packers draft picks, from a tt standpoin( quantity=quality)

[brennan1884]

ok so we have in the first round the 16th pick overall, im sick of all the marshawn lynch hype......look at the clinton portis situation, rbs are a dime a dozen in the nfl and the o-line makes them who they are, i say we draft laron landry first round if hes available, if not then why not draft patrick willis from ole miss and shore up our linebacking core as one of the best in the nfl second round we draft a reciever such as a robert mecheim from tennesee, 3rd round we can get a quality linebacker, 4-7 round we can fill positons of need such as rb (penn state rb would be a good fit) and wr, as well as de, and cb's

 

[porky88]

Your sick of it because you don't like it?

It comes down to Ted Thompson. He says he'll draft the best player available and that could be Lynch especially at #16.

I don't see why the Packers would draft Patrick Willis. He's an inside LB and we have Barnett there or a weak side LB and we have A.J. Hawk there. He doesn't fill a need and Poppinga improved on a daily basis. The Packers LB core is solid already and Willis would be a huge waste playing the strong side.

WR is certainly possible but I doubt Meachem, Jarrett, or Bowe, get higher grades than Lynch and neither of them are going to be on the board when the Packers pick in round 2.

If the Packers fail to resign Ahman Green and Marshawn Lynch is on the board when we pick I don't see how you cannot take him. Even if Green returns he’s not going to be a Packer for much longer and a long term RB is huge especially when Favre retires and we have to rely on the running game more and more.

As for Portis. What about Ladainian Tomlinson, Larry Johnson, and Shaun Alexander. Arguably the 3 best RB's in football were 1st round picks. To say you can find a RB in round 2 and he'll be better is not how it works. The Draft is a hit and miss game and it's like that for every position.

 

[brennan1884]

i agree with you as far as best available but have you heard of marhsawn ****** assualt problem, plus patrick willis has been on nfl network today and ive been watching the combine nonstop they say the guys is a beast and can play all three line backer spots, i agree it might not be the best pick at 16, what would you think about trading down ????

 

[porky88]

Re: packers draft picks, from a tt standpoin( quantity=quali

i agree with you as far as best available but have you heard of marhsawn ****** assualt problem, plus patrick willis has been on nfl network today and ive been watching the combine nonstop they say the guys is a beast and can play all three line backer spots, i agree it might not be the best pick at 16, what would you think about trading down ????

I DVR the Combine and didn't see where they said Willis could play strong side. If they said so then Mike Mayock is wrong in my opinion. He doesn't have enough bulk to play the strong side. Even at 16 though Willis could be a reach.

As for Lynch the charges I believe have been dropped and will be a non factor.

Edit: Trading down is always an option especially with Ted Thompson.

 

[PackerTraxx]

I would not mind TT trading down as this seems to be one of the deeper drafts in a while as long as he doesn't trade "out or site". As someone mentioned above an extra 2nd in this draft would be good. I believe a lot depends on who is available when we're up.

 

[porky88]

Actually if the Packers do end up trading a 3rd for Randy Moss or Willis McGahee even I could seem them moving out of the 1st round.

Thompson moving down from 16 with a team like the Jets and picking up 3 extra picks in this Draft.

So in hindsight the Pack would of traded a 1st and a 3rd for Randy Moss, two seconds, and a Day 2 pick.

Jets have two second round picks and I think they'd package them to move up.

Packers could probably get better value out of #16 then two seconds but this is just kind of an example of what could happen.

Overall 3 second round picks could turn into some pretty good players plus a Moss or McGahee brought in the fold.

Just something to think about.

 

[CaliforniaCheez]

#1 Ted will not trade a pick if he doesn't have to trade one.
#2 There is a lot of Lynch talk because it seems a good fit between player and team. I am not sure Lynch will be available at #16. You know draft day that sweating out the wait will be difficult. Don't rule out another team trading ahead of the Packers to get him.

My opinion is that Lynch is gone and Ted trades down in the first to pick up an extra 3rd. There are good TE's in the third round in this draft.

If no CB in the first round I don't think a later round would be worth it long term unless he lands a McKenzie(3rd). Two of these positions taken in the first 2 rounds CB, WR, RB.

I like the TE's in the third, and an FB and back up Center in the next 2 rounds. Then perhaps a return man.

So much depends on how the board is progressing. An RB does not have to be taken at 16 or in the first round.

I can see Ted suprising us and taking an O lineman in the first 3 rounds.

With so many possible options it can hurt your head to think about it.

 

[all about da packers]

Cali, history shows TT drafts based on need.

He doesn't have as many needs as last year, so I don't see him trading down a whole lot. Maybe a couple of times tops.

 

[HatestheEagles084]

Cali, history shows TT drafts based on need.

He doesn't have as many needs as last year, so I don't see him trading down a whole lot. Maybe a couple of times tops.

See, my philosophy is if there's less needs you can trade up and draft one high ranked player rather than have some xtra picks---not that extra picks are a bad thing

I dont know what you're saying about not having needs...Running back of some sort, Wide Reciever of some sort, Tight End, DE (pending KGB situation...), Safety unless we're going to platoon Underwood and Manuel, we don't have to go nuts drafting o-line this year but there are still some things that we need to address

 

[all about da packers]

Well hates, last year we basically had Driver/Ferggy as our WRs going into the season. We desperately needed a starting caliber WR to push Ferggy.

We desperately needed a starting LB to help Barnett. At that point we didn't know if Popp would be fully healthy to help out right away at LB.

We desperately needed some o-linemen that fit our ZB system and could start right away. Starting guards were a must.

We needed a young RB to compliment Green and possibly take over. While we didn't draft one, we did trade for Morency. He may yet come good (long shot, but still the possibility exists).

We thought the TE position would be settled, because we had Bubba coming back from injury, and there was optimism that Martin would finally deliver on his potential.


THIS YEAR
- We don't need a starting FB because Miree was our starter and he is still here. He did a decent job, which is better than below par. We need a FB to compete with Miree, but not necessarily a starting FB.

- We need a TE desperately, and I'd argue one that can push Bubba as starter. We definitely need a starting caliber TE.

- A RB is also a need, but as we know RB isn't a first round need. It is a deep RB class and good/solid RBs can be had in later rounds. While RB is a need, it isn't a first round desperation need.

- Safety was terrible, and I think they are banking on Underwood beating out Manuel. Culver has shown potential, so it isn't as if a starting caliber safety is a must.

- Jenkins/KGB/Kamp are a solid DE rotation that doesn't need immediate help.

Overall, compared to last year we don't have as much immediate starting caliber player needs as we did last season. We do need adequate depth, and that is a bit easier in getting than adequate starters.

 

[porky88]

Re: packers draft picks, from a tt standpoin( quantity=quali

We don't need a starting FB because Miree was our starter and he is still here. He did a decent job, which is better than below par. We need a FB to compete with Miree, but not necessarily a starting FB.

I actually think the Packers have needs at TE, RB, and FB in terms of starters. I also think they need to add depth to WR and OL. I agree that most of this will be done via the draft and rightfully so but you still need some foundation of veterans and the Packers do lack that especially in depth. On the Defensive Side of the ball depth to the secondary is the only need I would really address. I do think they need to add another DE but it appears KGB and Jenkins are their plans.

If I had to guess I think it’s very likely that Ted Thompson takes a RB and TE on the 1st Day of the Draft. I also think it’s likely he adds a WR whether it’d be through the Draft or trade. Safety in my opinion is something I think the Packers want to develop within with Underwood, Collins, and Culver. I’m an Underwood fan and he was a great player at San Diego State but I’d still like to see as much competition as possible in camp and it appears their consent on a veteran and two inexperience players.

 

[yooperfan]

IMHO building depth is the key right now.
Even if Theodora brings in some of the older players in FA just to add depth and veteran experience, I think he will be doing good as long as it is at the right price.
Special Teams needs to be shored up and I'm not sure it can be done through the draft or FA.
That area could be the coaching, however a return threat would be a big help.