2024 NFL Draft - Packers Focused

[CheezWizHed]

6 hours ago, OldHeidelberg said:

 I was thinking of the days of Reggie White/Vonnie Holliday as power ends in the 4-3 and thought maybe Wyatt and Brooks could fit that role, especially on early downs. But you are probably right, times have changed and guys have to be freaks like Reggie to pull it off now. But I do think Hafley must have sold it as the guys we have are better fits for it or we wouldn't be changing. Just start with stopping the run, I think that part is still considered a strength of the 4-3.

The switch does require another LB and unless we score someone in FA(Devin White?) I expect one of our top 3 picks to land a starter there. 

This is what prompted me to look... I was thinking we had too many OLB types (thinking more of a "Tim-Harris" type elephant DE position) and we'd use Wyatt at DE. But that wasn't what I see at 49ers and Jets. I see smaller DEs - basically the same as our OLBs.  

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

I don't think much has changed(which I think was effectively your conclusion). You needed that second athletic LBer. That becomes an even bigger priority. You needed secondary help. Now you need a more athletic safety to roam around and play the single-high, a more physical one to play in the box. Not everyone is going to fit the role perfectly, but a pretty good year for both bigger, physical safeties and rangy safeties.

Nope, not my conclusion.  My conclusion was that the players we had on the DL went from 3 starters to 2, so we have plenty of depth.  Our OLBs walk right into the DE positions.  

The massive hole at 4-3 LB is what I'm highlighting. We need 3 starters but only have 2 potential starting players on the roster with really no depth.  It wouldn't surprise me to see them sign Wilson, draft two LBs, and grab another FA with some upside. 

So for the draft, I'd be surprised if they draft a DL very high (unless someone drops in our lap).  We already have 5 quality players for 2 spots on the line. 

And we really need more 4-3 LBs that can cover. Because we basically have no one that is great in coverage at that position.  We are short at least one viable starter and three backups. 

The positive side is that we have less P Smith covering WRs.  That happens in 3-4 base with 3DL, 2 OLB and you don't blitz 5.  One OLB has to drop into coverage.  But now, we need to find those 4-3 LB types (220-230 lbers that run and cover). 

The conclusion is that we really don't need any more DL and we REALLY need more small LBers. 

[nate82]

From the outside looking in I think the Packers go LB/S in round 1 and then either LB/S/DB in round 2.  If the Packers are to go OL or DL it will be to replace Runyan and not a DL.  I don't think the Packers go early for an OL and they will wait until the 4th or 5th round to pick someone.  I think Runyan will be gone and will sign with someone else.  It doesn't make much sense to match a FA contract for an interior lineman like Runyan.  I think the Packers just let him go if the cost is too high.

So one interior lineman to replace Runyan is my guess as where the Packers will spend one of their 4th or 5th round picks.  There should be plenty to choose from in these rounds. 

I wouldn't be surprised if the Packers go LB, LB, DB with their first three picks. 

But I think this is fairly accurate for the Packers though I am not sure with who was available at 25 if the Packers would stay there.  I think they trade out of the 25th pick and pick up another pick in the 2nd and 4th/5th round. 

 

McCormick and Paul would be good projects both at T and G.  The biggest improvement for the Packers comes on the defensive side with Cooper and Bullard.  I like Rakestraw though and I think he could step in year one and play the slot or nickel package.  If the Packers are to play more press with their CB's then Rakestraw makes a lot of sense at 25 but I think the Packers could get him in the 2nd round if they trade back and pick up some more picks either in this draft or next years. 

I think teams that will be hungry for T's and edge rushers will overpay and give up a 2nd this year and possibly a 4th and another pick in next years draft for a late 1st rounder. 

[BrewerFan]

3 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Nope, not my conclusion.  My conclusion was that the players we had on the DL went from 3 starters to 2, so we have plenty of depth.  Our OLBs walk right into the DE positions.  

The massive hole at 4-3 LB is what I'm highlighting. We need 3 starters but only have 2 potential starting players on the roster with really no depth.  It wouldn't surprise me to see them sign Wilson, draft two LBs, and grab another FA with some upside. 

So for the draft, I'd be surprised if they draft a DL very high (unless someone drops in our lap).  We already have 5 quality players for 2 spots on the line. 

And we really need more 4-3 LBs that can cover. Because we basically have no one that is great in coverage at that position.  We short at least one viable starter and three backups. 

The positive side is that we have less P Smith covering WRs.  That happens in 3-4 base with 3DL, 2 OLB and you don't blitz 5.  One OLB has to drop into coverage.  But now, we need to find those 4-3 LB types (220-230 lbers that run and cover). 

The conclusion is that we really don't need any more DL and we REALLY need more small LBers. 

I think I said we needed another LBer and didn't say we needed a DL(but you should always draft one if a good one falls).

And that we needed another LBer either way. I also don't think anyone targets "small," LBers.  I don't think that'd ever be cited as a need. Teams obviously want bigger LBers...they just usually(or at least often) take a bigger College Safety. A player like Jaden Hicks who I've mentioned or James Williams from Miami.

You're playing 3 LBers maybe 20% of the time. The Jets #3 played about 17% of the snaps, the Buccs played about 15%, and the 49ers Burks played 35%. That's on the high end because he started some games. So we need another starting LBer. We needed that before. That's also in line with what he did at BC. 

Before we hired Hafley, assuming we were staying in a 3-4, we needed secondary help, especially CB, an upgrade at nickel and...another LBer. 
After we hired Hafley? It really hasn't changed.

We agree our edges fit. We mostly agree our DTs fit(I don't agree they need to move off Slaton via trade or cut).

Walker is a great fit. McDuffie is an obvious fit in the base.

 

Check out the Boston College-SMU game. The personnel he uses isn't much different than the Packers. Two DL, the edges standing up, usually 2 LBers. I don't think we need to re-sign Wilson...draft two LBers and then sign a FA at the position as well.

 

 

 

[BrewerFan]

2 hours ago, nate82 said:

But I think this is fairly accurate for the Packers though I am not sure with who was available at 25 if the Packers would stay there.  I think they trade out of the 25th pick and pick up another pick in the 2nd and 4th/5th round. 

They could...I think it's less likely as Gutekunst has traded down just once(Jaire, added a future 1st) and traded up in several others. For Jaire after trading down, for Love, tried to trade back into the 1st for Watson(Minnesota was smart to not trade 32 and give GB a 5th year). 

These mock drafts make trading down far more appealing given how these players are all kinda lumped together yet. I'd guess by the time the Packers are on the clock, they'll be aggressive...but moving down to ~36 with AZ(for example) and adding a pick in the late 2nd certainly makes sense.

 

2 hours ago, nate82 said:

McCormick and Paul would be good projects both at T and G.  The biggest improvement for the Packers comes on the defensive side with Cooper and Bullard.  I like Rakestraw though and I think he could step in year one and play the slot or nickel package.  If the Packers are to play more press with their CB's then Rakestraw makes a lot of sense at 25 but I think the Packers could get him in the 2nd round if they trade back and pick up some more picks either in this draft or next years. 

I think teams that will be hungry for T's and edge rushers will overpay and give up a 2nd this year and possibly a 4th and another pick in next years draft for a late 1st rounder. 

Patrick Paul is all over the place on these mocks, but seems like he's got a big upside. I've seen McCormick in some more

Edge is weak in this class, so I think you're right, teams will trade up. The tend to anyway. Not sure you'll see teams reaching for OT as it's such a deep class there, but the Packers seem to be in a place where the elite OTs will be gone on most mocks with another set like Morgan, Suamataia, Guyton possibly available where they pick in the 2nd. 

I think as the process goes on, the chances Cooper goes before 41 will just keep climbing. 

If they don't get Cooper, Wilson from NC State and Ford from UT are two others who I think would be really good fits. 

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

And that we needed another LBer either way. I also don't think anyone targets "small," LBers.  I don't think that'd ever be cited as a need. Teams obviously want bigger LBers...they just usually(or at least often) take a bigger College Safety. A player like Jaden Hicks who I've mentioned or James Williams from Miami.

You're playing 3 LBers maybe 20% of the time. The Jets #3 played about 17% of the snaps, the Buccs played about 15%, and the 49ers Burks played 35%. That's on the high end because he started some games. So we need another starting LBer. We needed that before. That's also in line with what he did at BC. 

Small LBers - Meaning typical 4-3 run and cover OLBs - in the 220-240lb range compared to typical 3-4 OLBers in the 250-280lb range.  Unless you like P Smith covering WRs...

You think we only need one 4-3 LB?  Who exactly do we have for backups? For 3 starting positions, we currently have 2  capable 4-3 LBs on the roster and zero backups.  That is why I'm saying we need 4 players.  I didn't say we were drafting/signing 4 starters... We need one starter and 3 backups.  One is probably coming from the 2-3rd round in the draft.  Others could come in later rounds or middle-range FAs. 

It is a pretty big shift from what we were looking at in a 3-4.  Where we maybe needed a backup MLB. 

Bringing back Wilson just provides a "floor", ST, and some experience.  He isn't "needed", but I ascribe to the theory of FA vets to set the "floor" and drafting for the upside.  TT would draft of upside, but when he missed, we didn't have a fall-back and often had some horrendous hole somewhere that killed the season. Gute seems to bring in a mix to ensure we don't have rookies falling on their faces and having no other options. 

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

Small LBers - Meaning typical 4-3 run and cover OLBs - in the 220-240lb range compared to typical 3-4 OLBers in the 250-280lb range.  Unless you like P Smith covering WRs...

Why are you comparing edges to off-ball LBers? How is that an apt analogy? 

Were you not comparing off-ball LBers from different eras? I'm not sure how Preston Smith enters the conversation here at all...

If you're defining Off-Ball LBers are "small LBers," ok...sure. 

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

You think we only need one 4-3 LB?  Who exactly do we have for backups?

Huh? No...I don't think we need to sign a FA at LB...with upside and then draft two more after signing Wilson. Unless you define someone like Oren Burks as the "FA with upside," then that'll probably be applicable to several positions between now and the end of the season.

This would be akin to looking at CB, saying we need a nickel and then you asking if I think we only need 4 CBs.

Oren Burks-SF
Jamien Sherwood-NYJ
Zach Cunningham-Philly
Zach Baun-NOLA

These are the "3rd starters," on modern NFL 4-3 defenses. All on pretty good defenses also. Most have TWO primary starters and then a 3rd who's often a converted safety or a big thumper who comes in to play the run. Those are among the easiest and least valuable types of players. 1-dimensional LBers. 

So no, I don't think we need "only 1 4-3 LBer."  I also don't think it changes where we were in needs a month ago defensively much. We needed another starting LBer to put next to Quay. We still need that. If you're simply saying we need depth at every position...then yeah, other than WRer, QB(maybe), and DL, depth is a "need," at every position. So again, I don't view that as a real drastic change...and I suspect you won't either as you watch the Packers defense next year.

Quote

we currently have 2  capable 4-3 LBs on the roster and zero backups.

We currently have Campbell, Walker, McDuffie, and Wilson as well as a couple of backups if we're being literal. We'll likely cut Campbell, but that's our guess, retain Wilson and then probably take a couple of athletes for STs. Guys like Tariq Carpenter. Tweeners who can play in the box safety. 

I doubt the Packers plan at LBers has changed as much as it has at safety. They reportedly offered the job to two 3-4 DCs, so I don't think they believed their personnel needed a significant overhaul irrespective of who they hired. It's a 4-2-5 league now. We have the luxury of having a guy like McDuffie ready to step in. He becomes more playable in the base now than he was.

An athlete like Edgerrin Cooper or Jaylen Ford was likely a priority either way and adding depth was also likely a priority as it's a part of the roster that sees the most turnover...and that seems to be the case with most 4-3 teams. The 3rd LBer plays a quarter as much as the nickel. 

 

1 hour ago, CheezWizHed said:

It is a pretty big shift from what we were looking at in a 3-4.  Where we maybe needed a backup MLB. 

It's really not. Again, refer to how he plays. He's in the nickel personnel the vast majority of the time just as NFL teams are.

He has two edges. They were usually standing. He's got two LBers the majority of the time, 5 DBs. The difference isn't in the positions NEARLY as much as it is in how they're used. 

 

MLF covered this last year. There ISN'T much of a difference between the 4-3 and the 3-4 in the modern NFL. The Packers personnel is particularly suited to adjust. We don't have undersized edges, we have DTs who can rush the passer. 

As he said, when they go to the Nickel, their Edges are bigger than most teams' DEs. They view them as DEs at that point. They were, like most teams, usually in their sub package.

So the "need" now vs the need a month ago amounts to a guy who can backup the 3rd LBer who seldom plays? I guess if that's a big change, sure.

 

The larger changes are in the secondary and the TYPES of safeties the Packers will need. They'll need a rangy CF who can cover a lot of ground(USC-Bullock type) and they'll need a guy who can come and play in the box(Beau Brade Maryland, Cole Bishop Utah). That's a much bigger change than the type of LBers we need(or the number). 

[CheezWizHed]

Wow.  There was so much wrong with that post, I couldn't even begin to unravel it.  So, I'll just try to make one singular point. 

On 2/21/2024 at 12:24 AM, BrewerFan said:

So the "need" now vs the need a month ago amounts to a guy who can backup the 3rd LBer who seldom plays? I guess if that's a big change, sure.

If we were to continue a 3-4, our starts and backups look like this in base defense:

• DE: Wyatt, Wooden
• NT: Slaton, Ford
• DE: Clark, Brooks,
• OLB: Gary, Ness
• ILB: Walker, <empty>*
• ILB: McDuffie, <empty>*
• OLB: Smith, Cox

Going to a 4-3, it looks like this;

• DE: Gary, Ness
• DT: Wyatt, Wooden, Ford
• DT: Clark, Brooks, Slaton
• DE: Smith, Cox
• WLB: <empty>*, <empty>*
• MLB: Walker, <empty>*
• SLB: McDuffie, <empty>*

* Do we have names like Banks or Mosby? Yes, But no one that seriously looks like a contributor.  This also assumes Douglas is cut, which we agree on. 

So the point?  The significant hole at LB the shift creates.  It doesn't matter if they don't play significant snaps.  Nor does it matter if they get a LB/S hybrid like Tariq Carpenter.  The point is they still need the bodies.  Four of them.  Not just one backup.

I found it signficant to share that in a draft-focused forum.... because I'll predict it has a big impact on what Gute does in the draft.

One. Simple. Point. 

 

 

[BrewerFan]

11 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

One. Simple. Point. 

Well, it seemed like the point was comparing how our roster was constructed now vs how it needed to be constructed for a coach who runs a base 43, but plays the nickel the vast majority of the time.

 

But if your complete conclusion is "we need a LBer to start and then depth," I'm...not really sure where I ever disagreed.

 

If your argument is "big LB vs little LB," then I'd disagree a bit as Preston Smith and Quay Walker have never played the same position, but...I'm not sure what you're arguing about. 

 

 

[Joseph Zarr]

Scheduled Packers Visits: (As of Friday 2/22)

• Cam Johnson, WR - Northwestern
• Justin Blazed, DL - UW Platteville
• Rayshad Williams, DB - Texas Tech (@ Hula Bowl via Ryan Fowler)
• Akeem Dent, DB - FSU
• Winston Reid, LB - Weber State
• AJ Woods, DB - Pitt
• T'vondre Sweat, DL - Texas
• Spencer Rattler, QB - South Carolina
• Joe Milton, QB - Tennessee
• Max Melton, DB - Rutgers 
• James Cahoon, QB - Bridgewater State
• Myles Murphy, DL - UNC
• John Rhys Plumlee, QB - UCF
• Patrick Paul, OT - Houston
• Doug Nester, OL - West Virginia
• Curtis Jacobs, LB - Penn State
• Steele Chambers, LB - Ohio State
• MJ Devonshire, DB - Pittsburgh
• Aidan Robbins, RB - BYU
• Donovan Jennings, OL - FLorida  (@ Shrine Bowl via Justin Melo)
• Edgerrin Cooper, LB Texas A & M

---

(2.29) Combine and more...

• Javon Bullard, S - Georgia...had an official visit with the Packers at the Combine (via MJ Hurley)
• Deiyantei Powell-Woods, OL -  Central Michigan (via Ryan Fowler)
• Evan Williams, S - Oregon (via MJ Hurley)
• Kamren Kinchens, S/DB - Miami (via MJ Hurley)
• Michael Pratt, QB - Tulane (via MJ Hurley)

---

(3.21) Top 30 Visits et al Updated

• Khristian Boyd (stoked about this One) 
• Jarrian Jones, CB - Florida State (also stoked about this one😅)

 

[LouisEly]

One of the things I have wondered about is Cooper DeJean's recovery from the leg injury he suffered late in the season - if he isn't fully recovered, how will that affect his performance on standardized tests and subsequently where he goes in the draft?

Looks like he isn't recovered yet and won't test at the combine.  Obviously there is still Iowa's pro day (can't find the date) and individual workouts, but this helps increase the chance that he's still there at #25.

[LouisEly]

11 hours ago, Joseph Zarr said:

Scheduled Packers Visits: (As of Friday 2/22)

• Cam Johnson, WR - Northwestern
• Justin Blazed, DL - UW Platteville
• Rayshad Williams, DB - Texas Tech
• Akeem Dent, DB - FSU
• Winston Reid, LB - Weber State
• AJ Woods, DB - Pitt
• T'vondre Sweat, DL - Texas
• Spencer Rattler, QB - South Carolina
• Joe Milton, QB - Tennessee
• Max Melton, DB - Rutgers 
• James Cahoon, QB - Bridgewater State
• Myles Murphy, DL - UNC
• John Rhys Plumlee, QB - UCF
• Patrick Paul, OT - Houston
• Doug Nester, OL - West Virginia
• Curtis Jacobs, LB - Penn State
• Steele Chambers, LB - Ohio State
• MJ Devonshire, DB - Pittsburgh
• Aidan Robbins, RB - BYU
• Donovan Jennings, OL - FLorida
• Edgerrin Cooper, LB Texas A & M

Interesting.  Other than Cooper and Paul, looks like mid/late round/UDFA's.

I've had a feeling about Paul.  His run blocking is bringing down his overall grade, but his pass blocking has been great.  2 sacks and 4 hits over 1,100 pass block snaps over the last two seasons.  The Packers care a lot more about pass blocking than run blocking..

[BrewerFan]

On 2/23/2024 at 11:34 PM, LouisEly said:

Interesting.  Other than Cooper and Paul, looks like mid/late round/UDFA's.

I've had a feeling about Paul.  His run blocking is bringing down his overall grade, but his pass blocking has been great.  2 sacks and 4 hits over 1,100 pass block snaps over the last two seasons.  The Packers care a lot more about pass blocking than run blocking..

I'd throw Sweat in there also. I'd be surprised if he gets past rd 2. I'd think a 3-4 team would jump on him before he'd get to the Packers, but big guys who can rush the passers are useful.

I thought the Packers mostly used the pre-draft process to evaluate guys they viewed as late-round picks. I know in '22 they did bring in Wyatt, Watson, and more guys who were in the 1st/2nd rd range, but I believe that was a bit of an outlier. I'd be curious how that compares to other teams. Do most teams bring in more first rd prospects or do they know they'll be able to meet with them at the combine or talk to them later on either way?

I'm becoming a bigger fan of Cooper every time I go and watch a clip of him. I think a more aggressive play style is going to benefit Walker as it is...and they could probably keep Campbell and get by for another year, but Cooper looks like he's nearly as athletic as Walker, but more physical. 

I'm just excited to watch an aggressive defense that plays with their hair on fire. It'll mean we give up some big plays, but I think it'll be well worth it on the other side.

[Joseph Zarr]

Justis Mosqueda and Tyler Brooke of Acme Packing just did their early LB deep dive (seems pertinent given the brief exchange above). It seems to also back up what I've been intuiting and seeing in the greater draftspeak space: no clear generational talents. No first round grades at this time. BUT, Texas A & M's Edgerrin Cooper and UNC's Cedric Gray seem to be the early consensus 1-2 punch.

Brief write-up with link to full podcast discussion HERE

Quote

Justis’ top LB rankings

1. Edgerrin Cooper, Texas A&M
2. Cedric Gray, North Carolina
3. Edefuan Ulofoshio, Washington
4. Junior Colson, Michigan
5. Darius Muasau, UCLA
6. Payton Wilson, North Carolina State
7. Marist Liufau, Notre Dame
8. Tommy Eichenberg, Ohio State

Tyler’s top LB rankings

1. Edgerrin Cooper, Texas A&M
2. Cedric Gray, North Carolina
3. Junior Colson, Michigan
4. Edefuan Ulofoshio, Washington
5. Tommy Eichenberg, Ohio State
6. Payton Wilson, North Carolina State
7. Darius Muasau, UCLA
8. Marist Liufau, Notre Dame

 

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

I'd throw Sweat in there also. I'd be surprised if he gets past rd 2. I'd think a 3-4 team would jump on him before he'd get to the Packers, but big guys who can rush the passers are useful.

I wouldn't call him a pass-rusher - in 51 career games he only has five sacks.  I did an analysis on this a year ago, and very few DL with no seasons with 5+ sacks get picked in the first three rounds.  And if they do, they're rarely worth it.  Mazi Smith, one of the few exceptions, was widely panned as the Cowboys' 1st round pick last year and looked like just a rotational piece during the season.  PFF has Sweat ranked #90, a late 3rd round pick, probably because of the lack of pass rush production.

[Matt Breen]

Okay, fun draft exercise. Right now the Packers don't pick until #25. But what if we moved up? Is there someone you think would be worth dealing extra capital to move up? Let's consider what it would cost - and then who you would select.

Parameters:

I am using the pick values found here: https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

The Packers now pick at #25 (720 point value), #41 (490), #58 (320). Let's work with these picks.

• If the Packers put together all three picks, the value comes to 1530 points. That gets you up to the #6-7 pick area.
• Picks #25 and #41 equal 1210 points. That gets you to the #12 pick.
• Picks #25 and #58 equal 1040 points. That gets you to about the #15 pick.

With those numbers, if the Packers moved up to any of those slots, who would you aim to pick? 

Again, just spitballing stuff. I'll start with one.

I'd consider dealing the #25 and #58 picks to move up into the mid-late teens to select Toledo CB Quinyon Mitchell. The guy just looks like he is going to be a stud. 

Thanks for playing!

[BrewerFan]

On 2/25/2024 at 4:16 PM, LouisEly said:

I wouldn't call him a pass-rusher - in 51 career games he only has five sacks.  I did an analysis on this a year ago, and very few DL with no seasons with 5+ sacks get picked in the first three rounds.  And if they do, they're rarely worth it.  Mazi Smith, one of the few exceptions, was widely panned as the Cowboys' 1st round pick last year and looked like just a rotational piece during the season.  PFF has Sweat ranked #90, a late 3rd round pick, probably because of the lack of pass rush production.

I'm less interested in sacks from a player like that as I am in how they collapse the pocket. 

And Pro Football Network has him #44;

Quote

Sweat's stats aren't impressive due to his role, as he's amassed only 124 tackles and five sacks over five seasons. However, his 2023 season was his best yet, consistently getting into the backfield in addition to demanding double teams. We've seen a trend of huge, athletic DTs going in the first, and Sweat looks poised to be the next. - Ian Valentino

 

[BrewerFan]

42 minutes ago, reillymcshane said:

Okay, fun draft exercise. Right now the Packers don't pick until #25. But what if we moved up? Is there someone you think would be worth dealing extra capital to move up? Let's consider what it would cost - and then who you would select.

Parameters:

I am using the pick values found here: https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp

The Packers now pick at #25 (720 point value), #41 (490), #58 (320). Let's work with these picks.

• If the Packers put together all three picks, the value comes to 1530 points. That gets you up to the #6-7 pick area.
• Picks #25 and #41 equal 1210 points. That gets you to the #12 pick.
• Picks #25 and #58 equal 1040 points. That gets you to about the #15 pick.

With those numbers, if the Packers moved up to any of those slots, who would you aim to pick? 

Again, just spitballing stuff. I'll start with one.

I'd consider dealing the #25 and #58 picks to move up into the mid-late teens to select Toledo CB Quinyon Mitchell. The guy just looks like he is going to be a stud. 

Thanks for playing!

I've said I'd LOVE to see the Packers draft Joe Alt. It really faded as the season went on and he kept moving up the draft boards and we kept moving down, but I think he's a Pro-Bowl LT year one and he could be an All-Pro very early in his career. #25, #41 and #58 would hurt, but I think he's good enough it's worth it.

MHJ, Alt are two guys who are damn near locks(Bowers as well, but I wouldn't take a TE). As close as you can get making the jump to the NFL. Both have fathers who played at that level who'll help prepare them, both had fathers who were elite, both are uniquely talented with abnormal size and agility at that size.

Don't think we can move up high enough to get MHJ, but probably enough for Alt, and then I think your OTs would be in place for the next decade. 

[Matt Breen]

7 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

Don't think we can move up high enough to get MHJ, but probably enough for Alt, and then I think your OTs would be in place for the next decade. 

Yeah, Marvin Harrison Jr. is a pipe dream unless you give up next year's 1st as well. I'd love him - but not at that price. 

I like Alt a lot as well. Do I want to give up our 1st and two seconds? Not sure. Would be great to get him. 

[BrewerFan]

8 minutes ago, reillymcshane said:

Yeah, Marvin Harrison Jr. is a pipe dream unless you give up next year's 1st as well. I'd love him - but not at that price. 

I like Alt a lot as well. Do I want to give up our 1st and two seconds? Not sure. Would be great to get him. 

I'm not saying I'd make that trade necessarily. That's obviously a ton to give up, but just in your hypothetical, if we were to move up, who would you do it for. I wouldn't do it for a WR other than MHJ. There isn't a defensive player IMO worth it there. At least as of now. 

 

[Matt Breen]

1 minute ago, BrewerFan said:

I'm not saying I'd make that trade necessarily. That's obviously a ton to give up, but just in your hypothetical, if we were to move up, who would you do it for. I wouldn't do it for a WR other than MHJ. There isn't a defensive player IMO worth it there. At least as of now. 

 

Exactly. This is for fun.

You are right - if we were able to trade into the top three (which is, what I think, it would take to get Harrison), he's the guy I'd select. 

But that would be fun to see Harrison with Love.

I'm guessing the Packers would have to trade 1st in 2024, 1st in 2025, and both 2nd round picks in 2024 to get up to the #3 - which is New England. Perhaps even a little more.

The first two picks will probably be QBs (Williams and Maye), and then - who knows. You would have to hope NE would more interested in acquiring draft capital rather than adding a QB (Daniels) or Harrison at #3. If Harrison makes it to the fourth pick, Arizona would be all over him in a heartbeat. So the third pick - with New England - is likely the only way to get him. 

[BrewerFan]

32 minutes ago, reillymcshane said:

Exactly. This is for fun.

You are right - if we were able to trade into the top three (which is, what I think, it would take to get Harrison), he's the guy I'd select. 

But that would be fun to see Harrison with Love.

I'm guessing the Packers would have to trade 1st in 2024, 1st in 2025, and both 2nd round picks in 2024 to get up to the #3 - which is New England. Perhaps even a little more.

The first two picks will probably be QBs (Williams and Maye), and then - who knows. You would have to hope NE would more interested in acquiring draft capital rather than adding a QB (Daniels) or Harrison at #3. If Harrison makes it to the fourth pick, Arizona would be all over him in a heartbeat. So the third pick - with New England - is likely the only way to get him. 

Love really blew it. Had us in perfect position after 7 games...we were picking 5th. Wouldn't have taken much to move up!

[GAME05]

Am I crazy in thinking that two 1sts and two 2nds doesn't sound like the worst deal in the world to get Harrison?

I really like the Quinyon Mitchell idea. He's gone from early 2nd to mid-1st in most mocks and I'd bet his combine will make him look even better. I otherwise like Fuaga as I understand he could play both G and T so that would add a ton of depth and flexibility we usually need.

[Matt Breen]

8 minutes ago, GAME05 said:

Am I crazy in thinking that two 1sts and two 2nds doesn't sound like the worst deal in the world to get Harrison?

No. I never really thought about it much until I wrote it down. But the idea of adding him is really cool. I have a feeling it would take some more - but who knows. I'm not sure how 'valuable' future picks are in the grand scheme of things. 

[Matt Breen]

9 minutes ago, GAME05 said:

I really like the Quinyon Mitchell idea. He's gone from early 2nd to mid-1st in most mocks and I'd bet his combine will make him look even better. I otherwise like Fuaga as I understand he could play both G and T so that would add a ton of depth and flexibility we usually need.

I saw some stuff on Mitchell last year and was really interested in him. Small school guys sometimes get discounted on draft day. Thought maybe he was second rounder at the time. Then I saw him go up the boards the last couple of months. Maybe I'm focused on him as he's someone is sort of 'found' on my own. It's easily to get infatuated with someone like that. 

[LouisEly]

Back in October I would have said Alt.  And I generally agree that he'll be a great player in the league for a long time (barring injury).  I would package those picks for him... if it was a position of need.

But it's not.  Debate the accuracy of PFF grades (I think they're much more accurate for the NFL than college), but PFF had Walker as the 7th best overall grade - LT or RT - from week 9 through 18.  Only six tackles graded better than him.  That's what we hope Alt would become.

I can't give up both 2nds when the only safeties on the roster are a Anthony Johnson, Zayne Anderson, and Bennie Sapp.  Unless they sign two starting quality safeties in free agency, I can't wait until late in the 3rd to draft one much less two.

I'd package a 3rd to move up a few spots to get Q. Mitchell or DeJean (if the medicals check out), maybe Kool-Aid if he runs well, but that's it.