1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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!
    Dismiss Notice

if coleman or doctson slips to 27.

Discussion in '2016 Draft Archive' started by GreenBaySlacker, Apr 18, 2016.

  1. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    I would be excited to get either Coleman or Doctson. While Coleman has a similar build as Cobb he´s best suited to play on the outside and therefore seems like a good fit for the Packers possible needs at the position.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    Don´t get me wrong, I don´t want the Packers to draft a wide receiver in the first round if there is a player at a position of need (DL, ILB) within the top tier available. I guess Coleman or Doctson would be in a tier above everyone else at #27 if still on the board in which case Thompson should select him.

    Cobb and Montgomery are best suited to play in the slot so as long as you don´t feel comfortable with either Adams or Janis starting on the perimeter the Packers are in need of an outside receiver.
     
  3. Vrill

    Vrill Cheesehead

    Messages:
    1,803
    Likes Received:
    135
    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2011
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
  5. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    we need to trade down w/denver/cleveland or someone...get more pics...if we trade down we would get at least another 2nd round and a 3rd or 4th, depending how far we drop and who with...we could get a defensive tackle (or two), a linebacker, or tight end, etc...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. jetfixer

    jetfixer Cheesehead

    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    25
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Location:
    Memphis, Tn./Pittsburg, Tx.
    Packer Fan Since:
    1967
    Why do we need picks, yes there is a better chance of finding players I guess with more, my thing this year is trade up and get more quality. TT does go your route more often than not, but we have fewer open spots and some glaring needs. I would rather take our 9 picks and move up in the first a bit, draft 7 guys, get some undrafted guys and see what happens.

    By the way if we trade our 27th for Den 31st we might get a 4th at best and I doubt that.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  7. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    The most important job for Thompson in this year´s draft is to address inside linebacker as well as the defensive line. If an impact player at those positions or a clear cut best player at another is available at #27 there´s absolutely no reason for him to trade back.

    The Packers would for sure receive a fourth round pick from Denver trading back four spots in the first round.
     
  8. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
     
  9. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    whats wrong w/more pics?...specially if we only drop a few spots...still get the man teddy wants and possibly more...ie/an extra d-lineman and/or linebacker/te/rb/wr/etc...lets face it...we need quality depth at linebacker, d-line, and o-line....plus, you can always use the extra pics to: a/ trade back up or b/ trade for a player or pics next year...teddy believes in the draft...in teddy we must trust! we could trade down and still get a vernon butler or chris jones & a tightend?! anyway, i'm not here to argue; i just honestly believe it would be in our best interest, if players we need/want are still there late in the first & early in the second! Can't wait until thursday night....go-pack-go...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. GreenBaySlacker

    GreenBaySlacker Cheesehead

    Messages:
    2,930
    Likes Received:
    161
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    I got to ask... Why is montgomery a slot receiver? I understand Cobb who is quick, not big. Who can move around, run, slice, dice, puree, bake and serve most defenders for dinner. And i understand montgomery can run, and has a similar skill set. But montgomery is what, 6'1, 225 or something? I feel he could play outside just fine...

    So why is he labeled a slot type?
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2016
  11. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    he isn' a true "burner" by nfl standards...excellent hands, routes, and quickness...a 6'2" or taller w/speed and jumping ablilty would be nice on the outside and in the red zone...match that w/a 6'6" tightend w/some speed, would open huge doors for our qb & offense, as a whole...
     
  12. GreenBaySlacker

    GreenBaySlacker Cheesehead

    Messages:
    2,930
    Likes Received:
    161
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Can we move up four spots for a 4th to steal a player we really want??? Im not as optimistic about that. Id expect to pay a 3rd. And thats what i would want in trade at least for seone to come up and basicly steal one of those wrs at #27
     
  13. GreenBaySlacker

    GreenBaySlacker Cheesehead

    Messages:
    2,930
    Likes Received:
    161
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Montgomery ran in the low 4.5s i think. He is big and physical, but most pf all he is very agile for a guy his size.
    If he wasnt a rookie, i think he starts outside last year after nelson goes down, instead of jones. Also when he finally earned his shot, he was killin them that game he got hurt. Kind of a freak injury too. Didnt look bad, but obviously tweaked the structural part of the ankle...
    I think he would do very well outside. Boldin back in the az days comes to mind...
     
  14. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
     
  15. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    you could be right? i just think a taller, speed demon on the outside w/a vertical of 38" or better would be awesome...combine that with a big-body tight end, and imagine the possibilities???
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    21,491
    Likes Received:
    2,432
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    Just a label for now would be my guess. Athletically, Montgomery’s skill set is varied enough to line up at both spots. He actually measured 5-foot-11 7/8" at the NFL scouting combine. I have also seen him listed as tall as 6' 2" so no idea why the discrepancy. His height is on the low end for a perimeter receiver, but his 40.5-inch vertical jump allows him to play bigger. I remember reading comments from MM that he could line up anywhere on the field and depending on what Adams does this year, we may just see him out wide.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. PackerDNA

    PackerDNA Cheesehead

    Messages:
    4,405
    Likes Received:
    318
    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    I don't know that you can go wrong getting more weapons for Aaron Rodgers.
     
  18. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
     
  19. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    exactly...the more, the marrier? like i said before; the more "quality" depth at each position...the better...go-pack-go!!!
     
  20. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Messages:
    21,491
    Likes Received:
    2,432
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Location:
    Madison, WI
    Packer Fan Since:
    1973
    The only problem I see with using high draft picks on "more weapons for Rodgers" is neglecting the glaring needs on Defense, DL and ILB and soon to be OLB. We can only put so many WR's and TE's on the field at a time. When your ILB's are named "Barrington, Ryan, Thomas and Bradford", you need to fix that before adding more weapons for Rodgers, IMO.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  21. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
     
  22. The Horn-Dog

    The Horn-Dog Cheesehead

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Packer Fan Since:
    1977
    absolutely...thats why i like the idea of trading down for more pics...get the defensive players first...then apply some offensive depth...
     
  23. OldSchool101

    OldSchool101 Pack

    Messages:
    4,836
    Likes Received:
    555
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Yes. I've nicknamed him mini-moss
     
  24. jetfixer

    jetfixer Cheesehead

    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    25
    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Location:
    Memphis, Tn./Pittsburg, Tx.
    Packer Fan Since:
    1967
    But you still only have 52 spots on Sunday, I'm certainly not saying your wrong......that is how TT built this team. I just think we are deep at most positions and think this year we might actually go in the other direction, like how we got Clay Mathews.
     
  25. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Messages:
    25,206
    Likes Received:
    1,255
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Packer Fan Since:
    1995
    If there´s either an impact player at a position of need (DL, ILB) or a clear cut best player available (possibly Coleman or Doctson) there´s absolutely no reason to trade back.

    Montgomery isn´t a polished route runner and doesn´t have the diverse route tree needed to play outside. In addition he has questionable hands, his catch radius is smaller than desired and he has troubles tracking deep balls. He´s a weapon in the slot though and that´s where the Packers should play him.

    Once again, here´s a link to the widely used draft trade chart, you can figure out on your own what it would take to make trades happen.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/draft/draft-trade-chart/

    As long as there´s an impact player at inside linebacker or the defensive line on the board at #27 there´s no reason to draft a receiver. Coleman or Doctson could be a nice steal if positions of need can´t be adequately addressed at that spot though.
     

Share This Page

-->