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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

One Big Draft Prediction

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by warhawk, Apr 3, 2007.

  1. dhpackr

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Ratings:
    +0
    What if Olsen and Lynch are gone, is Jarrett a wasted pick then?
     
  2. dhpackr

    dhpackr Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,635
    Ratings:
    +0
    I just want to know what is wrong with selecting a solid possession WR in the 1st round w/pick #16?

    Did you break your TV when the Packers selected Bubba Franks?

    If Lynch and Olsen are gone, why not select a solid player who is a red zone threat.

    I see that many people post on what the Packers need. A Saftey? A RB? a WR? Well, to me one of the most glaring weaknesses on the '06 Packers was the teams inability to score in the red zone. The offence moved the ball, but many times couldn't sealthe deal. I feel Jarrett could be utilized in the red zone like Bubba was. Especially on slants and fade routes, where Brett could toss up a jump ball and Jarrett could have an advantage over a DB. a 6' 5" WR playing in the slot would be a nice weapon for #4.
     
  3. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    What is wrong with selecting a possession WR at #16 for the Packers?

    Last year we drafted a guy name Greg Jennings who is an excellent possession receiver who's probably going to be better than Jarrett in the pros, in addition we have Donald Driver who also is a posession receiver. Didn't it strike yet that we need a pretty fast receiver with good hands and good routerunning skills?

    That receiver is not Dwayne Jarrett and it's not Robert Meachem.

    My guess is the Packers aren't going to select a WR with their two first picks because a guy like that isn't going to be available.

    Mike Walker could be that guy in the 3rd or 4th round while Laurent
    Robinson could be that guy in everything from the 3rd to the 6th round.

    Also I am pretty sure the Moss deal is not dead yet, however as I've said many times before, it seems very unlikely that anything will happen before the draft.
     
  4. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Everybody and their brother has said that the Packers lack PLAYMAKERS. With Jarretts lack of speed I see him being another possession receiver in the pros.
    With four other receivers after Johnson rated higher I can predict with confidence that TT will take a lot of heat if this pick were made. I know I would have to question his system of determining the next best available.

    My guess is that OregonPackFan could be right on and NO receiver after Johnson gives us what we need that's worthy of the 16th selection.

    If, in fact, both Olsen and Lynch are gone it would mean someone like Leon Hall will still be available and he would have to rate way higher on the charts than the remaining wr's.

    I mean we are talking about the #1 corner vs. the #5 receiver. It would be a no brainer.
     
  5. chibiabos

    chibiabos Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    398
    Ratings:
    +0
    :twocents: If Meachem and Lynch are gone, TT might be looking at Revis, Olsen, Bowe, or Ross. Just wondering who might slip out of the top ten ranked palyers and be available to the Pack?
     
  6. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    Meachem isn't the kind of WR that would fit in the Packers,

    Meachem runs some horrible routes, if they drafted him they wouldn't be able to rely on him in a majority of the west coast offense plays, which require very good route running.

    We need a fast WR that runs good routes.

    Steve Smith out of USC could be a possibility but would be a major reach at #16. He's also a little small.
     
  7. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Nobody wants to screw up the first round pick so I think you have to go back to the big picture, look at everybody on the board, and try to determine who is the next best player.

    Many here obviously WANT that to be a WR but the more discussion that evolves around that position the more it looks there isn't one worth that pick.

    If the remaining WR's are rated as no higher than mid 20's why would we go at #16? The ONLY guy that has the world class speed and big play capability we need is Ginn and that scares me although he could become a great receiver over time.
    His kick return ability would pay off right away but that's a hell of a price to pay. Especially if he does not become a great receiver.

    I just don't see this position addressed at #16. Sorry. If Lynch, Hall, or Olsen are around we will go there first and more than likely at least one will be there.
     
  8. chibiabos

    chibiabos Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    398
    Ratings:
    +0
    :thumbsup: I agree on Meachem; think he'll drop down aways on draft day. The way it looks right now, GB will eiother take Olsen a bit of a reach or else go with a defensive player at 16. That's assuming Johnson doesn't fall to 16. LOL
     
  9. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    I agree. I don't think there is a WR after Johnson that would be a good pick at 16. Similarly I don't think there is a RB after Peterson either. Olsen doesn't strike meas a solid pick at 16 either. Landry or Nelson are probably my 2 guys. Maybe a Moses. I just don't like the 16 spot for the Pack
     
  10. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Interesting thoughts pyle, mind me asking what you think if the Pack select Ginn.

    I'm gonna go with the line of thinking that this team still needs playmakers, and while Ginn is far from a sure thing, the ability to get a playmaker at 16 is too good to pass up...
     
  11. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'm not a Ginn fan at all. I think Ginn could be controlled with a bump at the line. I also question his durability and he tends to hear footsteps at times. Ginn knows one speed.....fast, but in the NFL you have to be a little crafty as well. He would be a nice player returning kicks but I question if he is just another fast guy or a legit NFL WR.

    Just my opinion
     
  12. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Plus he's not useful in the red zone - just forgot to add that
     
  13. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    He could instantly improve our KR and PR games, you think that would justify him going in at 16?
     
  14. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    That I agree with but I don't know if I can stomach spending the 16 on a KR.
     
  15. PackOne

    PackOne Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +4
    My big draft prediction is that the packers trade their 6th round pick for the rights to Ricky Williams.
     
  16. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    I have similar thoughts but the more I watch him and the more I hear about his work ethic the more intrigued by him I become. I rather take him than Jarrett. If you think Ginn is soft then look at the big ole "softy" from USC. He can't get off the line when he gets pressed. I think Ginn as a guy who can stretch the field for the Pack would be a decent pick but I can’t say I 100% endorse it as well. Mixed feeling really.
     
  17. chibiabos

    chibiabos Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    398
    Ratings:
    +0
    :thumbsup: Taking Ginn at 16 seems to me a bit of a reach. I would think GB would take either Revis of Pittsburgh or Aaron Ross of Texas before they'd draft Ginn. There's also Dwayne Bowe of LSU if GB is going for the WR position which I doubt at this point in the draft. With the ratings I have I wouldn't be surprised if GB took Carriker or Branch if they manage to be around at 16. I really don't think Nelson would fit in at GB; we've had a number of DB's with less then average smarts that haven't panned out too well.
     
  18. robkeg

    robkeg Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    38
    Ratings:
    +0
    What do ya'll think about the possiblity of trading down in the first round if either Lynch or Olsen already gone and maybe swap a 1st and pick up a fourth?
     
  19. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    If they think a guy will still be there then it could happen.

    The WR and CB groups are deep in this years draft. Many of these guys are clustered in the late first or early second projections so it's a scenario that could work.

    I see seven guys being real studs. Johnson, Russell, Quinn, Thomas, Peterson, Landry and, Adams.

    Another 10 guys including Hall, Willis, Branch, Anderson, etc, being a little ahead of the rest and then about 25 guys that are a crap shoot as far as who will ultimately succeed the most in the NFL.

    Rouse or Meriweather? Rice or Gonzalez? And I can't name all the CB's in that cluster. At least 3 or 4.

    If a star falls which we have all seen happen I say take him otherwise trading down a few spots beats overpaying what is a late round talent with the 16th pick.
     
  20. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    ESPN Insider is reporting the Packers are looking to trade down in the Draft even if Olsen is on the board when they pick. Just throwing that out there.
     
  21. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    According to the draft value chart, if we swapped first round picks with the Jets, we should get their 2nd too.

    A 4th is way too little.
     
  22. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Does not surprise me at all. There are a BUNCH of guys rated very close near the end of the 1st round and we could trade down to the low 20's and pick up another 2nd which makes a lot more sense than reaching for somebody with the 16th pick.

    Trade down, pick up an extra 2nd, and trade the lowest 2nd we end up with for Moss. We end up with a pick in every round AND Moss.

    I figure if I keep throwing various scenarios against the wall of how we can end up with Randy sooner or later one might stick.
     
  23. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think at #16 we are just out of reach of the top players, from #16 and down in the first round the level of the players available is pretty much the same depending on position. I firmly believe we will trade down and I don't think Lynch or Meachem is worth picking at #16, the only player I could see slip to us that would be worth picking there is Leon Hall.
     
  24. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,571
    Ratings:
    +650
    if there are no top-tier players left and the packers are should trade down, which teams would want to trade up?
     
  25. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Titans and the Jets are both reportedly high on Meachem, I could see both of them trying to trade up.
     

Share This Page