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

[HardRightEdge]

Most teams have one or two injury prone starters no? But if you like, throw them out. We could debate them separately. Even so, you’re still talking about 14 spots on the starting depth chart without including younger guys slotted for roles that haven’t proven themselves, such as the running backs, King, and Jones. I guess you could also make the case to include Tramon Williams given how he played in Arizona last season.

So that illustrates my original point— lots of solid players or better in starting roles. Few stars.

Hmm. You're getting the hang of this.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Most teams have one or two injury prone starters no? But if you like, throw them out. We could debate them separately. Even so, you’re still talking about 14 spots on the starting depth chart without including younger guys slotted for roles that haven’t proven themselves, such as the running backs, King, and Jones. I guess you could also make the case to include Tramon Williams given how he played in Arizona last season.

So that illustrates my original point— lots of solid players or better in starting roles. Few stars.

Once again, how does that compare to other contenders though??? Aside of Rodgers the Packers unfortunatley lack elite talent.

Which is precisely why I want them to trade back and then trade up on day 2 getting as many bites at the apple in the top 100-150 picks.

The Packers definitely need a rookie capable of having an immediate impact this season. Therefore they should stay put at #14.

Jackson concerns me for a lot of reasons posted. If he isnt a press corner then why invest so highly in him?

According to PFF Jackson did fine in press coverage last season as well.

 

[GleefulGary]

Wimm, have you seen Jackson press?

Because he doesn't actually press. He doesn't re-route or jam. He just gets up close and then mirrors from there. Don't trust PFF on everything.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Wimm, have you seen Jackson press?

Because he doesn't actually press. He doesn't re-route or jam. He just gets up close and then mirrors from there. Don't trust PFF on everything.

As I've mentioned before I don't put a lot of time into watching tape on draft prospects anymore. I trust PFF, which actually grades every single snap of an FCS prospect, to be correct when they mention that he played a fair amount of press coverage as well.

 

[GleefulGary]

As I've mentioned before I don't put a lot of time into watching tape on draft prospects anymore. I trust PFF, which actually grades every single snap of an FCS prospect, to be correct when they mention that he played a fair amount of press coverage as well.

I promise you PFF isn't grading every FCS prospect. They do most FBS for sure, but not FCS.

But hey, you don't have to believe me...but Lance Zierline says the same thing. Is he respectable enough for you?

 

[GleefulGary]

Also, I'm just saying his press coverage isn't what I consider a true press.

He gets up close, but he doesn't jam or misdirect the route. Just mirrors. Which is definitely an impressive skill...Jackson just isn't that physical of a player. But that's why PFF calls it press coverage, because he lines up within a couple yards of the WR.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I promise you PFF isn't grading every FCS prospect. They do most FBS for sure, but not FCS.

But hey, you don't have to believe me...but Lance Zierline says the same thing. Is he respectable enough for you?

My bad, was talking about the FBS of course. Zierlein is a respectable source but haven't seen anything about him mentioning that Jackson can't excel in press coverage.

He gets up close, but he doesn't jam or misdirect the route. Just mirrors. Which is definitely an impressive skill...Jackson just isn't that physical of a player. But that's why PFF calls it press coverage, because he lines up within a couple yards of the WR.

I fully believe PFF is capable of differentiating between press coverage and a cornerback mirroring a receiver.

 

[Dantés]

What JJ is saying is true. He lines up in press technique, but doesn't often actually get hands on the receiver to physically "press them." When PFF says that he's effective in press, they mean that he's effective when he lines up in press technique.

 

[shockerx]

almost lost 14th pick... packers try to trade perry and 14th pick for OJB...Giants reject. good!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

almost lost 14th pick... packers try to trade perry and 14th pick for OJB...Giants reject. good!

Link???

 

[shockerx]

Aaron Nagler.

 

[Dantés]

Aaron Nagler.

You're misreading the tweet. Nagler didn't say that this happened. He entertained the hypothetical.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

almost lost 14th pick... packers try to trade perry and 14th pick for OJB...Giants reject. good!

This is why you can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theatre!

 

[HardRightEdge]

You're misreading the tweet. Nagler didn't say that this happened. He entertained the hypothetical.

Good thing it's just a rumor.

 

[4zone]

Tough choices this year. I see short term and long term needs at RT, CB, OLB and WR & TE although TE is kinda OK for at least this year. At best we get 2, maybe 3 of the 5 if we get a decent TE in Rd 3. I really would like to see us get an OLB at #14 then trade back up into the first round without using our 2nd rounder to do it to get Hughes then go for Chark in the 2nd round.

It doubt we will skip over them if either of the top two OTs are still left to us at #14. Can't let the franchise get grilled again like last year. That will probably leave us Chark as our best option in Rd 2. Hughes will be long gone by the time we pick there.

 

[elcid]

Tough choices this year. I see short term and long term needs at RT, CB, OLB and WR & TE although TE is kinda OK for at least this year. At best we get 2, maybe 3 of the 5 if we get a decent TE in Rd 3. I really would like to see us get an OLB at #14 then trade back up into the first round without using our 2nd rounder to do it to get Hughes then go for Chark in the 2nd round.

It doubt we will skip over them if either of the top two OTs are still left to us at #14. Can't let the franchise get grilled again like last year. That will probably leave us Chark as our best option in Rd 2. Hughes will be long gone by the time we pick there.

While that would be glorious, I dont see any way the Pack can trade back into the first without using its second round pick. But I wouldnt mind going passrusher at 14 in Landry, then trading our first day 3 pick to move our #45 to the top of the 2nd round and take any of the cb's that might still be available (Jackson, Alexander, Hughes, Oliver,)

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It doubt we will skip over them if either of the top two OTs are still left to us at #14. Can't let the franchise get grilled again like last year.

The Packers have too many other more pressing needs to select a tackle in the first round.

 

[shockerx]

After what happen with Rodgers injury last year, and couple that with a new guaranteed contract coming. how do you have more pressing need than keeping 12 up right. Yes i would like to see edmonds, fritz or james, but if they are gone and the number one OT is there or nelson. I think you have to take them.

 

[4zone]

The Packers have too many other more pressing needs to select a tackle in the first round.

What's more pressing, getting to the other QB or keeping them from getting to ours? Ours will definitely cost more money than theirs quite soon.

 

[jetfixer]

I don’t think there is a Tackle worthy of a top 14 pick. Yes, Nelson is worthy, but I’m not taking a G there. I’m saying we pick a DB or LB with our first pick.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

After what happen with Rodgers injury last year, and couple that with a new guaranteed contract coming. how do you have more pressing need than keeping 12 up right. Yes i would like to see edmonds, fritz or james, but if they are gone and the number one OT is there or nelson. I think you have to take them.

While I wasn't too pleased with the depth of the OL last year and hope to see it get better and deeper, it should be pointed out that the hit that basically ended Rodgers season was not the "fault" of the OL.

 

[OldSchool101]

I really want Gute to trade up and snag a game changer for the defense.

Chubb, Fitzpatrick, Ward, Roquan, James, Edmund.

Any of them. We need "the man" on defense.

As much as I want to agree with you (because I’ve strongly considered this very notion)
I don’t want to get anxious and trade up (unless something stupid happens like Chubb or Saquon falling outside the top 10 where it’s not as costly?) This year is an anomaly of sorts as far as trading into the top 10 due to the emphasis on the QB position and the QB pool being a “once in a decade” type scenario.
My prediction is IF 4 QBs go top 5 or so?
the other position groups value will (and should) inflate dramatically at the top end (picks 6-10..)
No other team is going to trade down without making it super equitable for themselves (costly for us) We can all but throw the draft trade point calculator out the window.

My gut tells me don’t trade unless our guy is within a couple of picks because then that trade partner can trade back and eliminate the possibility that we could pick their ideal candidate.
E.g, the Dolphins trading back to #14? is really only letting 2 other players get picked before they’re up again because they can ensure we don’t pick their guy at pick #11. Therefore this could be a more normal and realistic trade deal.

I don’t want to put all our eggs in one basket so to speak.. 3-4 baskets? Ok maybe.
We have too many holes to fill and we need to be smart with these picks and if we consolidate we still need 8-9 picks minimum and preferably not all late rounders.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

After what happen with Rodgers injury last year, and couple that with a new guaranteed contract coming. how do you have more pressing need than keeping 12 up right. Yes i would like to see edmonds, fritz or james, but if they are gone and the number one OT is there or nelson. I think you have to take them.

What's more pressing, getting to the other QB or keeping them from getting to ours? Ours will definitely cost more money than theirs quite soon.

I would be fine with the Packers drafting a tackle at #14 if the team needed a starting left tackle. With Bakhtiari performing at an All-Pro level there's no need to spend the pick on an offensive lineman as it's definitely possible to draft a serviceable right tackle later in the draft.

I don’t think there is a Tackle worthy of a top 14 pick. Yes, Nelson is worthy, but I’m not taking a G there. I’m saying we pick a DB or LB with our first pick.

McGlinchey and Williams might be worthy of being selected at #14 but the Packers definitely need to upgrade other positions first.

 

[AmishMafia]

As much as I want to agree with you (because I’ve strongly considered this very notion)
I don’t want to get anxious and trade up (unless something stupid happens like Chubb or Saquon falling outside the top 10 where it’s not as costly?) This year is an anomaly of sorts as far as trading into the top 10 due to the emphasis on the QB position and the QB pool being a “once in a decade” type scenario.
My prediction is IF 4 QBs go top 5 or so?
the other position groups value will (and should) inflate dramatically at the top end (picks 6-10..)
No other team is going to trade down without making it super equitable for themselves (costly for us) We can all but throw the draft trade point calculator out the window.

My gut tells me don’t trade unless our guy is within a couple of picks because then that trade partner can trade back and eliminate the possibility that we could pick their ideal candidate.
E.g, the Dolphins trading back to #14? is really only letting 2 other players get picked before they’re up again because they can ensure we don’t pick their guy at pick #11. Therefore this could be a more normal and realistic trade deal.

I don’t want to put all our eggs in one basket so to speak.. 3-4 baskets? Ok maybe.
We have too many holes to fill and we need to be smart with these picks and if we consolidate we still need 8-9 picks minimum and preferably not all late rounders.

Definitely explore a trade. The only way it would work is if MIA feels they can get their guy at 14 that they would be taking otherwise. It may likely cost a 3rd and I'm not sure about that. I would try 4.01 and a late 5th.

 

[GleefulGary]

I don’t think there is a Tackle worthy of a top 14 pick. Yes, Nelson is worthy, but I’m not taking a G there. I’m saying we pick a DB or LB with our first pick.

What's wrong with taking a G at 14?

The rise of 3T's with pass rushing ability is at an all time high. Teams need good guards to block them, and Nelson is one of the best. If we didn't have other needs, I'd have no issue spending an early pick on him. Heck, I'd still probably be fine if we drafted him with all of our issues...he's that good.