With their 1st Pick in the 2018 NFL Draft the Packers select...

[Deleted member 6794]

Where fans go awry, is they put way too much into a trade value chart. What the chart is meant to do is quantify the average value of a player you are likely to get at a particular draft spot. It makes an assumption that you can rank draft picks in order from 1 to 300, which of course is ridiculous. It also assumes that each team ranks the players equally. Also ridiculous. It should be updated every year to exactly match the talent available.

So what happens if you are the Patriots and a player you rank as the #1 player in the draft is there at 14? Do you only offer the Packers the trade chart value of pick #14 or are you willing to go much higher for a player you think is really special? Then they also may think, wow, after Player zzzz, our next ranked player is quite a drop off. Which also drives up the price they are willing to pay. Or, take it from the Packers perspective. What if all their top players are gone and they have the next 10 players equally ranked (doubtful at this point in the draft, but I want to illustrate something)? The Packers asking price would drop significantly because they know they are getting a player they may have taken at 14 anyways. The price then is you have less players to choose from and whats left may not be a position you need.

It's true that teams occasionally agree to deals that aren't in-line with the trade value chart but most of the time it's a pretty good indicator on what to expect in return for a specific draft pick. Regarding your scenario the Patriots wouldn't tell the Packers that their #1 ranked prospect is still on the board and therefore not offer a deal hugely favoring the other team. On the other hand Gutekunst wouldn't significantly lower his asking price for the 14th pick just because the team is fine with drafting several other prospects later in the first round.

And having an OT that can run block can help the offense as much or more than getting say a receiver.

That might be true in an offense predicated on the run but definitely not for the Packers who predominantly rely on Rodgers to move the ball.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There's what they "should" do from the basis of incomplete information vs. what they will do.

1) Can Bulaga play?
2) Will Spriggs make a 3rd. year jump?
3) Is Murphy best positiioned as an interior lineman?

If the answers are no, maybe, and yes, respectively, there's no reason to think the Packers will not take an OT in the 2nd. or 3rd. round. All of those answers are plausible.

I don't believe the Packers value right tackle enough to spend a second rounder on the position.

 

[AmishMafia]

It's true that teams occasionally agree to deals that aren't in-line with the trade value chart but most of the time it's a pretty good indicator on what to expect in return for a specific draft pick. Regarding your scenario the Patriots wouldn't tell the Packers that their #1 ranked prospect is still on the board and therefore not offer a deal hugely favoring the other team. On the other hand Gutekunst wouldn't significantly lower his asking price for the 14th pick just because the team is fine with drafting several other prospects later in the draft.

Of course not. Why the hell would any GM reveal their draft strategy to another GM they are making a deal with. Seriously? Come on man!

The point was, if NE values a player as #1 and they are trying to trade into #14 and get him, is his valuation to NE suddenly only worth the 1100 pts or is the player still worth the 3000pts first overall pick NE valued him at?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Of course not. Why the hell would any GM reveal their draft strategy to another GM they are making a deal with. Seriously? Come on man!

The point was, if NE values a player as #1 and they are trying to trade into #14 and get him, is his valuation to NE suddenly only worth the 1100 pts or is the player still worth the 3000pts first overall pick NE valued him at?

My point was that even if another team values a player much higher than other teams do they won't offer the farm to trade up just because of it. Therefore the Packers won't receive two second round picks to move back 5-10 spots in the first round.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I don't believe the Packers value right tackle enough to spend a second rounder on the position.

The Packers value RT well enough to pay Bulaga what they've been paying him. And the Packers traded up for Spriggs in the 2nd. round in 2016 with Bulaga finishing the season on his feet and then doubled down with Murphy in the 6th. round.

At the time of the draft it looked like the Spriggs pick was a backstop against losing Bakhtiari to free agency a year down the line. However, when the B. contract came down after week 1, it was pretty evident they were going to pay whatever was required. That Spriggs played like crap in preseason might have been a factor is acknoledged.

While going OT in the 1st. round instead of defense would be quite a surprise, the 2nd./3rd. round would not be surprising to me at all.

It's a different situation than in 2016 but perhaps a more acute one with Bulaga's condition in doubt while the book is still open Spriggs.

I don't think having Williams and Miller come in for visits is idle tire-kicking. At the least they are benchmarking off these guys. At the most they are considering options if one of these guys or a reasonable facimile falls into the 2nd. round pick or even a trade up in the 2nd. round if the Bulaga outlook is negative.

If they go that way, I would expect them to take a guy who could project at either OT or G and put him in a competition for RG and RT, both positions having question marks.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The point was, if NE values a player as #1 and they are trying to trade into #14 and get him, is his valuation to NE suddenly only worth the 1100 pts or is the player still worth the 3000pts first overall pick NE valued him at?

That's a highly unlikely hypothetical on it's face. And as you observed, NE is not going to tell anybody they think a guy available at #14 is worth a #1.

I don't think anybody believes every trade is executed at the values dictated by the chart. There are of course examples to the contrary. But where you typically see "overpaying" by a substantial amount are at the top of the first round. The Jets, as discussed earlier, is an example. The Bills trade up for Sammy Watkins, is one that sticks in my mind. I'm sure there are others that can be cited. You can also get a better deal if you're willing to take a next year pick, even if the final value of that pick is uncertain, which was the case in both the Jets and Watkins trades.

The purpose of the chart is to provide a ballpark estimate of an all-things-being-equal situation which is the point around which most trades cluster. It's a question of what is likely to happen, not what will happen, in an area where we operate with incomplete information.

If Josh Rosen, for example, drops to #14 then the Packers might stand to make a pretty good deal if they so choose. But that's not likely to happen.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers value RT well enough to pay Bulaga what they've been paying him. And the Packers traded up for Spriggs in the 2nd. round in 2016 with Bulaga finishing the season on his feet and then doubled down with Murphy in the 6th. round.

I believe the Packers traded up to select Spriggs for him to become Bakhtiari's successor. They quickly found out that he wasn't ready to take over at left tackle after one season though and immediately re-signed Bakhtiari. Murphy isn't relevant for the discussion as I would be fine with the team investing a day three pick on the position.

 

[Dantés]

I tend to disagree Captain. I think the Packers are one of the organizations that understand that the value between left and right tackle isn’t all that large.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I believe the Packers traded up to select Spriggs for him to become Bakhtiari's successor. They quickly found out that he wasn't ready to take over at left tackle after one season though and immediately re-signed Bakhtiari. Murphy isn't relevant for the discussion as I would be fine with the team investing a day three pick on the position.

Yes, I noted that consideration at the time of that draft and just acknowledged that same point as a possibility so it would not need to be repeated back to me. It was perhaps a year-in-advance contingency. Or a double contingency given Bulaga's missing chunks of 3 out of 5 seasons to that point.

Now, to repeat further, the current situation may well be more acute with that very same Spriggs penciled in at RT if Bulaga can't play. And even if he can, the accumulated injuries suggest he may not play up to his heretofor best level.

Bulaga's contract belies the contention the Packers do not value the RT position.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I tend to disagree Captain. I think the Packers are one of the organizations that understand that the value between left and right tackle isn’t all that large.

It stands to reason if you have a QB who holds the ball the value of the RT increases. Bulaga's contract says as much. Now the starting TE is more of a slot/wideout than in-line, so he won't be in position much to chip on the way out.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I wouldn't be that sad if Bulaga is "Josh Sittoned" during the final cut downs. That would be roughly a savings of about $12M over the next 2 years. If he isn't ready to play early in the season, it means they have to have someone else ready to play. While BB has been a really good RT when he can play, I just don't trust that he will be able to stay healthy.

I hope Spriggs is ready, we paid enough draft capital to obtain him.

 

[Dantés]

It stands to reason if you have a QB who holds the ball the value of the RT increases. Bulaga's contract says as much. Now the starting TE is more of a slot/wideout than in-line, so he won't be in position much to chip on the way out.

I think what probably happened in 2016 is that the FO looked at their tackles, saw a young guy on the left that was solid but maybe a candidate to move to guard, and a saw a good veteran on the right who had missed 4 games a year on average. So they decided to make sure they’d hedged at the position generally. I’m not convinced that Spriggs was about left or right tackle specifically, but rather just making sure they were better prepared on either side.

 

[Dantés]

I wouldn't be that sad if Bulaga is "Josh Sittoned" during the final cut downs. That would be roughly a savings of about $12M over the next 2 years. If he isn't ready to play early in the season, it means they have to have someone else ready to play. While BB has been a really good RT when he can play, I just don't trust that he will be able to stay healthy.

I hope Spriggs is ready, we paid enough draft capital to obtain him.

The case for optimism with Spriggs is that he was never supposed to be a plug and play guy. He’s still only 23 years old.

 

[GleefulGary]

The case for optimism with Spriggs is that he was never supposed to be a plug and play guy. He’s still only 23 years old.

If you aren't good in your first two years you'll never be good.

See: Davante Adams for proof.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think what probably happened in 2016 is that the FO looked at their tackles, saw a young guy on the left that was solid but maybe a candidate to move to guard, and a saw a good veteran on the right who had missed 4 games a year on average. So they decided to make sure they’d hedged at the position generally. I’m not convinced that Spriggs was about left or right tackle specifically, but rather just making sure they were better prepared on either side.

I don't think moving Bakhtiari to guard was ever a consideration.

 

[HardRightEdge]

If you aren't good in your first two years you'll never be good.

See: Davante Adams for proof.

Adams was promising in his first year, injured in his second.

As a rookie, Spriggs did not play a whole lot, and when he did it was often as a TE run blocker. In his second season, he got called out by his head coach for a poor work ethic. Then he played better.

I wouldn't say the Packers are uncomfortable with Spriggs at RT going into the season. I also couldn't say they are comfortable with that outcome either.

What I am saying is two things have to happen to discount the idea of an OT on day 2 of the draft. They have to think Bulaga will be able to play and Spriggs has more upside. Otherwise there's nobody on the bench to backup at OT. Murphy has been nothing but terrible at OT and should be moved to OG or cut; McCray proved serviceable in a pinch at OT but he's penciled in at RG. The backup OG/C depth is nothing to write home about either.

If questions exists with either Bulaga or Spriggs, it would make a lot of sense to invest something in an OT who might also swing to OG if needed.

 

[PikeBadger]

I don't think moving Bakhtiari to guard was ever a consideration.

I think they had a really good OT in Bakhtiari.

Spriggs was to be LT insurance and Bulaga’s eventual replacement imo.

Current depth - way too early to assess. The staff and mgmt know way more about Murphy, Patrick & Amichia than we do. Jahri Evans is still without a contract and I think it’s safe to assume at least one o-lineman will be headed our way after the draft.

I’m not concerned at all at this point.

 

[Dantés]

I don't think moving Bakhtiari to guard was ever a consideration.

We will never know. But he was projected to guard or center coming out of college and the Packers are famous for such transitions. I doubt it was "the plan" so to speak after the 2015 season, but I wonder if they were keeping that option open when they took Spriggs. Because Bakh was still kind of uneven until he really hit his stride in the last two seasons.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I love going back and reading draft profiles, years after a player has been in the NFL. My friends are on Facebook, seeing what all their old friends are doing without them, I'm on "NFL Draft Profiles"

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/david-bakhtiari?id=2540183

 

[Dantés]

Chris Ballard said the Colts have "blue chip" or "elite" grades on 8 non-QB's in this class and then a tier break. Who might they be?

I would think Nelson, Barkley, and Chubb are safe guesses.

The other 5 would be some combination of Ridley, Hurst, Vea, Payne, Smith, Edmunds, Vander Esch, Landry, Davenport, Ward, Fitzpatrick, and James.

I'm betting it's:

1. Barkley
2. Nelson
3. Chubb
4. Ward
5. Edmunds
6. Smith
7. Fitzpatrick
8. James

Though sometimes team grades surprise us because we get so used to the mainstream media takes. What do you guys think?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Chris Ballard said the Colts have "blue chip" or "elite" grades on 8 non-QB's in this class and then a tier break. Who might they be?

I would think Nelson, Barkley, and Chubb are safe guesses.

The other 5 would be some combination of Ridley, Hurst, Vea, Payne, Smith, Edmunds, Vander Esch, Landry, Davenport, Ward, Fitzpatrick, and James.

I'm betting it's:

1. Barkley
2. Nelson
3. Chubb
4. Ward
5. Edmunds
6. Smith
7. Fitzpatrick
8. James

Though sometimes team grades surprise us because we get so used to the mainstream media takes. What do you guys think?

I think you are pretty spot on, with maybe someone not on that list being the draft day surprise and getting grabbed earlier than expected (Guice, McGlinchey). I am also hoping that we see Lamar Jackson's stock rise and have him be the 5th or even possibly 6th QB (Mason Rudolph) grabbed early. The key for the Packers are teams grabbing those QB's, offensive players and Vea. Would love to see Edmunds, Smith or Ward still there at 14, with Smith probably being the most likely of the 3, but would the Packers select R. Smith?

 

[HardRightEdge]

We will never know. But he was projected to guard or center coming out of college and the Packers are famous for such transitions. I doubt it was "the plan" so to speak after the 2015 season, but I wonder if they were keeping that option open when they took Spriggs. Because Bakh was still kind of uneven until he really hit his stride in the last two seasons.

Bakhtiari had played 3 years at LT. The only notable blemishes on his pass blocking record were a few too many holding penalties. His run blocking to that point was mediocre. Then they gave him a LT contract. Nothing in this scenario says "guard".

Sure, the Packers have been winners in drafting mid-round college LTs that lack the pass blocking range to project well at the position in the NFL, and convert them to OGs. Sitton, Lang, yada, yada. Bakhtiari was already an accomplished LT. You don't mess with that unless you can't sign it to a second contract.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Chris Ballard said the Colts have "blue chip" or "elite" grades on 8 non-QB's in this class and then a tier break. Who might they be?

I would think Nelson, Barkley, and Chubb are safe guesses.

The other 5 would be some combination of Ridley, Hurst, Vea, Payne, Smith, Edmunds, Vander Esch, Landry, Davenport, Ward, Fitzpatrick, and James.

I'm betting it's:

1. Barkley
2. Nelson
3. Chubb
4. Ward
5. Edmunds
6. Smith
7. Fitzpatrick
8. James

Though sometimes team grades surprise us because we get so used to the mainstream media takes. What do you guys think?

That list of 8 looks about right.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I think they had a really good OT in Bakhtiari.

Spriggs was to be LT insurance and Bulaga’s eventual replacement imo.

Current depth - way too early to assess. The staff and mgmt know way more about Murphy, Patrick & Amichia than we do. Jahri Evans is still without a contract and I think it’s safe to assume at least one o-lineman will be headed our way after the draft.

I’m not concerned at all at this point.

Spriggs was LT and RT insurance. You are right about Murphy, Patrick and Amichia in that we do not know what they think about them. You might as well throw Dillon Day in there. And most importantly, you didn't mention Justin McCray, your penciled-in RG.

They were confident enought in Lane Taylor to let Sitton walk which was something of a surprise in the confidence as much as the walking. But in not knowing one cannot rule out a meaningful value placed on an OL, particularly an OT. None of these guys are anybody you'd want playing at OT. The best option is probably McCray.

However, you simply cannot ignore Bulaga's injury history, especially coming off an ACL, now one on each knee, with various and sundy other knee and ankle injuries. There's risk there. And there's more risk in Spriggs not progressing. And there's no evidence to us that those other guys will play up to at least Evans' level.

Speaking of Evans, he's expressed interest in returning. Why, do you think, the Packers have not bit? He wouldn't cost much just as he didn't last season. Perhaps it's because they want to first see what they get out of the draft? I think so.

 

[Dantés]

Speaking of Evans, he's expressed interest in returning. Why, do you think, the Packers have not bit? He wouldn't cost much just as he didn't last season. Perhaps it's because they want to first see what they get out of the draft? I think so.

I think that's it. If they love someone who drops in the draft, I think they'll want to reserve those scarce practice snaps for the younger guys.