1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Trade #32 Pick?

Discussion in '2011 Draft Archive' started by brett2520, Mar 2, 2011.

  1. brett2520
    Offline

    brett2520 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2011
    Messages:
    192
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings:
    +32 / 0 / -0
    Now that we are past the combine and we are done looking at the results, what do we do next? (if you are an owner or part of player's union the answer to that question is finish the CBA - NOW!)

    But to those of you fans, who like me, never really see an end to the season, because the draft/free agency is just another excuse to follow the Packers: let's talk draft.

    I have been doing some research and the more I look at prospects for the #32 pick, the more I see that the difference between the #32 best prospect and the # 45 prospect is not that different, but more of what teams need. My solution: Trade the pick.

    I did the math and as you can see, our pick is worth 590 points. Looking at team's draft positions, i notice our best trade partner would be the Houston Texans, who need CB's and safeties like the Vikings need a new roof for their stadium. They have the #42 pick (480 points) and the #73 (105) picks.

    Basically if we trade #32 we will have the #42, #64, #73, and #96, not including our [SIZE=-1]compensatory pick[/SIZE] for Aaron Kampman (rumored to be a 3rd round pick).



    Draft Countdown - Trade Value Chart
    • Like Like x 2
  2. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,068
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings:
    +3,537 / 86 / -26
    Im down for it, but would rather trade up as we dont really need a ton of volume picks and if we get a cba deal done it most likely will restructure the rookie salary wages so less of a risk moving up imo.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    Trade or stay put and take the best available regardless of position, I'm happy either way. However, if some trading does occur, I would like to see us get a pick or two in a future draft. You are all familiar with what I like to call The Kraft Draft right? There is no denying that wheeling and dealing for picks beyond the current year's draft is a huge reason why the Patriots have remained so competitive for so long. With our youth and depth, it is the perfect time to follow their lead and start amassing picks down the road to keep where we're at. It's never easy to lose a guy to free agency, but it you have an extra pick or two in the first three rounds of the draft, it makes the pill a lot easier to swallow.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Pack88
    Offline

    Pack88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    90
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0
    I suspect that if TT were to trade down it would be because one of the 3-5 players he has slotted at this position are not available or one of the 1st 7 make a deal to come up a few spaces and get one of the Qb's that unexpectedly dropped. I could easily see TT dropping to 37-39, but if one of the top tier offensive tackles or OLB's are available at 32 TT stays put!
    Pack88
  5. PackersRS
    Offline

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Location:
    Porto Alegre, Brazil
    Ratings:
    +979 / 0 / -0
    Here's how I grade TT on the draft (purely subjective, no data whatsoever, taken from the top of my brain):

    Bad moves: 10% (Harrell, Brohm, some other low rounders that didn't pan out)
    Good moves: 35% (obvious picks, good low rounders)
    Great moves: 40% (picks like Raji, Jennings, Bishop, Collins)
    Spetacular moves: 15% (Rodgers, Matthews)

    I can't think of a better GM during draft day than him. He has even outwitted Bill Belichick.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Riley82
    Offline

    Riley82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    Rugby
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    Who are we rumored to like at the draft.
  7. TheGiftedApe
    Offline

    TheGiftedApe TheGiftedApe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Messages:
    572
    Location:
    MADTOWN
    Ratings:
    +77 / 4 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1987
    we need as many 1-4th round picks as we can get, anything we do to acquire 1st-4th round picks makes me happy. Trading for future picks makes me sad, Packers window of opportunity is about 5-7 years. We need talent NOW NOW NOW, not later, we need talent RIGHT NOW. I'd like to see us trade next year's picks for more picks this year if we fill in positions of need(Ol, DL, LB, DB) but not if ted is gonna draft strictly on "potential" like he claims he always does, drafting a qb to me is a waste of time. I'm not worried about where the packers will be in 10 years, I'm excited for where the packers could be for the next 5-7 years though. The time to buy is now, not sell.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. GBPack2010
    Offline

    GBPack2010 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Location:
    CA
    Ratings:
    +67 / 0 / -0
    I think most mocks have us taking a DE like Cameron Heyward considering Jenkins and perhaps Jolly are gone, a BPA approach for WR Jon Baldwin to replace Driver's golden days or James Jones if he signs elsewhere, a CB like Aaron Williams and obviously a OL IF they fall cause the top 7 OL, OGs included all increased or solidified their 1st round grades.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    I'm sorry Ape, but our window of opportunity is only the next 5-7 years? Not hardly. With savvy planning for the future our window is endless, and besides that, how is getting even one extra early round pick next year not going to help us in the next 5-7 years? Not only will it do just that, once the extra picks are there, they can be manipulated year after year to keep multiple early round picks, thus keeping our window open. Again I will refer you to New England. This year they have 7 picks in the first four rounds, with two in both the first and second rounds, and six of the seven being in the first 92 picks. Last year they had 6 in the first four rounds, the year before that they had 7. It was only back in 2007 that they were actually short picks with only two total in rounds 1-4, and 2008 when their only loss was in the SB. I'm not sure if there are a bunch of players in this year's draft that you think are so good we have to mortgage the future for, if you're trying to make a joke, if you're too naive to understand, or if you're a troll from another team, but I doubt you'll find many people agreeing with your take that the first four rounds of this draft will make us a short term dynasty. Don't get me wrong, I am totally fine with keeping and making our current picks without making any trades, or even moving up to get a particular player. But putting the stock you seem to be into this particular draft strikes me as ridiculous.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. PFanCan
    Offline

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,344
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    Ratings:
    +712 / 14 / -3
    I don't think he is making a joke, is naive, a troll, or being ridiculous, Mel. It's his opinion, and it's likely one that is shared by many others on this board.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    That's all I'm doing is stating an opinion as well PFC. As a matter of fact trading opinions with other fans is one of the funnest parts of this time of year. Actually I am curious how many are of that frame of mind, so I will ask the question in a new thread.
  12. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33
    Mel-MinAlum makes a good point about the Patriots. In addition to having two picks in the first two rounds, I believe they also have two picks in the third round. Two of those extra picks came from trading players, not picks but looking towards the future is definitely their MO.

    Look at the progression of Thompson’s drafts from the time he arrived to rebuild the roster to last year:

    2005: In Thompson’s first draft he traded down 3 times and selected 11 players. He received an extra pick for trading McKenzie to New Orleans.
    2006: He traded down 4 times and selected 12 players. He received an extra pick for trading Javon Walker to Denver.

    2007: He traded down twice and selected 11 players.

    2008: Thompson traded down 3 times (including out of the first round) and selected 9 players. It was the first time as Packers GM he traded up – into the third round for Jeremy Thompson.

    2009: He selected 8 players with no trade-downs and perhaps the most successful trade-up in franchise history: Into the first round for Matthews.

    2010: He selected 7 players with no trade-downs, and one trade-up into the third round for Burnett.

    It’s not a perfect progression but the trend is clear. As the roster got more talented and deeper, Thompson changed his draft strategy.

    From the story in jsonline: “The release of tight end Donald Lee and safety Derrick Martin leaves the Packers with 66 veteran players who finished the season either on their 53-man roster or injured-reserve lists. Last month, they signed nine "street" free agents, all of whom spent time on their practice squad in 2010.

    In the draft, the Packers have their own seven selections and are expected to receive another as compensation for the free-agent loss of Aaron Kampman. McCarthy also said the team would like to sign their normal complement of about 12 rookie free agents after the draft. "We've made a lot of hay there," he said. If Johnny Jolly is reinstated by the league, the Packers could conceivably have more than 90 players to fashion into what in the past has been an 80-man roster.”

    With that in mind – a very talented and deep roster bolstered by the return of players from the IR - I wonder if Thompson will continue to trade up and select fewer players in the draft (perhaps trading with the Pats)? Or, will he copy the Patriots and trade for future, higher picks? Of course every trade takes two to tango and how Thompson and his staff rate the particular players available in the draft and at each pick will no doubt decide. I would lean towards continuing the trend of fewer, but (hopefully) higher quality picks. But then, I’ve never built a Super Bowl winning roster.
    • Like Like x 4
  13. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    Good stuff there ThxJack. This pre-draft scenarioizing (new word I just came up with) is awesome.
  14. TheGiftedApe
    Offline

    TheGiftedApe TheGiftedApe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Messages:
    572
    Location:
    MADTOWN
    Ratings:
    +77 / 4 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1987

    I'm simply saying aaron godgers is in the prime of his career, and the time is NOW, i don't like the idea of trading for picks in next years draft. Are you saying that Bj Raji/clay matthews/bulaga havent made a HUGE difference on our team in the last 2 years?? Imagine if we can get another clay matthews in this draft.

    There are no "bad drafts" there is at least 1 hall of fame player in this draft, and a ton of pro bowl caliber players. Just cause you don't think that it's a deep draft doesn't mean its true. In 2006 people said oh this will be the strongest draft ever of all time, when in reality the 2006 draft was full of busts. Many are already saying this is the best offensive line class in the last 10 years, I would love to grab some big uglies. If that makes me a troll, troll on then.


    as well it would appear mike mccarthy agrees with me: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/117376913.html
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    You saw the part where I said I was fine with moving up to get someone right? And where did I say this is not a deep draft class? In truth I think this draft is pretty deep at a couple of positions I would like to see us draft, which is why I think we can trade down and get better if the price is right. Also, can you refresh my memory, what trades did we make to get in position to get Bulaga and Raji? If there are guys like that available when we pick I hope to God TT grabs them. To me your original post sounded like you are willing to give up multiple future draft picks and/or players just to get picks in this year's draft, not specific players. I don't care if we shoot the works on one or two guys this year, I just don't want to suffer down the road for it. Its kinda like putting your retirement money in a low risk or high risk fund. The younger you are, the more risk you can take, which is the point I think you're trying to make, and it makes sense. I just have a lower tolerance for risk than you is all.
  16. Calhoun Lambeau
    Offline

    Calhoun Lambeau Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    93
    Location:
    Menasha, WI
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    It all depends on who's there at #32, if there's a player on Ted's board at that pick, he'll fire, if his guys are gone (not worth trading up for/couldn't trade up for) he trades down to find his next guy (the Jordy Nelson situation). The difference between players at the 32nd pick and the 45th pick is always there. Going into every draft people think it's deep and the difference at 30 and 45 isn't different, that's nonsense, there's a talent drop-off in EVERY draft.

    I think the notion of this offensive line class being 'the best of the last 10 years' is a little off. First off, the NFL has gone 'tackle crazy' over the past few years, elevating the position where more tackles are being taken higher than they should. The value of the position has overrated a lot of the players.

    Look at 2009, a very top-heavy, athletic group of tackles, on paper better than the 2011 guys.
    Look at 2010, a very talented group (Williams, Okung, Bulaga, Davis, Saffold), again better than the 2011 class.

    On paper the 2011 offensive line class isn't any better than it's been the past couple years. Next year I'd be willing to guess there will be a few highly rated OT's that everyone will be wanting, and people will say the 'offensive line class is great', too.
  17. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,068
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings:
    +3,537 / 86 / -26
    anyone know if the draft magazines have hit the stands yet?
  18. Calhoun Lambeau
    Offline

    Calhoun Lambeau Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    93
    Location:
    Menasha, WI
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0
    Yes, they're out. I already got my hands on the 2011 Pro Football Weekly Draft Guide.
  19. timdykeman
    Offline

    timdykeman Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    Jemseg, N.B., Canada
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Doesn't Pro Football Weekly have the Pack taking Ironheads kid for Ohio?( Have it but cannot find the book right now)
  20. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33
    Back to the question of the thread: What I would like to see is Thompson continue the trend of fewer picks and greater quality. Ideally I'd like to see the CBA settled before the draft which would allow Thompson to use the trade of Barnett to move up in the first round. Also - since I'm hoping, not predicting - I'd like to see a 3rd round comp pick for Kampman making Thompson's including the Packers' 3rd rounder in the trade up more likely, if need be. How far up in the first round would trading Barnett, the Packers' 1st and 3rd rounders get 'em? I don't know. But that trade up would remind me of the one for Matthews and if the results were even similar... :)

    I would also like to see a first or second rounder spent on an OT because I think spending assets to protect Aaron Rodgers will pay dividends for seasons to come. Clifton had an amazing season. I hope he can repeat that in 2011. But I don't think that's likely and I would like to see the Packers fully prepared if it doesn't.
    • Like Like x 1
  21. GBPack2010
    Offline

    GBPack2010 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Location:
    CA
    Ratings:
    +67 / 0 / -0
    We can cover our needs without having to move up. Talent will be there. We'll be able to coach our guys up.
  22. timdykeman
    Offline

    timdykeman Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    Jemseg, N.B., Canada
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Like the down option better than staying put. More picks equals more depth and as we found out this season you can never have enough depth behind your starters.
    That being said, if TT sees a player at 32 he thinks will fit the team, he will pull the trigger.
  23. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33
    The jsonline story I linked earlier in this thread says the Packers have 66 veteran players who finished on the 53-man roster or IR. They signed 9 street FAs who spent time on their practice squad in '10. They have 9 draft choices in the upcoming draft and "McCarthy also said the team would like to sign their normal complement of about 12 rookie free agents after the draft." (Of course a CBA will have to be in place for that to happen.) If Jolly gets reinstated, that would be 97 players.

    If the owners get the 18 games they want, the rosters will have to expand but under the previous CBA, there would only be room for 53 players and the 7 extra for the PS would have to go through waivers first. So that's 44 "too many" players for the active roster and after keeping an additional 7 that no other team wants for their active roster, that's still 37 too many. Under the previous rules they could only have 80 signed before the cut downs start. Even if they don't sign one UDFA, that's 5 too many for an 80-man roster.

    I don't expect a mega trade up ala Matthews in '08 but as I posted previously, the trend has been Thompson selecting fewer players in the draft (I believe) because there's not as much room on the roster as there was previously. So in answer to GBPack2010's post I would say Thompson traded up in each of the last three drafts - twice into the 3rd round and once of course into the first. He apparently didn't think the talent they targeted would be there at their picks. And in answer to timdykeman's post I'd point out my paragraph above - how much sense does it make to add even more players for whom there just isn't room?

    Would anyone disagree that the Packers have their deepest roster going into this year's draft? I saw one story which said the top talent tier in this draft is about 22 players and the next tier is about 46 players. Of course we don't know how the Packers view the different tiers in this draft class. But I think it makes sense for Thompson to continue the trend by trading up into what they view as the top tier or to move lower picks to get multiple picks in the next tier. Even if that process starts by trading down a few picks out of #32, as timdykeman suggests. My fantasy is hoping Thompson can move Barnett in one such trade up. But I don't think it's unrealistic to think Thompson will make extra selections in the second, third, and/or fourth rounds targeting players rather than trading down for 10 or more picks as he did when he took over an aging and shallow roster.
    • Like Like x 3
  24. Mel-MinAlum
    Offline

    Mel-MinAlum Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    Is there a specific player(s) those of you who are talking about trading up are thinking of? Obviously there are limitless scenarios that could factor in, but there must be some names out there you're thinking of.
    I am only basing my next statement on the who knows how many mocks I've looked at and where players are generally projected to go........With the possible exception of DE and OL, we would have to move up close to or into the top ten to get someone with a noticeable difference in talent that players available at 32 thru the mid to late 2nd round have. Then I look at the DEs and OL guys who are likely to go off the board in the mid teens thru 20s, and I just don't see anyone that jumps out at me. There are four guys at this point I would love to trade up and get, I just can't see them as realistic possibilities. Those guys are: P. Peterson; Julio Jones; Aldon Smith and Von Miller. The first two just as much to return kicks as their position talent, and the other two to bookend Clay. I see Akeem Ayers mentioned going early in a lot of drafts, I just haven't seen enough of him to know if he has similar potential. If he's in the mold of Smith and Miller, I would add him to the list as well.
  25. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Ratings:
    +1,918 / 49 / -33

    Not for me. I am very interested in draft philosophy and of course extremely interested in the players the Packers select, but I don't have any particular players in mind. I am not a "draftnik" (not that there's anything wrong with that :)) as I only see all of the Badgers' games, a few other games of interest like the bowl games, and I read the "reviews" of some of the players the "experts" think the Packers may be interested in. So I am not as familiar with potential draftees as many here. For example, when Thompson traded up for Clay, I was excited, not because I knew anything in particular about him, but because of the cost of that trade-up I knew Thompson and his staff were excited about him.


    The caution I offer regarding this is an obvious one. One of the DEs or OL that don't jump out to you may jump out at Thompson. IOW, the Packers rankings of players in the first round and throughout the draft may be radically different than yours and the "experts". (Like I said an obvious point.) One of the players the Packers have as a top 10-15 player may fall to the mid 20s causing Thompson to attempt a trade-up. Also, was it realistic that Aaron Rodgers - who was talked about as the #1 pick overall - would fall to #24?

Share This Page