Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
Draft Ratings (by Round)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Magooch" data-source="post: 958776" data-attributes="member: 17987"><p>I don't know exactly what grade I'd give it but I can't complain too much so far. </p><p></p><p>Given the assessment that we had 6ish WR prospects graded as 1st-round prospects, with the way things fell I'm okay that we didn't get one in R1. I have a hunch - nothing to prove this, just speculating - but I'd bet that out of those 6 1st-rd graded WRs there were probably only 2 or 3 that they would've been willing to move up for. If I had to guess, Wilson, London, Williams. I think they would've taken Burks, Dotson, Olave in the first but probably didn't rate them worth moving up for...and by the same merit, looking at what it would've cost to get in to the range that Wilson/London/Williams (and Olave) were drafted, it would've been really steep. </p><p></p><p>I'm happy with Walker and Wyatt. If we still had last year's WR room (Davante, MVS) I'd go so far as to say that it would have been an A+ first round. Obviously that's not the case, those guys are gone, so that need is greater, but when looking beyond just 'need' I think we did quite well. </p><p></p><p>I think probably the only two complaints I could make is that *maybe* it was a bit high for Walker - but of course we saw Dean fall a long way. Maybe you could question if Walker was a better choice than Lloyd. And you could probably say we overpaid to get Watson, but at the same time... a lot of WRs ended up going before our original first day-two pick, so we were probably going to need to move up to get one of our top-graded guys one way or another. Maybe not as high as 34, maybe not giving up so much, but I don't think we get one of our preferred players if we stay pat at 53. </p><p></p><p>Rhyan I'm really happy with too. I think that pick's both a great value and fills need. </p><p></p><p>So I don't know, maybe call it like a B+, A-?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Magooch, post: 958776, member: 17987"] I don't know exactly what grade I'd give it but I can't complain too much so far. Given the assessment that we had 6ish WR prospects graded as 1st-round prospects, with the way things fell I'm okay that we didn't get one in R1. I have a hunch - nothing to prove this, just speculating - but I'd bet that out of those 6 1st-rd graded WRs there were probably only 2 or 3 that they would've been willing to move up for. If I had to guess, Wilson, London, Williams. I think they would've taken Burks, Dotson, Olave in the first but probably didn't rate them worth moving up for...and by the same merit, looking at what it would've cost to get in to the range that Wilson/London/Williams (and Olave) were drafted, it would've been really steep. I'm happy with Walker and Wyatt. If we still had last year's WR room (Davante, MVS) I'd go so far as to say that it would have been an A+ first round. Obviously that's not the case, those guys are gone, so that need is greater, but when looking beyond just 'need' I think we did quite well. I think probably the only two complaints I could make is that *maybe* it was a bit high for Walker - but of course we saw Dean fall a long way. Maybe you could question if Walker was a better choice than Lloyd. And you could probably say we overpaid to get Watson, but at the same time... a lot of WRs ended up going before our original first day-two pick, so we were probably going to need to move up to get one of our top-graded guys one way or another. Maybe not as high as 34, maybe not giving up so much, but I don't think we get one of our preferred players if we stay pat at 53. Rhyan I'm really happy with too. I think that pick's both a great value and fills need. So I don't know, maybe call it like a B+, A-? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
weeds
Pkrjones
Green_Bay_Packers
GreenBaySlacker
Latest posts
The 11th Annual Amish Draft Contest 2024
Latest: OldSchool101
2 minutes ago
Draft Talk
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
4 minutes ago
Draft Talk
Most hated teams outside of the division
Latest: GreenNGold_81
9 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Not too soon 2024 roster prediction
Latest: GreenNGold_81
25 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
S
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: sschind
31 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
Draft Ratings (by Round)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top