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 or

    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!

Do we have to take a WR high in the draft?

Discussion in '2013 Draft Archive' started by ivo610, Apr 13, 2013.

  1. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,244
    Ratings:
    +4,116
    Do we have to take a WR early in this draft? By early I mean rounds 1-3. Obviously this offense is about creating mismatches on the offense with great WRs. Jennings and driver are gone. Jones will be a FA next yr I believe. Is this a position of need in this draft?
     
  2. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,646
    Ratings:
    +2,563
    1st. round would be a shock. 2nd. round would be a surprise. 3rd. round is in the range of reasonable expectations. 4th. round on down is the more likely scenario.

    I think we'd be more likely to go high for a TE than a WR. If Finley sucks in 2013 we'll let him go. If he plays anywhere between decent and great he'll take the most $ the market will bear, and that will not likely be our offer.

    Re-signing Jones should be manageable. His chances of scoring that frequently again are about nil. I don't think there's much he can do to change the view that he'd be just an OK #2 and a very good #3. That's not a bank breaker.
     
  3. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    While I expect at least one of the first 3 picks to be used on offense, no, we do not.
     
  4. Oshkoshpackfan

    Oshkoshpackfan YUT !!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,286
    Ratings:
    +1,453
    4th or 5th round we will take a WR. We have to for insurance reasons, our guys have been dropping like flies with injury. Always a good idea to have freash targets for Arod.
     
  5. VolvoD

    VolvoD Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,087
    Ratings:
    +643
    use the 1st round for our position with the least need? nah. TE maybe.
     
  6. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,646
    Ratings:
    +2,563
    My favorite mock for the Packers comes from sbnation.com:

    We trade our #26 to Buffalo (who will select E.J. Manuel). In exchange, we get Buffalo's 2nd. rounder (#41) and third rounder (#71).

    It's a very long shot that any particular trade could take place, but this mock is indicative of a concept.

    With 4 picks in rounds 2 and 3, I could see us going as high as our #55 for a WR, more likely a TE, depending on who's on the board. We could still shore up O-Line and D-Line in the process, though I still believe S is a weakness despite MM's rosy assessment of the position.

    Otherwise, holding the #26, D-Line would be the odds-on pick in the 1st. round. It's a position of need and good value is likely to be present on the board. Barring trade, I don't see going higher than round 3 for either a WR or TE, and again, more likely a TE if the right guy is there.

    We're 3.5 deep at WR, factoring in Finley, but the 2014 issues are relevant. I'd worry more about not re-signing Finley, with no pass catching threat behind him on the bench, than the possibility of not re-signing our #3 WR.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    I actually say TT takes one in the 2nd round. If i'm not mistaking wasn't Jennings, Nelson, and Cobb all taken in the 2nd? the more weapons for Rodgers the better as i forsee us having to outscore people so why not???
     
  8. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,593
    Ratings:
    +1,858
    No. WR we are still pretty strong. We don't have any 'glaring' needs. We have a few that could use an upgrade, or depth, and WR is not one of them. That being said, this will be known as the year of the WR. There will be solid pros being selected throughout the first 5 rounds. I would be shocked if TT did not grab one - they represent great value - at some point.
     
  9. TJV

    TJV Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    4,125
    Ratings:
    +3,190
    Do we have to take a WR high in the draft? Not in my opinion unless the Packers' draft board "screams" that they do. IOW, only if a WR from an upper talent tier is available in the first three rounds.
     

Share This Page