players that TT must trade up for if the opportunity is there

[PackerDNA]

I'm not convinced that Hayward was suddenly that great. Granted, a very, very small sample and limited view of him this past year, but I didn't see a lot different; same occasional good stuff, same problems and shortcomings. It would be better to talk to objective Chargers fans.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Well, the team knew he was good since his rookie season was exceptional and his final year with the team, while not great, was pretty good; the main concern I could see from the packers would be a concern that he couldn't stay healthy. I still contend that the Packers made a huge mistake in letting him walk, not because they could have been expected to know he would be that good, but because the deal he signed with the Chargers was so cheap! Hayward is making a little over half what Shields was scheduled to be paid.

At the time I was fine with letting Hayward walk based on future salary and performance, as were the Packers. But even with his excellent rookie year, I am pretty sure that the Packers weren't sold on him or they probably wouldn't have used their first 2 picks in 2015 on CB's, as well as already having Sam Shields on the team. The ironic thing that ended up stinging them, they had too much confidence in Randall and Rollins after their rookie season.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Back to the subject, players the packers should be willing to trade up for, I'd go Malik McDowell, Derek Barnett or Tim Williams. I actually assumed Derek Barnett would be far out of the Packers' reach but apparently some think he could fall a bit because he's not the classic looking pass-rusher like Garrett; however, you can't look past the fact that he was just as productive in college, against the same competition, as Garrett. As for the other two, McDowell would give the Packers a second great player on the dline while Williams might be the best pass rusher in the draft.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not convinced that Hayward was suddenly that great. Granted, a very, very small sample and limited view of him this past year, but I didn't see a lot different; same occasional good stuff, same problems and shortcomings. It would be better to talk to objective Chargers fans.

Hayward allowed the third lowest passer rating while being one of the guys playing the most snaps against #1 receivers in the league last season. He definitely played on a high level in 2016 but mostly did that when healthy in Green Bay as well.

 

[Half Empty]

I'm not convinced that Hayward was suddenly that great. Granted, a very, very small sample and limited view of him this past year, but I didn't see a lot different; same occasional good stuff, same problems and shortcomings. It would be better to talk to objective Chargers fans.

I contacted both Charger fans, and they no longer care.

 

[Dantés]

I'm not convinced that Hayward was suddenly that great. Granted, a very, very small sample and limited view of him this past year, but I didn't see a lot different; same occasional good stuff, same problems and shortcomings. It would be better to talk to objective Chargers fans.

Hayward shadowed #1 wide receivers more than anyone else in the league other than Patrick Peterson and allowed a passer rating of 55 into his coverage. He routinely took away opponent's top option in the passing game. He held Amari Cooper and Kelvin Benjamin to one catch. Mike Evans went 3 for 38 against him. He only allowed one touchdown on the season, while picking off 5 passes. I watched every game, and he was every bit as good as has been advertised.

 

[PackerDNA]

Hayward shadowed #1 wide receivers more than anyone else in the league other than Patrick Peterson and allowed a passer rating of 55 into his coverage. He routinely took away opponent's top option in the passing game. He held Amari Cooper and Kelvin Benjamin to one catch. Mike Evans went 3 for 38 against him. He only allowed one touchdown on the season, while picking off 5 passes. I watched every game, and he was every bit as good as has been advertised.

Thanks for the info; if I 'd seen him for 50 total plays on the season it was a lot.
Next question; why so good for them and not for us?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hayward shadowed #1 wide receivers more than anyone else in the league other than Patrick Peterson and allowed a passer rating of 55 into his coverage. He routinely took away opponent's top option in the passing game. He held Amari Cooper and Kelvin Benjamin to one catch. Mike Evans went 3 for 38 against him. He only allowed one touchdown on the season, while picking off 5 passes. I watched every game, and he was every bit as good as has been advertised.

Sounds like Capers and the Packers DB coaches did a great job at getting Hayward ready for his new career!

 

[Dantés]

Thanks for the info; if I 'd seen him for 50 total plays on the season it was a lot.
Next question; why so good for them and not for us?

I think it was probably mostly schematic/coaching related. Capers asks quite a bit of his corners and I'm not convinced that he and his staff are very good teachers. There was stuff floated out there by the MJS that SD was using a lot of zone, but that wasn't true. They played man predominantly, but used a lot more off coverage. IMO, the jump in his level of play is something of an indictment of the defensive staff in GB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

He only allowed one touchdown on the season, while picking off 5 passes.

FWIW Hayward intercepted seven passes in 2016, leading the league in that category.

 

[Dantés]

FWIW Hayward intercepted seven passes in 2016, leading the league in that category.

My mistake. PFF had the numbers at 1 and 5, but you're right that it was 7.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Man, was I wrong about Hayward....What's TT's excuse?

I am happy for Hayward though. Had he stayed, he would have been stuck deep on the Packers depth chart and when given a chance to finally play, pulled a hammy or a groin.

 

[Poppa San]

So, effectively, the team has to plan this offseason as if the top two picks of the 2015 draft never happened. For a team that uses the draft more than any other team in the NFL, that's the kind of thing that can set a team back for years.

You, of course, are assuming the Packers FO evaluates that draft based on what they read on internet boards. They may have seen signs of growth between the injuries and miscommunication and be quite OK with those two. Not to say they can't or won't draft or sign another.

 

[Packer96]

There will be some surprising drops into late 1st/early 2nd round (again) so if I'm TT I'm looking to slide back 5-10 picks and getting another 4th rounder out of the move. Similar talent available at 29 as 34-37. A QB-needy team will (hopefully) be looking to move up to get that 5th-year option on a QB.

NO, DO NOT SLIDE BACK, that's what got us a team of avg. players. Trade up for studs.

 

[Pkrjones]

NO, DO NOT SLIDE BACK, that's what got us a team of avg. players. Trade up for studs.

Who do you NEED to have that won't be there after pick 24, or 19 (assuming TT trades up 5-10 spots)? Is there a super stud that will turn this D around instantly (who won't be gone in top 5 picks)? No way in Hades TT trades away this entire draft AND '18's #2 and/or #3 to move up into the top 6.

The players available between 29 & 45 are all extremely similar quality, so trade down means TT could get possibly the same guy 10 picks later that he would've taken at 29... AND attain an extra 4th or swap of 3rds in the process. My premise is IF QB-needy teams don't waste a top 10 pick on a QB they may be motivated to move back into late round 1 for a QB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You, of course, are assuming the Packers FO evaluates that draft based on what they read on internet boards. They may have seen signs of growth between the injuries and miscommunication and be quite OK with those two. Not to say they can't or won't draft or sign another.

There's no other way to evaluate Randall and Rollins as to admit that both struggled mightily in 2016 and can't be relied on as long as the Packers don't add a #1 cornerback. I guarantee the front office didn't envision an undrafted free agent with limited athleticism being ahead of a first and second round pick on the depth chart at the end of last season.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

You, of course, are assuming the Packers FO evaluates that draft based on what they read on internet boards. They may have seen signs of growth between the injuries and miscommunication and be quite OK with those two. Not to say they can't or won't draft or sign another.

I'm assuming the packers evaluate their players based on what they actually do. There is no way anyone can say that Randall and Rollins' play last year was anything but horrifyingly disappointing.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Who do you NEED to have that won't be there after pick 24, or 19 (assuming TT trades up 5-10 spots)? Is there a super stud that will turn this D around instantly (who won't be gone in top 5 picks)? No way in Hades TT trades away this entire draft AND '18's #2 and/or #3 to move up into the top 6.

The players available between 29 & 45 are all extremely similar quality, so trade down means TT could get possibly the same guy 10 picks later that he would've taken at 29... AND attain an extra 4th or swap of 3rds in the process. My premise is IF QB-needy teams don't waste a top 10 pick on a QB they may be motivated to move back into late round 1 for a QB.

Malik McDowell, Derek Barnett or Tim Williams are all guys that could make an enormous impact on this team.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Malik McDowell, Derek Barnett or Tim Williams are all guys that could make an enormous impact on this team.

I expect Barnett to be drafted within the top 10 picks though.

 

[PikeBadger]

Who do you NEED to have that won't be there after pick 24, or 19 (assuming TT trades up 5-10 spots)? Is there a super stud that will turn this D around instantly (who won't be gone in top 5 picks)? No way in Hades TT trades away this entire draft AND '18's #2 and/or #3 to move up into the top 6.

The players available between 29 & 45 are all extremely similar quality, so trade down means TT could get possibly the same guy 10 picks later that he would've taken at 29... AND attain an extra 4th or swap of 3rds in the process. My premise is IF QB-needy teams don't waste a top 10 pick on a QB they may be motivated to move back into late round 1 for a QB.

Agree. There is no way imo that Thompson should trade way up towards the top and mortgage the teams future unless there is a generational talent still on the board like a Warren Sapp, Charles Woodson or JuliusPeppers. From what I've seen and heard, no such player exists in this draft.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Agree. There is no way imo that Thompson should trade way up towards the top and mortgage the teams future unless there is a generational talent still on the board like a Warren Sapp, Charles Woodson or JuliusPeppers. From what I've seen and heard, no such player exists in this draft.

Thompson should use free agency to improve the cornerback and outside linebacker positions to finally support the generational talent already on the roster in Rodgers with a defense capable of at least slowing down above average offenses though.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I expect Barnett to be drafted within the top 10 picks though.

I thought the same but some are starting to wonder if he'll fall because he's not the "athlete" that some of the other top pass rushers are.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I thought the same but some are starting to wonder if he'll fall because he's not the "athlete" that some of the other top pass rushers are.

I'm mainly interested in how Barnett is doing in the broad jump but don't care a whole lot about the other numbers from the combine for edge rushers. If he drops to #29 the Packers would be smart to select him at that spot.

 

[Dantés]

I'm mainly interested in how Barnett is doing in the broad jump but don't care a whole lot about the other numbers from the combine for edge rushers. If he drops to #29 the Packers would be smart to select him at that spot.

3 cone is the other drill that has been highly predictive for EDGE success.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I'm mainly interested in how Barnett is doing in the broad jump but don't care a whole lot about the other numbers from the combine for edge rushers. If he drops to #29 the Packers would be smart to select him at that spot.

Oh, I think the Packers should be willing to move up into the mid-teens for him or McDowell; short of something coming out of nowhere (e.g., past crime, drug use, injury) there's no realistic shot either of those guys fall to the Packers.