Trading #14 pick

[Pokerbrat2000]

If Campen was gone, I would maybe lean more towards putting more draft capital into the OL, but he isn't and for the most part Campen and the Packers success on the OL has come through a variety of picks, UDFA's and now a low end FA....stick with what seems to be working and keep trying to improve the defense, TE or WR with your first 3 picks.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

stick with what seems to be working and keep trying to improve the defense, TE or WR with your first 3 picks.

Keep in mind the premise of this thread was trading our pick for two 1st Rounders.

If you go back to my first post I proposed:

1st- OG
1st- WR
2nd- LB

That takes care of 2/3, but if you ask me the OL is a need, just maybe not as glaring. And that still leaves the 3rd and 4th Rounds to address TE, and the 1st TE off the board I'm not projecting until mid 2nd Round.

 

[Dantés]

A lot of people have correctly pointed out that the Packers’ ability to identify mid round OL talent and develop it means they don’t have to invest premium picks in the unit, especially along the interior.

But at some point a prospect is so good that you go ahead and ignore that. For me, Nelson is that good.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Keep in mind the premise of this thread was trading our pick for two 1st Rounders.

Yup, I knew the premise and whether that happens or not, I would prefer seeing the first 3 rounds not be used on the OL. Keep in mind, I was someone who was b*tching about the lack of depth of the OL at the beginning of last season. I just think the Packers have higher priorities right now and can still have a solid group on the OL, using other means.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A lot of people have correctly pointed out that the Packers’ ability to identify mid round OL talent and develop it means they don’t have to invest premium picks in the unit, especially along the interior.

But at some point a prospect is so good that you go ahead and ignore that. For me, Nelson is that good.

While I agree that it is really hard to pass up talent (see 2005 Pick #24). Even if Nelson falls to the Packers, I would be disappointed in the pick......if we go into the draft not addressing some of our bigger needs via Free Agency.

 

[Dantés]

While I agree that it is really hard to pass up talent (see 2005 Pick #24). Even if Nelson falls to the Packers, I would be disappointed in the pick......if we go into the draft not addressing some of our bigger needs via Free Agency.

This is most likely all moot. He’s very likely to go in the first 13.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This is most likely all moot. He’s very likely to go in the first 13.

Well then let me put your feet to the fire What would you be willing to trade to move up 2-3 spots to get him?

 

[Dantés]

Well then let me put your feet to the fire What would you be willing to trade to move up 2-3 spots to get him?

Zilch. I’m not passing on him at #14 due to value but I’m not so desperate for an elite guard that I’d invest multiple picks.

 

[Poppa San]

I have no problem with how the Packers have gone about developing the OL. They have a nice formula of taking college Tackles that just don't have the "it factor" and turning them into very productive guards. Furthermore just because you spend major draft capital doesn't equate to a great OL and look no further then the Seattle Seahawks.

They have spent 6 first or second round picks since 2009 on OL and have one of worst OL's in the NFL. They have also spent countless mid round picks in that position group too. On top of that they have spent money bringing in free agent Tackles(Luke Joeckel) and traded future top draft capital for (Duane Brown) and there Offensive Line still sucks. Keep in mind these guys had Jahri Evans a couple years back and actually cut him.

The OL is the last spot where I would negatively critique the Packers draft and develop approach. Campen obviously deserves a lot of credit here but if it's not broken then don't fix it. With all the other holes there is no reason to take an OL early with all the other holes the Packers have and there ability to make mid-round picks very productive offensive lineman.

We don't need to draft a guard with a top pick and based on what the Packers have been able to do it would almost be foolish.

One of the few posts of yours I actually agree with 100%

 

[jetfixer]

A lot of people have correctly pointed out that the Packers’ ability to identify mid round OL talent and develop it means they don’t have to invest premium picks in the unit, especially along the interior.

But at some point a prospect is so good that you go ahead and ignore that. For me, Nelson is that good.

I’m not wanting to pick a o line guy at 14, but if this guy is a 10 year pro bowl type guy, I guess you can’t go wrong with that.
The Panthers FA guard is going to break the bank as far as guards go I’m thinking.

 

[jetfixer]

I see on NFL.com he is only a very close second to Penn St. Barkley on their rating scale.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

If nelson a guard is the best player available why would you hesitate to take him? If your scouts think he's gonna be a hall of famer why would you even hesitate to take him just because he's a guard and if he was really that good he'd be a tackle ?

I think you are better off with a HOF talent at a non premium position than you are with an average player at a premium position.

The Packers should draft the player presenting the best value to the roster and I highly doubt a guard will end up being on top of that list at #14. It's way too premature to think about Nelson as a future HOFer, especially when considering that Will Shields (drafted in the third round of the 1993 draft) currently is the last guard to make it to Canton.

I agree, you can't discount the OL. The days of TT drafting a 6th Rounder and just tossing him to the wolves by being inserted into the starting lineup due to injury should be over. It seems like we average 2 injuries on the OL that last for 25% or more of the season. In my opinion a 1st-3rd Round Pick should be invested in the OL every 4-6 years to keep the talent level high and maintain good depth. The OL is good, but far from elite, and by maintaining the status quo we further illustrate the fact of how bad this team is without Aaron Rodgers.

The more time we can give AR and the more lanes we can give our RBs is only going to make this team better, because until otherwise, we live and die with the offense.

It's true that the Packers shouldn't discount the offensive line. That doesn't mean the team has to spend their earliest picknin nine years on a guard though especially as an immediate contributor on defense would have a much higher impact on the on-field product next season.

Keep in mind the premise of this thread was trading our pick for two 1st Rounders.

If you go back to my first post I proposed:

1st- OG
1st- WR
2nd- LB

That takes care of 2/3, but if you ask me the OL is a need, just maybe not as glaring. And that still leaves the 3rd and 4th Rounds to address TE, and the 1st TE off the board I'm not projecting until mid 2nd Round.

The Packers first and foremost have to improve their pass rush and coverage. Tight end should be addressed in free agency.

 

[OldSchool101]

The only way I’d take OG 1st day is if we are fortunate enough to trade back with the Bills and a top prospect falls to #21/#22 and we all know that is highly unlikely

Otherwise, similar to several above posters, Id like to see us using in the area of a comp pick for that. Obviously there’s exceptions if someone slips rounds or whatever

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The only way I’d take OG 1st day is if we are fortunate enough to trade back with the Bills and a top prospect falls to #21/#22 and we all know that is highly unlikely

I would be against selecting a guard in the first round even if the Packers end up with the 21st and 22nd pick.