My (early) Packer mock draft

[RepStar15]

Shelton will most likely be drafted in the top 10, the Packers would have to give up too much to trade up for him.

I don't know, there are a lot of solid NT's in this draft and may not fit every team's need. Stocks could rise and fall significantly in the coming weeks and even seconds before, so we could get lucky at #30, or even a team like the saints may be desperate enough to give us a good trade. They may not necessarily want to pay a 1st rounder the money this year. Who knows, draft day is very unpredictable. Regardless, I would be a happy Packer fan if we get that kid.

But I wouldn't be upset with Kendricks #30 and a guy with size like Jordan Phillips next.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I would prefer Kendricks over Perryman simply because he's capable of covering RBs and TEs.

I agree with that assessment, but I'm not quite ready to write off Perryman.

We'll see what the Combine drills might show.

However, it is a similar situation to projecting a 4-3 DE conversion to 3-4 OLB. Perryman's a guy who plays downhill and sideline-to-sideline with the play in front of him. What will he do when the play is behind him against NFL athletes? How will he transition from a run call to a pass play in the faster NFL game?

I don't doubt Perryman is a 2-down player. There are too many of those guys in this front 7 already. Kendricks is a lower risk proposition; he already looks like a polished 3-down player even if his skills are more of the subtle variety and less of the splash play blow-up-tackle variety.

I think it's worth mentioning Kendricks brings A-1 citizenship qualities, smarts and leadership, from all accounts. While not having any particular info on Perryman on that score, Kendricks looks like a guy who can provide some glue to to a defense that often appears unglued, and evidently has the smarts to get with the Capers complexities (as much anybody can).

Let's say Kendricks' realistic projection is a step quicker version of the 2010 Hawk. I think I'd take that at #30.

 

[RepStar15]

Thoughts on picking up Sean Mannion in the 5th-6th?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Thoughts on picking up Sean Mannion in the 5th-6th?

I´d rather re-sign both Tolzien and Flynn.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I like Manion. Has the size, played in pro-style offense and knows how to audible. BUT....with Aaron having at least 5 more years left, why draft someone to be groomed over the next 2-3 years? Tolzien and or Flynn are the right age to back-up Aaron for the rest of his career and if the Packers feel confident in either or both of them, that position doesn't require a draft choice. There are always plenty of cheap Vets to bring into camp as a 3rd stringer.

 

[Carl]

I like Manion. Has the size, played in pro-style offense and knows how to audible. BUT....with Aaron having at least 5 more years left, why draft someone to be groomed over the next 2-3 years? Tolzien and or Flynn are the right age to back-up Aaron for the rest of his career and if the Packers feel confident in either or both of them, that position doesn't require a draft choice. There are always plenty of cheap Vets to bring into camp as a 3rd stringer.

Value. If this kid is the best guy by far late in the draft, gotta take him if they can't trade down.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree with you to some extent Carl, about picking for value. But in this situation, at QB, I just see it as sort of a "throw away" pick to take a QB in the draft. Aaron isn't going anywhere (barring major injury) for at least 5 years, so we aren't looking to groom a QB as a future starter (like you do at most positions). We have 2 guys behind him now that can step in and there are always plenty of experienced vets that can also be picked up. I just don't see the need to spend a draft pick to groom and back up Aaron in the process. Packers have drafted "back-ups" at QB in the recent past.....BJ Coleman, Brian Brohm, Matt Flynn, Ingle Martin. 3 of them are no longer playing and Flynn when he was ready to start, well we all know what happened to him. Just my opinion on spending picks on this position at this time.

In 3 years.....then its time to start thinking about drafting our future starter at QB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree with you to some extent Carl, about picking for value. But in this situation, at QB, I just see it as sort of a "throw away" pick to take a QB in the draft. Aaron isn't going anywhere (barring major injury) for at least 5 years, so we aren't looking to groom a QB as a future starter (like you do at most positions). We have 2 guys behind him now that can step in and there are always plenty of experienced vets that can also be picked up. I just don't see the need to spend a draft pick to groom and back up Aaron in the process. Packers have drafted "back-ups" at QB in the recent past.....BJ Coleman, Brian Brohm, Matt Flynn, Ingle Martin. 3 of them are no longer playing and Flynn when he was ready to start, well we all know what happened to him. Just my opinion on spending picks on this position at this time.

In 3 years.....then its time to start thinking about drafting our future starter at QB.

Mostly agree with your post but as of now you have to consider that both Flynn and Tolzien are free agents.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

yes, my "plan" hinges on getting one or both of them signed again. Really can't see Flynn going anywhere and almost the same for Tolzien