick gained in the trade, to move up with our original second round pick to possibly grab a player still considered to be in that "top group" of a position.

Pokerbrat2000 said: ↑
I think we could first trade back out of the first round and then trade up with our 2nd pick in the second round.

Trade back: I think we can still get one of the players we would want at #29 at #33-#35 and pick up an addition 4th round pick by trading back.

Trade Up: Use that 4th round pick with our #60 pick to trade up to around 50-52 to possibly get ahold of one of the players who was regarded as a first tier player in a position of need.

 

[XPack]

I'm actually glad the media is doing this for once. I wish they'd do it for everyone. People are declared guilty in the court of public opinion over these things on just an allegation. At least wait until charges are brought forward and there has been deemed enough evidence to move forward.

Innocent until proven guilty, that is unless you invoke the Alford Plea or any other legal shenanigans. I agree with you though, that an allegation isn't proof of anything and the media needs to stop being so eager to make headlines, but they won't, nor will the internet.

TT mentioned in his recent interview that many of these are false news introduced with the purpose of influencing the draft. If a popular early pick has enough mud thrown at him, he may fall down the pick order (or maybe even drop a round).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

TT mentioned in his recent interview that many of these are false news introduced with the purpose of influencing the draft. If a popular early pick has enough mud thrown at him, he may fall down the pick order (or maybe even drop a round).

While I would agree with some of that in regards to disinformation in regards to injuries, attitudes or other things that rely solely on judgement, I have a hard time thinking that their is a big enough network of conspiracist that want to alter the draft to start throwing around disinformation and accusations of ****, violence and other more serious things that eventually can be proved to be true or false.

 

[XPack]

I have a hard time thinking that their is a big enough network of conspiracist that want to alter the draft to start throwing around disinformation and accusations of ****, violence and other more serious things that eventually can be proved to be true or false.

All it needs is a "unnamed source". Somebody with knowledge of random incidents on a players ind raft and put a spin to it and newspapers don't really look for strong proof before printing allegations. All it needs is to float around for a 2 or 3 days and then whether it's true or false becomes immaterial.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

All it needs is a "unnamed source". Somebody with knowledge of random incidents on a players ind raft and put a spin to it and newspapers don't really look for strong proof before printing allegations. All it needs is to float around for a 2 or 3 days and then whether it's true or false becomes immaterial.

I understand your point, but even information from "unnamed sources" is thoroughly investigated to ascertain the legitimacy behind it. I seriously doubt if a 49er Fan had hopes for his team to be able to draft a certain someone with their #2 pick, that fan would have much influence on the team picking #1 by trying to leak a false story on said player.

 

[KevinR]

Top need........pass rusher..........T.J. Watt ?

 

[PikeBadger]

I wasn't implying we could pick up 2 more top 100 picks, my strategy was merely to trade back out of the first if there are enough guys still on the Packers board that they would have picked at #29. After that, use the 4th round pick gained in the trade, to move up with our original second round pick to possibly grab a player still considered to be in that "top group" of a position.

Pokerbrat2000 said: ↑
I think we could first trade back out of the first round and then trade up with our 2nd pick in the second round.

Trade back: I think we can still get one of the players we would want at #29 at #33-#35 and pick up an addition 4th round pick by trading back.

Trade Up: Use that 4th round pick with our #60 pick to trade up to around 50-52 to possibly get ahold of one of the players who was regarded as a first tier player in a position of need.

I realize that. I'm hoping for the trade down to 33 and then down again to 40-45 to pick up enough extra picks to get another pick in the middle of round 3. Hopefully ending up with something that looks like 41,61,74,78,91.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I realize that. I'm hoping for the trade down to 33 and then down again to 40-45 to pick up enough extra picks to get another pick in the middle of round 3. Hopefully ending up with something that looks like 41,61,74,78,91.

If TT could pull that off, I would be impressed.....as long as he got a solid guy at #41. But if you add up the draft value of those picks, they are a couple of hundred points more than what the Packers currently have, so it might be hard to maneuver into getting 5 picks in the top 100. If that was TT's strategy (top 100 picks), it would probably be more reasonable to expect to be able to collect 4 total picks, something like you listed without the #78 pick. But you know TT, he likes picks, so I don't expect it to happen.

 

[brandon2348]

Get Mixon and score points. It's our only chance.

 

[PikeBadger]

If TT could pull that off, I would be impressed.....as long as he got a solid guy at #41. But if you add up the draft value of those picks, they are a couple of hundred points more than what the Packers currently have, so it might be hard to maneuver into getting 5 picks in the top 100. If that was TT's strategy (top 100 picks), it would probably be more reasonable to expect to be able to collect 4 total picks, something like you listed without the #78 pick. But you know TT, he likes picks, so I don't expect it to happen.

Yes, I believe it could be hard. It would take more than one trade and one of them would have to be a desperate move by a trading partner, or one in which he was entertaining multiple offers.