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

[elcid]

I know most fellow Packer fans here are never keen on starting the talk of free agency, let alone the NFL draft early, yet I am very curious with what you all hope the Packers do with their relatively high pick. Target Josh Jackson/ Denzel Ward? Go pass rusher? Another weapon/lineman for Rodgers maybe?

As a guy that does not watch a lot of College Football I am very interested in looking at the guys you throw out here.

 

[Lawdog]

Josh Jackson CB Iowa. This is just killing me as I want another weapon for Rodgers. Jackson would contribute from day one. Randall, King, and Jackson this would be a nice nucleus for the CB position. I reserve the right to change my mind between now and the draft.

 

[Half Empty]

So, in other words, the OP is right in that it's too early.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I want a olb but this draft seems light on those. Indo t followfthe draft a ton but i dont see a lot of olb's in the middle of the draft. Key from LSU is in there but has some serious question marks but elite talent. If the Packers think he can stay motivated then he would be a very good add.

Jackson would also be a solid addition. We would have really good size with King and him on the outside. Randall could play inside.

There are numerous wrs that could be had in the mid 2nd.

Obviously a lot will be determined on how and if we use free agency. Get a te or one of the positions above in fa then there isn't as much of a need maybe.

The Packers are looking to get an extra 3rd and 3 extra 5ths according to over the cap. If one of those 5ths could turn into a 4th that would be nice. Still having 9 picks in the first 5 rounds should provide some serious depth and give ability to trade up

 

[OldSchool101]

I’m along bigbubbatds thinking. Much can change but realistically? it will take us 2 drafts to acquire the players we need.
We need to try to accomplish a high level goal of filling all these needs with limited Cap Space and lots of late mid round picks.

It’s obviously best available talent mixed with need. We don’t know what that will be until after FA is gone. I’d like to see minimum 2 of the following 4 positions locked down with the addition of Veteran starters. CB, DE/OLB, TE, ILB. We sometimes forget that the ILB is the nucleus of our Defense and having a substantial playmaker paired with Martinez would have a dramatic and immediate impact. Just imagine how good that nucleus would he if Martinez was a just a shadow to a dominant ILB. Jake Ryan would be a very good rotational ILB depth/special teams guy to make up for the loss of Janis

Then that leaves us just 2 more to firm up in the draft. Ideally, we go with the best Edge Rusher available pick #14 unless the sky falls. Having a talented understudy to an aging Clay would be wise now, not in 1 or 2 more years. This draft gives us a reasonable chance at Clays successor, our contingency to a Perry or CM3 injury and our next KGB.

That said, we all know things can change dramatically with just one transaction as we found out with the Redskins last week.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

Roquan Smith, he's the best LB in the class and if you ask me his 1st Pro Bowl is no later than year 3. I know everybody wants to keep going after DBs, but a stellar front seven makes who we have look even better. It's time to give Mike Daniels some legitimate help.

 

[thequick12]

Roquan Smith, he's the best LB in the class and if you ask me his 1st Pro Bowl is no later than year 3. I know everybody wants to keep going after DBs, but a stellar front seven makes who we have look even better. It's time to give Mike Daniels some legitimate help.

Only thing about roquan Smith is size at 6-1 225 I'm not sure the packers don't already have a similar player in Josh Jones at 6-2 220 and he's much faster than smith.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Roquan Smith, he's the best LB in the class and if you ask me his 1st Pro Bowl is no later than year 3. I know everybody wants to keep going after DBs, but a stellar front seven makes who we have look even better. It's time to give Mike Daniels some legitimate help.

I am in this camp as well. New DC, new schemes. Improve the pass rush and you will improve the play of the secondary. We have spent way too much draft stock on the secondy over the last 3 years, to keep throwing more top picks at it. Who says we don't already have good players back there? Give King, Randall, Dix, Jones and whoever else a chance to thrive under a new DC, but don't leave them out there all afternoon trying to stay with guys, because the QB has all day to pick them apart.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

Right now, I have crushes on Davenport and Edmunds. Davenport is just a beastly man from a small school who needs to develop some more pass rush moves, but you can't deny his size and strength. Edmunds looks like the second coming of Brian Urlacher and that would help this team lock down the middle of the field. He also has range and speed to play outside at times if we need him to.

As a UGA fan, I love Roquan, but he does have problems shedding blocks from guards on the second level. He's a tackling machine, but I'd rather have a pure Mike that can run this defense for years.

Josh Jackson or Denzel Ward would provide us with a lockdown tandem and I couldn't be mad with either of them with such a lack of top end talent at edge.

I'm warming up to the idea of Derwin James too. He's absolutely elite and could add another dimension to the defense.

In round two, I really would love a play making tight end and I have an unhealthy obsession with Dallas Goedert right now. I think he could bring a Travis Kelce/Zach Ertz type of player to our offense. Tell me you wouldn't want that lol.

 

[PackAttack12]

Put team needs aside: draft the player you think will be a difference maker. We need difference makers at every position on the roster besides quarterback. Wide receivers? We have one difference maker. Running backs? At this time, zero. Tight end? Zero. Defense? Mike Daniels. That's one guy on the defensive line.

Draft a guy who is going to make plays and make a difference. The team has too many needs to limit it to select positions.

 

[AmishMafia]

Put me down for Edmunds. Okay with Darwin Smith and Josh Jackson as well.

 

[AmishMafia]

Put team needs aside: draft the player you think will be a difference maker. We need difference makers at every position on the roster besides quarterback. Wide receivers? We have one difference maker. Running backs? At this time, zero. Tight end? Zero. Defense? Mike Daniels. That's one guy on the defensive line.

Draft a guy who is going to make plays and make a difference. The team has too many needs to limit it to select positions.

Too negative on the roster talent. I think Clark passed up Daniels last season and is now our best DL. Would love another impact 5T but I'm not sure there is one available. Vea or Payne are the only 2 possibilities and I'm not sure they would be BPA at 14.

 

[ThePerfectBeard]

Put team needs aside: draft the player you think will be a difference maker. We need difference makers at every position on the roster besides quarterback. Wide receivers? We have one difference maker. Running backs? At this time, zero. Tight end? Zero. Defense? Mike Daniels. That's one guy on the defensive line.

Draft a guy who is going to make plays and make a difference. The team has too many needs to limit it to select positions.

Clark is a difference maker too. I think it's too early to say we don't have difference makers and we might see that we have more playmakers than we know with a new DC. I still think Josh Jones and King will be difference makers. Also Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams are pretty good at running back. It's only been one year, but I really like what we saw from Jones especially.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Draft a guy who is going to make plays and make a difference. The team has too many needs to limit it to select positions.

While every team hopes to find "difference makers" in each draft, the Packers have been somewhat snake bit at finding those in the last several drafts. For this reason and just the whole notion of relying too much on rookies, if the Packers hope to have success in 2018, I think those difference makers will need to be found in Free Agency and the guys they find in the draft should be viewed as 2-4 year investments in what this team needs to be successful beyond this coming year. For instance, at TE, sign one of the top 5 FA TE's, but use a 3rd rounder on a solid rookie. Bring the rookie along, but let the Vet carry the load for the next year or two.

I think having a new DC as well as Philbin coming back on offense will give the Packers a whole new fresh outlook on what this team "needs" to be successful on defense and offense for that matter. Seems like with Capers, it was a case of trying to plug a big hole (CB, DL, ILB) with rookies that may just not have been a good fit or too green, to really help the Packers immediately.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Clark is a difference maker too. I think it's too early to say we don't have difference makers and we might see that we have more playmakers than we know with a new DC. I still think Josh Jones and King will be difference makers. Also Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams are pretty good at running back. It's only been one year, but I really like what we saw from Jones especially.

I hope to see some obvious improvement from some of the younger guys on defense, mainly due to Pettine, new schemes and new energy from the players themselves. As much as it seemed like players had Capers back, they couldn't have been to happy with their performances over the last several seasons and that drains on your psyche. Maybe walking into camp this year, they will all be re-energized knowing things may finally change for the better.

 

[Packman87]

Right now, I have crushes on Davenport and Edmunds. Davenport is just a beastly man from a small school who needs to develop some more pass rush moves, but you can't deny his size and strength. Edmunds looks like the second coming of Brian Urlacher and that would help this team lock down the middle of the field. He also has range and speed to play outside at times if we need him to.

As a UGA fan, I love Roquan, but he does have problems shedding blocks from guards on the second level. He's a tackling machine, but I'd rather have a pure Mike that can run this defense for years.

Josh Jackson or Denzel Ward would provide us with a lockdown tandem and I couldn't be mad with either of them with such a lack of top end talent at edge.

I'm warming up to the idea of Derwin James too. He's absolutely elite and could add another dimension to the defense.

In round two, I really would love a play making tight end and I have an unhealthy obsession with Dallas Goedert right now. I think he could bring a Travis Kelce/Zach Ertz type of player to our offense. Tell me you wouldn't want that lol.

 

[RepStar15]

So hard to made this decision at this point. Have to see what happens with free agent, contracts, etc. If nothing changes and we go into the draft the way we are right now, I think we have to go after a CB/OLB in the first two rounds. Josh Jackson and Josh Sweat stand out to me personally, but it’s still very early in the draft cycle

 

[Dantés]

In my opinion, in this class, if you lock into a position or two you’re very likely to screw it up.

 

[PackFan2]

Best player available. But Won't be mad if we drafted Tremaine Edmunds, Vita Vea, Josh Jackson, Denzel Ward, and or Harold Landry.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Best player available. But Won't be mad if we drafted Tremaine Edmunds, Vita Vea, Josh Jackson, Denzel Ward, and or Harold Landry.

I wouldn't apply the BPA theory with a QB in this case, but I doubt the Packers have any of the QB's that would still be left on the board at #14 rated that high. Although, I don't think we need to spend a high pick on a RB, if Saquon Barkley happened to fall (which he won't), I wouldn't be too mad about getting him.

I'm still pretty convinced that the "BPA formula" doesn't have you selecting a guy, just because he is rated one or two spots better than the next guy on your board, if he isn't a player at a position of need. Now if there is a clear and wide gap between where you have him rated and the next guy, then maybe BPA applies. Which was obviously the case when Rodgers was selected in 2005.

 

[PackFan2]

I wouldn't apply the BPA theory with a QB in this case, but I doubt the Packers have any of the QB's that would still be left on the board at #14 rated that high. Although, I don't think we need to spend a high pick on a RB, if Saquon Barkley happened to fall (which he won't), I wouldn't be too mad about getting him.

I'm still pretty convinced that the "BPA formula" doesn't have you selecting a guy, just because he is rated one or two spots better than the next guy on your board, if he isn't a player at a position of need. Now if there is a clear and wide gap between where you have him rated and the next guy, then maybe BPA applies. Which was obviously the case when Rodgers was selected in 2005.

Thank you for clarifying my statement.

 

[RepStar15]

I don’t know if it would be possible but a front three of Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels and Vita Vea would be insane! Is that possible to virtually have three tackles playing on the line at the same time?

 

[AmishMafia]

I wouldn't apply the BPA theory with a QB in this case, but I doubt the Packers have any of the QB's that would still be left on the board at #14 rated that high. Although, I don't think we need to spend a high pick on a RB, if Saquon Barkley happened to fall (which he won't), I wouldn't be too mad about getting him.

I'm still pretty convinced that the "BPA formula" doesn't have you selecting a guy, just because he is rated one or two spots better than the next guy on your board, if he isn't a player at a position of need. Now if there is a clear and wide gap between where you have him rated and the next guy, then maybe BPA applies. Which was obviously the case when Rodgers was selected in 2005.

BPA is rarely a QB. They almost always get over-drafted because they are so important.

I finally figured out why some posters here don't believe the Packers use BPA. I was in a discussion with someone the other day when it dawned on me. They thought the Packers big board is a ranking of 200+ players sequentially. That #5 is a better player than #6. No NFL teams do this, only websites. It's impossible, inefficient, and erroneous.

What they do is score each player individually. Area scouts start the score and then it gets adjusted by coaches, medical, Sr. Bowl, interviews, research, and the combine.

Check this out:

Www.powerhousegm.com/blog/nfl-draft-prospect-grading-systems

At no time does the staff all sit down and say okay, Edmunds is #10, now who should be #11? Can you imagine? It would take a week to get the top 30 done. And then, how do you compare with current team and future drafts? How could you evaluate trades if you don't understand the relative value of what you are giving or getting?

Not sure why I'm under this impression, but I believe the Packers use an 8.0 scale, closer to the first one discussed in the link. At least they did under wolf. This one is a little more detailed than I believe the Packers had.

Anyway, when the Packer's pick at 14 they may have 2 or 3 guys rated as a 7.1 to choose from. If they pass up the last 7.2 available, they are drafting for need. If 7.1 is the highest score available and they pick any guy at 7.1 they are taking BPA. With the Packers picking at the end on the first, they usually had a bunch of players to choose from. Drafting higher, they will have fewer options.

 

[jetfixer]

Marcus Davenport

 

[GleefulGary]

BPAAPON

Best player available at a position(s) of need. Teams will almost always draft a player at a position of need, but they typically have more than one position of need. Also just depends on what that position looks like later in the draft, according to their rankings, and next year.

For example, at the top, the edge position this year is just average. Some quality depth, Chubb, and some decent starters. Next years draft, as of now, looks to be really good at the edge. I can't say for certain, but I would think that plays a role in some teams mindset.