I guess I missed that post, sorry if I repeated that info. I just figure the move up 9 slots brings more prospects/options into play, maybe even package #52 and another pick to move even higher.I posted the exact thing earlier this week.
I would be in favor of it, IF there were enough players (4-5) on the board that interested the Packers when their pick at #29 was on the clock. Really a no brainer in my mind. Still get a guy you want and move up 9 spots in the second to possibly still find a first tier player. Not sure how much value the 5th yr. option is on a #29 pick, but definitely something to consider.
Should TT trade out of first round?
- Thread starter thequick12
- Start date
Sherman would be an intriguing option but I don't think Seattle would trade him to an NFC team, much less us since we seem to meet in the playoffs on a consistent basis, not to mention the regular season. The Butler option is more realistic of the 2 since he is in the AFC....whether he is worth a 1st rd pick or not.
ExpatPacker
Cheesehead
I would not give up a 1st round pick for Butler, no way.
One prospect intrigues me: if Jabrill Peppers was there at the 29th pick, should the Packers take him? They don't have a need at safety but in the opinion of many Peppers has a high ceiling.
If the Packers' first 3 rounds went something like Round 1 Jabrill Peppers, Round 2 Kevin King, Round 3 Joe Mixon, I think I'd wet myself.
Last edited:
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Like TT, I am a guy who thinks the more pics you have, the more likely you are to hit on one, but this might be a draft class where trading up (or back with #1) into the first half of the second round could benefit a team that needs help at CB, OLB and the RB position. I would like to see the Packers hang on to a 6th or 7th to grab one of the top college punters, instead of having to compete in the UDFA for the leftovers.
Dantés
Gute Loot
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2017
- Messages
- 12,044
- Reaction score
- 2,970
Not a bad idea at all, though if I had my first choice I would probably make a trade to net us extra picks rather than just moving existing picks up and down. TT's biggest asset as a GM is finding good players in the middle round, so I'm all for giving him extra swings.
I'm happy when we have a lot of draft picks, and I believe in trading back a little to accumulate more so you can move around to grab someone you really want. The only thing that sucks about that is all the anticipation you built up for your team to pick and then you have to wait longer because you traded back. On the flip side, I love the adrenaline rush when you aren't expecting a Packers pick, and then it says trade, Packers are now on the clock.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
If we could trade our #29th and get CB Kevin King and OLB Jordan Willis thats a win for us IMO.
What is it with the trading down BS. We had a very long thread last fall about not getting an impact player because we always draft near the end of the first round. Now there are people advocating moving further down? Just for a chance to throw more **** at the wall to see what sticks?
Dantés
Gute Loot
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2017
- Messages
- 12,044
- Reaction score
- 2,970
This is exactly why I would favor trading down only if the top talent is gone. Teams usually assign around 20 first round grades per draft class. At least that's what you hear. So if the guys on that level by the Packers' assessment are all gone, and you're not going to be shifting down to a different tier of prospect by moving down, then fine. But if one of your top guys makes it to you there, take them. The best course of action will always be a real time decision.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
DoURant corrected my error in recollections. However, to suggest Hundley is incapable of being a serviceable back-up is almost treasonous. I question your Packer pride. We must support all Packers!!! As fans, we must uplift them; instill confidence...But I digress. Lol.
I haven't mentioned Hundley not being able to turn into a decent quarterback but questioned your take that he is a great backup because of what he did against second and third stringer during the preseason two years ago.
Yes.
Peppers doesn't address any of the Packers' biggest needs. Hopefully Thompson passes on him if he's still pn the board at #29.
McKnowledge
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 1,306
- Reaction score
- 270
If you would've made this argument nearly a month ago, when I made a statement like this before the combine, I would have debated you. Now, I would agree. Pack should pass on Peppers. However, if Peppers was more raw, not as well known, and willing to play LB, drafting him in the later round would be interesting. Maybe drafting a safety in the later rounds of this draft and converting him to ILB would be a wise move. TT doesn't appear willing to consider ILB free agents (Z. Brown), so getting an immediate ILB contributor early and drafting a converted safety later may be wise. Packers could use sideline to sideline speed. Packers could use athleticism on defense in general.
Last edited:
OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 14,322
- Reaction score
- 5,704
Agreed. My answer to the question above we need to do whatever is necessary to acquire players who fill an immediate need. I could definitely see us consider taking two upper-mid 2nd round picks especially at RB and CB Or OLB and CB
It'll be interesting to see if TT has something up his sleeve that diverts from being conservative.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2013
- Messages
- 6,391
- Reaction score
- 1,761
Something I just realized a couple of days ago is that both Burnett and Dix have contracts expiring after the 17 season. I can see Thompson drafting a safety this year. That would definitely fit his M.O.
I wonder if Ted will stick it to all the haters and draft Tedric Thompson, the Safety out of Colorado? Either its a no brainer he will, or Ted doesn't think there's enough room in Green Bay for 2 Ted Thompson's
Dantés
Gute Loot
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2017
- Messages
- 12,044
- Reaction score
- 2,970
If they were going to let one walk, it would be Burnett for obvious reasons. With that in mind, I would love to see them take Marcus Maye out of Florida. He's a top 50 talent, but maybe the injury and DB depth could push him into the 3rd? That would be a great investment.
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Marcus Williams would be a great pick to groom if we lose one. Problem is he may go early 2nd to mid 2nd. Nate Gerry in the 6th?
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Packers could pick up the fifth year option for Clinton-Dix this offseason possibly making it easier to sign him to a long term contract.
OP
OP
thequick12
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 3,155
- Reaction score
- 577
ok i really hope not cuz that would be a terrible trade in my book give up a 1st rounder for the privilege to pay an average player 10 million a year. Seattle has traded with the packers before numerous times I get that they wouldn't want to strengthen a rival but if it was the deal that was there for them it might happen. they did trade their starting center and a high pick to the saints granted they got Jimmy graham. but I wouldn't totally rule it out
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
There's no doubt in my mind that Sherman is a way above average player and would immediately fill the Packers need for a top cornerback. Thompson would most likely have to give up too much to acquire him for it to make sense though.
OP
OP
thequick12
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 3,155
- Reaction score
- 577
I was talking about Butler as the average player. Sherman is a top 5 nfl cornerback right now honestly I can't think of anyone I would say is definitely better than him
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Sorry, my bad. While Butler isn't a top five cornerback by any means he would still address the Packers need for a #1 cornerback in my opinion though.
OP
OP
thequick12
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 3,155
- Reaction score
- 577
I don't think hes a number 1, I'd call him a number 2. you don't want him lining up against the other teams number 1 wr all year. Just because he's a top 32 cb doesn't mean he's a number 1 just means there aren't 32 number 1 cbs in the league just like there aren't 32 number 1 qbs in the league. I will say this if he didn't want to be paid 10 m a year he might be worth 29th pick after looking at the history of players taken in that spot. best Steve Wisnewski 1989 nick Mangold 2006 and Harrison Smith 2012. None as good as Sherman and only 3 I would say for sure better than Butler since 1980. Although players like nick Barnett, Ryan Pickett, Hakeem nicks etc are all on the same level as Butler I'd say.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
We have to agree to disagree on Butler not being a #1 cornerback, especially as he has improved every single season and might get even better. Unfortunately it takes $10 million a season to sign players capable of moving on top of the depth chart at the position.
OP
OP
thequick12
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 3,155
- Reaction score
- 577
True. To me getting Sherman would be awesome and getting Butler would be settling just to say you got someone. Kinda like a chick who marries a lame dude just because she is getting old and thinks she has to do something
Sky King
158.3
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2012
- Messages
- 2,817
- Reaction score
- 329
If the Seahawks are truly willing to trade Sherman to a rival then I would be suspicious that they know something that their rivals may not know fully, at least not yet. A very costly, nearer-the-downhill-slide, coach-killer is not what GB needs regardless of his past performances, if that's what he eventually turns-out to be. The fact that the Seahawks are entertaining the possibility of trading him in itself seems like a red flag to me.
