Trade Up Targets

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,115
Reaction score
3,036
For the record, I don't want the Packers to move up. I'd rather they move down. They have 11 picks, yes, but I would still happily take more and I believe there are plenty of spots on the roster that could use more competition on the back end.

That said, this is the time of year for draft discussion. So if they were going to trade up, who should it be for, how high would they need to go, and what do you think it would cost?

By the chart, one of their 3rd rounders would get them into the 19-20 range, #58 would get them in the 15/16 area, and #41 would get them up around #12.

For me, there are only three players that I think are special enough and fit well enough to warrant a trade up (other than the top 3 receivers, but GB can't reasonably get that high).

Joe Alt, OT, Notre Dame: If the tackles didn't go in the order that most project and Alt slipped to 11/12, I could see packaging #25 and #41 and going up to get him. He would put Walker into a swing role and upgrade left tackle for the present and the future.

Terrion Arnold, CB, Alabama: I think I like Mitchell better in a vacuum and Arnold a little bit more for the Packers specifically, but if either gets to the middle of round one, I wouldn't hate packaging #25 and #58 to go get him. Arnold could literally do anything you want immediately in terms of both alignment and coverage style.

Quinyon Mitchell, CB, Toledo: Everything goes here, I would just have him a little notch behind Arnold because I think he's going to have more of a learning curve when it comes to press and man coverages in general.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
You listed the two Corners for me.

I also hold to the truth that Jared Verse is special and wouldn’t be against if he fell to around 15-21 range. Which I think is the range I’d understand going after Q and Arnold as well.

Alt I love but strongly disagree with some claiming he is other worldly and a guy worth moving higher than 15th to draft. Still admits he is freaking awesome but I’m not one to believe he is a top 5 prospect like many.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
I will say drafting Alt and making potentially Tom your RG and Walker RT….that ought to be an insanely good OL
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,545
Reaction score
8,138
Location
Madison, WI
I will say drafting Alt and making potentially Tom your RG and Walker RT….that ought to be an insanely good OL
I just read that the Packers feel that Tom is a potential All Pro RT and potentially a HOF Center. This makes me think that the Packers won't necessary be drafting a Center, but possibly someone to immediately play RT and move Tom to Center this season. That would mean let Myers and Rhyan compete for the starting RG spot, with the loser becoming a backup.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
I just read that the Packers feel that Tom is a potential All Pro RT and potentially a HOF Center. This makes me think that the Packers won't necessary be drafting a Center, but possibly someone to immediately play RT and move Tom to Center this season. That would mean let Myers and Rhyan compete for the starting RG spot, with the loser becoming a backup.

Tom will play anywhere we need for our best OL. We could draft an elite LT tackle and he slide in to guard this year and center next or a RT and he slide in…or an elite tackle that slides in to guard and he stays. Tom essentially makes us not boxed in.

I see Jordan Morgan and Barton as the best fit for us cuz both could be starters at tackle or guard IMO.
 
OP
OP
Dantés

Dantés

Gute Loot
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
12,115
Reaction score
3,036
Hard to know how to read into those comments coming out right now, mid April.

I could see them being legit and that they would move Tom to center if they got a shot at a good tackle in round 1. Maybe they’re floating them through the media to see how Tom responds.

Or maybe they’re really in on a guy like Barton and are trying to throw other teams off the scent so they don’t get sniped?
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,413
Reaction score
5,778
I honestly wouldn’t be upset if we moved up a little to get Chop Robinson. He reminds me of a modern day Nick Perry (slightly lighter and faster) He just gets after it with an uncanny ability to disrupt.
I’m a player anywhere in that Miami/Pittsburgh area or beyond.

That said I also find myself moving backwards slightly in about 50% of my Mocks, either in Rd1 or Rd2. If Chop or a Stellar CB or OL isn’t there? Moving back later Day1 might make sense. I’d love to grab either 1 more 3rd or 4th Rounder. Seems to be a group of really good players popping up there at OL, RB, LB etc.
 
Last edited:

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,054
Reaction score
1,307
I honestly wouldn’t be upset if we moved up a little to get Chop Robinson. He reminds me of a modern day Nick Perry (slightly lighter and faster) He just gets after it with an uncanny ability to disrupt.
I’m a player anywhere in that Miami/Pittsburgh area or beyond.

That said I also find myself moving backwards slightly in about 50% of my Mocks, either in Rd1 or Rd2. If Chop or a Stellar CB or OL isn’t there? Moving back later Day1 might make sense. I’d love to grab either 1 more 3rd or 4th Rounder. Seems to be a group of really good players popping up there at OL, RB, LB etc.
I'm sorry but if I'm moving up in the first I want someone better than Nick Perry . I think Dantes did a nice rundown of Robinson and From that I wouldn't mind either but not for a Nick Perry.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
I'm sorry but if I'm moving up in the first I want someone better than Nick Perry . I think Dantes did a nice rundown of Robinson and From that I wouldn't mind either but not for a Nick Perry.
To be fair before his injury Perry was legit. Not quite the player I think most thought but solid. From a prospect comp I see it if I go back and look at my notes.

I see a little more speed and less strength moved from Chop, but not a bad comp
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,054
Reaction score
1,307
To be fair before his injury Perry was legit. Not quite the player I think most thought but solid. From a prospect comp I see it if I go back and look at my notes.

I see a little more speed and less strength moved from Chop, but not a bad comp
True about the injury. I had forgotten about that.
 

Voyageur

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
2,447
Reaction score
1,941
For the record, I don't want the Packers to move up. I'd rather they move down. They have 11 picks, yes, but I would still happily take more and I believe there are plenty of spots on the roster that could use more competition on the back end.

That said, this is the time of year for draft discussion. So if they were going to trade up, who should it be for, how high would they need to go, and what do you think it would cost?

By the chart, one of their 3rd rounders would get them into the 19-20 range, #58 would get them in the 15/16 area, and #41 would get them up around #12.

For me, there are only three players that I think are special enough and fit well enough to warrant a trade up (other than the top 3 receivers, but GB can't reasonably get that high).

Joe Alt, OT, Notre Dame: If the tackles didn't go in the order that most project and Alt slipped to 11/12, I could see packaging #25 and #41 and going up to get him. He would put Walker into a swing role and upgrade left tackle for the present and the future.

Terrion Arnold, CB, Alabama: I think I like Mitchell better in a vacuum and Arnold a little bit more for the Packers specifically, but if either gets to the middle of round one, I wouldn't hate packaging #25 and #58 to go get him. Arnold could literally do anything you want immediately in terms of both alignment and coverage style.

Quinyon Mitchell, CB, Toledo: Everything goes here, I would just have him a little notch behind Arnold because I think he's going to have more of a learning curve when it comes to press and man coverages in general.
I agree. They should not try to move up. They have multiple needs, and losing early picks to move up a handful of spots just doesn't cut it. My belief is that with 3 picks in the top 100, and a 4th at 102, we have some solid talent that can be picked up to fill spots that need filling. Moving up to get someone like Alt may give us a reasonable improvement over Walker at LT, but we really don't know what Walker's peak is going to be at this point. He might actually be better than Alt in a couple of years.

Walker's stats from this past year are deceiving. He did give up 8 sacks, but at the same time, I think he was one of the highest rated blockers in the entire league last year, so getting hung up on the sacks like too many people do because it's a "gaudy stat," is a problem. Personally, I'd guess his shortcomings from last year have been his #1 priority in working on his game this entire off season.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
Walkers youth should make them think they may have a stud….or they may see his deficiencies and know that was his best….this draft is likely going to show what they lean towards.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
613
Reaction score
424
I agree. They should not try to move up. They have multiple needs, and losing early picks to move up a handful of spots just doesn't cut it. My belief is that with 3 picks in the top 100, and a 4th at 102, we have some solid talent that can be picked up to fill spots that need filling.om last year have been his #1 priority in working on his game this entire off season.
We have 5 in the top 100, and our next one after those 5 is 126.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,853
Reaction score
1,629
I also am of the opinion there is no need to move up on Day 1 or 2. IMO there will be a quality player (BPA) at 25. At 41 & 58 IMO 2 of the 3, LB, DB & OL can be addressed. IMO 88 & 91 will still have guys at the position not yet filled. If the BPA is one of the positions listed then at 91 you can double up or take a RB based on their board. Rounds 4 & 5 IMO should be doubling up at LB, DB or OL. If they grab a DL or an Edge may depend on if they think this is about it for P. Smith or if they don't think Clark is worth another big contract. If the OL they choose are strictly tackles that may mean there is something to this TOM at center talk. 2 things I can guarantee. 1. It will be a fun and interesting weekend. 2. I am going to like some picks, I am going to dislike some picks and I am going to learn to live with all of them. P.S. I will gladly let everyone know exactly which picks fall into which category.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
If I was a betting man, I’d wager that the Packers move up this year.
Gute is gonna move up for sure at least once…he could trade back as well at some point it feels right to move up with so much equity.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
2,853
Reaction score
1,629
Is Dantes predicting a move up in the 1st round? While you are predicting a move up at some point?
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,413
Reaction score
5,778
My hypothesis IF there is a move up is this. We’ll use in that #58 or #88, #91 to move up for a CB or OT. We basically have a #91 bonus (traded a late 5th) to get Rasul’s successor or nail it at OT. We also parted with 2 OT (Bak and Nijman) and there’s a hole there.
Also there’s several Prospects in that teens range at both positions. There’s also an outside chance we can find a bonafide top 10 player floating into the mid teens.

In addition Seattle does NOT have a 2nd Rounder. One way to get there is to roll back to our selection which should net then a very nice selection at #58 (in some capacity)
Then Seattle would be picking
25, #58, #81, #102, #118, #179,#192,#235
VS
#16…. …. …. …. #81 #102, etc…. That’s a big hole and it’s excruciating watching 50 other choices go away all day long ahead of you to start Day2. The other thing about #58 is Seattle could back up 5-6 spots or so and recoup a 5th Rounder they currently don’t have.

It’s also about us. Taliese Fuaga, Terrion Arnold, Quinyon Mitchell. These are players that can start now. Fuaga at RT is another idea. That guy is an absolute mountain to move. He’s the Run game neutralizer 10.0 and I’ve read several scouting reports saying he can play Guard at an exceptionally high level and he’s a RB’s best friend. Bulaga ish but add ++ Run blocking.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,413
Reaction score
5,778
Going up 2 go after those 2 CB's would definitely reveal their future plans for Stokes.
Do you mean trading him?
I could see a scenario where we could part ways but I’m not sure what’s going on with him. He came back for a period and while he got picked on and gave up several big plays? If you watch those plays his coverage really wasn’t all that bad. 1 TD threaded the needle in the back of the Endzone (Tampa?) and his hand was like 1 ft from the ball it was just an amazing throw (by Baker if I recall correctly?)
 
Last edited:

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
1,566
Reaction score
1,112
VS
#16…. …. …. …. #81 #102, etc…. That’s a big hole and it’s excruciating watching 50 other choices go away all day long ahead of you to start Day2. The other thing about #58 is Seattle could back up 5-6 spots or so and recoup a 5th Rounder they currently don’t have.

What happened to #41?

Unless you are suggesting trading 1, 2 2's to move up 9 spots? I'd throw the remote through the TV and consider that idiotically stupid. I really am not sure why everyone is so enamored to give up multiple premium picks to move up a few spots.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
14,413
Reaction score
5,778
What happened to #41?

Unless you are suggesting trading 1, 2 2's to move up 9 spots? I'd throw the remote through the TV and consider that idiotically stupid. I really am not sure why everyone is so enamored to give up multiple premium picks to move up a few spots.
No! that’s Seattle currently.
We don’t own pick #81, #102 etc..

Relax as everyone isn’t enamored these are just pure speculation if we perfected a trade what it might look like. It’s still conceivable but I wouldn’t wager much on that

It’s probably more likely we stay put or do a mini trade back and I’m talking like 2-5 spots similar to last season. If the board falls near consensus there’s going to be some really good players at OL, DT, Safety, LB in that 100-175 area (call it 4th-6th Rounders). At our positions of elevated need specifically? (RG, iLB, Saf, RB) there is a big chunk of really good options there. I would LOVE to do a mini trade back using a 2nd Rounder and nab another Top 140 selection. That could be our RG or a second LB or a Safety to pair with Xavier
 
Last edited:

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
1,566
Reaction score
1,112
No! that’s Seattle currently.
We don’t own pick #81, #102 etc..

Ah... reading comprehension helps... For some reason in my head I was thinking you were listing picks post trade for Seattle and Green Bay as opposed to just Seattle pre and post.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top