2023 Packers draft discussion

[LouisEly]

11 minutes ago, patrickgpe said:

Yes, especially with the (so far) reluctance to sign a back-up. 

I don't think it's reluctance.  I do think that they'll have some cap space after the draft to be able to sign a backup QB with experience, but they're waiting until after the trade/draft so they know exactly how much they'll have available.

[nate82]

16 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

Absolutely.  I was *this* close to putting him as the "Don't be surprised" pick if they get a 2nd from the Jets.  Why not draft a QB with a pick they got for Rodgers?

 

I think Hooker may become the best QB in this draft 3-5 years from now.  Whoever gets him and if they can develop him into a more consistent passer will have a MVP caliber QB on their hands.  Almost perfect for the Packers as they can stash him behind Love and if Love sucks for the next two years just go with Hooker and not extend Love. 

[patrickgpe]

29 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

I don't think it's reluctance.  I do think that they'll have some cap space after the draft to be able to sign a backup QB with experience, but they're waiting until after the trade/draft so they know exactly how much they'll have available.

Yes I’d prefer a vet to be the backup. There are still options out there. To have a 1st starter and a rookie as your qb room is tough 

[patrickgpe]

12 minutes ago, nate82 said:

I think Hooker may become the best QB in this draft 3-5 years from now.  Whoever gets him and if they can develop him into a more consistent passer will have a MVP caliber QB on their hands.  Almost perfect for the Packers as they can stash him behind Love and if Love sucks for the next two years just go with Hooker and not extend Love. 

I don’t think he will be around at 78 and I could see the packers taking him with a 2nd. With Rodgers gone I don’t see how they don’t keep 3 qb’s on the roster anyway ( one vet and one rookie) 

[GAME05]

Can't the Packers just take a guy late in the 7th Round and have him step in and be starter material?

[Oxy]

After doing way too many draft simulations, it sure seems like trading down is always a good option.  Basically accumulate as many picks as possible from the pick 45-115 range or so.  Would I rather have Michael Mayer or get Luke Musgrove AND Zach Kuntz?  Brian Branch or Antonio Johnson AND Nick Herbig? Jordan Addison or Tyler Scott AND Cedric Tillman?

Unless the staff has a super high grade on a guy (top 5) and he falls in their lap at 15, trade down.

[Matt Breen]

54 minutes ago, Oxy said:

After doing way too many draft simulations, it sure seems like trading down is always a good option.  Basically accumulate as many picks as possible from the pick 45-115 range or so.  Would I rather have Michael Mayer or get Luke Musgrove AND Zach Kuntz?  Brian Branch or Antonio Johnson AND Nick Herbig? Jordan Addison or Tyler Scott AND Cedric Tillman?

Unless the staff has a super high grade on a guy (top 5) and he falls in their lap at 15, trade down.

Trading down is always a great strategy - but it's easier said than done. Gotta have other teams willing to play along.

I think the Packers have a lot of needs - so a lot of guys are enticing to us (which gives us flexibility). So if you can drop down 5-10 picks and still get a guy like Mayer or Branch or whomever - and pick up more picks. That's gold. But the situation has to be almost perfect for that to happen. And there's always a risk the guy you think will be there will get taken before you pick. It's why it's so good to be flexible - and be happy with getting anyone of several players.

[CheezWizHed]

15 hours ago, LouisEly said:

I don't think it's reluctance.  I do think that they'll have some cap space after the draft to be able to sign a backup QB with experience, but they're waiting until after the trade/draft so they know exactly how much they'll have available.

Yes, I think "patience" is a better description than reluctance.  I think the main reason Wolf was such a good GM is that he:

1. Built by BPA in the draft.  Don't let your needs dictate who you draft. (Though his 1st round drafting was weak). 
2. After the draft, filled in gaps with trades and FAs. 

One area Sherman, TT, nor Gute have really attempted is using next year's 6th/7th round picks to nab those starter gaps (Eugene Robinson).  

My guess is if someone like Hooker falls to them in a good spot... we don't bother with a vet.  If we don't get someone very high in the draft, we go for a vet FA.  

 

[PeaveyFury]

On 4/17/2023 at 7:52 PM, LouisEly said:

Don’t be surprised if it’s: Keion White, DE, Georgia Tech

The more I look towards next week, the more I think White is the guy they take at 15. If for no other reason than he seems to fill the yearly pick that spawns the 'OMG, they could have had him at 45 and he's a reach' stuff, but makes a ton of sense on paper, and ends up looking super impressive in the end.

I'm not a big fan of TE at 15, but if they do Washington is the only one that seems to have the ceiling to justify the pick there. I'll agree with those that say mocking a trade down is far easier in a fake mock draft than the real thing, but if they target a TE early I hope it's in the 2nd or after a trade down from 15. Feels like there are three guys that are fringe 1st/early 2nd guys in Mayer, Washington, and Kincaid, with Musgrave a hair behind them but still in that same area- the position could be overdrafted, but I'm somewhat confident there's a guy still on the board from that group especially if they end up with pick 42.

[MVP2110]

On 4/21/2023 at 1:10 PM, PeaveyFury said:

The more I look towards next week, the more I think White is the guy they take at 15. If for no other reason than he seems to fill the yearly pick that spawns the 'OMG, they could have had him at 45 and he's a reach' stuff, but makes a ton of sense on paper, and ends up looking super impressive in the end.

I'm not a big fan of TE at 15, but if they do Washington is the only one that seems to have the ceiling to justify the pick there. I'll agree with those that say mocking a trade down is far easier in a fake mock draft than the real thing, but if they target a TE early I hope it's in the 2nd or after a trade down from 15. Feels like there are three guys that are fringe 1st/early 2nd guys in Mayer, Washington, and Kincaid, with Musgrave a hair behind them but still in that same area- the position could be overdrafted, but I'm somewhat confident there's a guy still on the board from that group especially if they end up with pick 42.

What makes you think Keion White makes a ton of sense on paper besides the fact he's an Edge? 

[LouisEly]

He's an ultra-athletic edge (4.65-4.75 40) with strength to set the edge (30 reps on the bench) and almost ideal size for a 5-tech (6'5", 285).  Can stand up or put a hand down, big enough to move inside on passing downs.  There isn't much for guys who can be a 5-tech in this draft as the five DL the Packers have are naturally NT-3i-tech guys.  They only have three DL who have made a tackle in a NFL game and Slaton/Ford are true NTs and don't have the agility to play anywhere else on the line.

[LouisEly]

On 4/21/2023 at 1:10 PM, PeaveyFury said:

The more I look towards next week, the more I think White is the guy they take at 15. If for no other reason than he seems to fill the yearly pick that spawns the 'OMG, they could have had him at 45 and he's a reach' stuff

I still can't believe that post-Nick Collins there are people who still think that because a consensus draft board, or any draft board, has a guy at a certain spot means that he will still be there.  After the Packers drafted Collins, Ozzie Newsome called TT to congratulate him and told him that he was going to take Collins two picks later.

[MVP2110]

4 hours ago, LouisEly said:

He's an ultra-athletic edge (4.65-4.75 40) with strength to set the edge (30 reps on the bench) and almost ideal size for a 5-tech (6'5", 285).  Can stand up or put a hand down, big enough to move inside on passing downs.  There isn't much for guys who can be a 5-tech in this draft as the five DL the Packers have are naturally NT-3i-tech guys.  They only have three DL who have made a tackle in a NFL game and Slaton/Ford are true NTs and don't have the agility to play anywhere else on the line.

You're right that they might like him because of his athleticism but I just don't like the idea of drafting a guy who, by most accounts, is still raw and needs to develop but who is also already 24 years old. In the 2nd round sure I'd be fine with him but I struggle to think there aren't 15 guys better for us

Tbf though I'm very low on White, he's my 71st ranked prospect 

[Fear The Chorizo]

5 hours ago, LouisEly said:

I still can't believe that post-Nick Collins there are people who still think that because a consensus draft board, or any draft board, has a guy at a certain spot means that he will still be there.  After the Packers drafted Collins, Ozzie Newsome called TT to congratulate him and told him that he was going to take Collins two picks later.

People really have a hard time grasping at how teams can have vastly different draft boards and how different GMs factor in team position needs or even rule out picking guys at certain positions if it's a weak class for that spot.  Just because all the drafniks' boards wind up looking eerily similar right before the draft starts doesn't mean they're right - frankly if they were more right they'd be in a front office somewhere.

Particularly in a draft year that is considered relatively thin, there are going to be a lot of head scratchers throughout this draft with people wondering why "so and so" didn't get picked instead - guys are going to fly up and down boards last minute depending on how teams pick.

[Matt Breen]

I think White is a fascinating prospect. Unlike a lot of EDGE rushers, he's a bigger player (285lbs). And he played DT at times. That should make him solid against the run.

I also wonder if there's room to grow. The guy started as a TE. So he's probably still learning.

Reports say he's got a great motor and work ethic. 

Still, perhaps as he's a bit older, he's peaked as an athlete. Might not be big upside. But whatever - if the team likes him - he's certainly an option. I'm guessing in round 2 he'll be there. 

I predicted the club will take Will McDonald Jr. - but there's not a lot separating the two. McDonald is more of a true pass rusher. 

Should be a fun draft.

[Samurai Bucky]

Now that Rodgers is gone, do they draft a QB high in the draft?  I don't really trust Gutekunst.

[patrickgpe]

3 minutes ago, Samurai Bucky said:

Now that Rodgers is gone, do they draft a QB high in the draft?  I don't really trust Gutekunst.

I think they need to get a vet now that their QB situation is resolved. i would hope that they let Love sink or swim and use their picks to give him as many weapon as possible. 

[brewcrewdue80]

19 minutes ago, Samurai Bucky said:

Now that Rodgers is gone, do they draft a QB high in the draft?  I don't really trust Gutekunst.

Well what's your definition as high? 3rd rd sounds good to me so expectations would be it turns in to an awful player because 3rd.

I'd think they find a way to sign/trade for a vet vs spending a pick on a guy this season. I'd hope Love is focused on his 1st season starting versus being dragged in to some teaching already himself.  I'd also want a vet that could be a mentor as Love goes through his in game experiences to talk to.

[patrickgpe]

Obviously its hard to grade the trade without knowing the 2024 compensation, but assuming that Rodgers plays 65% of the plays and the Jets have a good season, the total package is akin to a 1st in the high teens. If they still get a 2nd, then its more or a late 1st, which I think is fair. 

[brewcrewdue80]

Going to guess GB trades up back in to 1st rd with either Cincy or NO to select the best remaining TE that falls there using 1 of the 2nds and the 3 rd. pick.

[patrickgpe]

2 minutes ago, brewcrewdue80 said:

Going to guess GB trades up back in to 1st rd with either Cincy or NO to select the best remaining TE that falls there using 1 of the 2nds and the 3 rd. pick.

I 100% agree that they will use those (2) 2nds they have this year to try to get back in the 1st round. 

[DR28]

So what picks do we now have for this weekend?

[Sixtolezcano]

4 hours ago, patrickgpe said:

I 100% agree that they will use those (2) 2nds they have this year to try to get back in the 1st round. 

I hope not. Most experts believe there isn’t much difference in players 20-50. With the team as it currently stands (depth) 2 bites of the apple is better than just 1.

[Sixtolezcano]

2 hours ago, DR28 said:

So what picks do we now have for this weekend?

Round 1 =13

Round 2 = 42 and 45

Round 3 = 78

Round 4 = 116

Round 5 = 149

Round 6 = 207

Round 7 = 232, 235, 242 and 256

Subject to change on draft nights.

[Joseph Zarr]

Well having 4 of the Top 100 picks is certainly cool. As per usual, I have absolutely no clue what direction the Packers are leaning. If they stay put at 13, I'd be happy with any one of: Top OL, Top DL, Edge, CB, or Njiba. That's pretty much where I stand with some comfort.