2024 NFL Draft - Packers Focused

[Matt Breen]

NFL draft is one month away. In the latest Mock Draft from the Athletic, they had the Packers trading up to #12 with Denver and selecting CB Quinyon Mitchell of Toledo. 

Packers give up 1st (#25), 2nd (#58), 3rd (#91) and a 7th (#245).

If you're wondering about the draft capital chart values, here's the breakdown:

Packers get: 1st (#12) - 1200 pt value

Denver gets: 

#25 - 720 pts
#58 - 320
#91 - 136
#245 - 1 
TOTAL: 1177 pt value

Of course, that's if you trust the value charts out there. 

Thoughts?

[CheezWizHed]

24 minutes ago, reillymcshane said:

NFL draft is one month away. In the latest Mock Draft from the Athletic, they had the Packers trading up to #12 with Denver and selecting CB Quinyon Mitchell of Toledo. 

Packers give up 1st (#25), 2nd (#58), 3rd (#91) and a 7th (#245).

If you're wondering about the draft capital chart values, here's the breakdown:

Packers get: 1st (#12) - 1200 pt value

Denver gets: 

#25 - 720 pts
#58 - 320
#91 - 136
#245 - 1 
TOTAL: 1177 pt value

Of course, that's if you trust the value charts out there. 

Thoughts?

I tend to prefer the "more bites of the apple" approach.  I know nothing about Mitchell, but you really have to be confident to give up that many "bites" for him.  CB is a need, but not that big of one, IMO. If you were going up there for an LT that might make me rethink it. 

[homer]

21 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

I tend to prefer the "more bites of the apple" approach.  I know nothing about Mitchell, but you really have to be confident to give up that many "bites" for him.  CB is a need, but not that big of one, IMO. If you were going up there for an LT that might make me rethink it. 

I don't know if this is true, but it seems like there is less variance with a 1st round OT than a CB. If they were to trade up, I'd rather it be for an OT

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, reillymcshane said:

NFL draft is one month away. In the latest Mock Draft from the Athletic, they had the Packers trading up to #12 with Denver and selecting CB Quinyon Mitchell of Toledo. 

Packers give up 1st (#25), 2nd (#58), 3rd (#91) and a 7th (#245).

If you're wondering about the draft capital chart values, here's the breakdown:

Packers get: 1st (#12) - 1200 pt value

Denver gets: 

#25 - 720 pts
#58 - 320
#91 - 136
#245 - 1 
TOTAL: 1177 pt value

Of course, that's if you trust the value charts out there. 

Thoughts?

No to Mitchell. I'd maybe do the DeJean trade. That one was more realistic and I think DeJean has a really high floor due to how physical he is.

I also don't think he's going to go as high as The Athletic is mocking him as we don't know if he's an NFL CB or Safety at this point. He hasn't run. If he's a 4.44 guy and runs the 3 cone in under 7, he's a top 10 pick. But you do know pretty reasonably that he can play safety.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see GB trade up in the 1st rd. They could trade back and trade back up in the 2nd...I don't know, but as others have said, I wouldn't do it for a CB in this draft and I'd probably only be willing to trade that much for two players. Alt and MHJ.

 

[Joseph Zarr]

I like Quinyon Mitchell a lot. There's no way I do that trade. I think last year's Jayden Reed; Dontayvion Wicks; Karl Brooks haul would give quite a bit mote credence to the idea of accumulating as many Top 100 picks as they can - ie trading back - en lieu of trading up and giving away all that capital. I personally don't really care what the charts say.

[BrewerFan]

7 minutes ago, Joseph Zarr said:

I like Quinyon Mitchell a lot. There's no way I do that trade. I think last year's Jayden Reed; Dontayvion Wicks; Karl Brooks haul would give quite a bit mote credence to the idea of accumulating as many Top 100 picks as they can - ie trading back - en lieu of trading up and giving away all that capital. I personally don't really care what the charts say.

That was a great trade. In these mocks(which really couldn't be less relevant when it comes to reality) there are a lot of teams trading up for a QB. That's just the way the board falls. That makes sense. TB trading 57+2025 1st for a QB if they fall, then we trade back up ala Jaire.

I think that's unlikely at 25, but I just wouldn't rule anything out. Gute has traded up as much as down(actually I'd guess he's traded up more, but arguably last years trade down was SO incredibly successful, especially if Anders can get it together). 

Gute just gets the benefit of the doubt now. If he moves up, I'll get on board. If he likes Walker, I'll believe he's better than I think he is. If he doesn't address at least the IOL...I'll assume Sean Rhyan has some very incriminating photos, but short of that...

[Joseph Zarr]

Just now, BrewerFan said:

...I'll assume Sean Rhyan has some very incriminating photos, but short of that...

😂

[BrewerFan]

7 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I tend to prefer the "more bites of the apple" approach.  I know nothing about Mitchell, but you really have to be confident to give up that many "bites" for him.  CB is a need, but not that big of one, IMO. If you were going up there for an LT that might make me rethink it. 

It seems like not many Packers fans view OT as a need. 

You know where I stand, but...it's not a real commonly held opinion. And I get it, Walker MIGHT keep getting better and the CBs in the Hafley system are going to be in more man coverage. 

But let's stick with OT for the sake of argument, would you be as confident taking a RT with Tom seemingly able to play either side at that high level?

[OldHeidelberg]

43 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

It seems like not many Packers fans view OT as a need. 

You know where I stand, but...it's not a real commonly held opinion. And I get it, Walker MIGHT keep getting better and the CBs in the Hafley system are going to be in more man coverage. 

But let's stick with OT for the sake of argument, would you be as confident taking a RT with Tom seemingly able to play either side at that high level?

Most Packer fans I know view OT as a huge need, seems like posters here do as well. We think we have our franchise QB, you protect him with an all pro LT if you can. Like others here it’s the only position I would make a big move up for. And with all the QBs and WRs at the top it could get interesting for sure.

[homer]

58 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

It seems like not many Packers fans view OT as a need. 

You know where I stand, but...it's not a real commonly held opinion. And I get it, Walker MIGHT keep getting better and the CBs in the Hafley system are going to be in more man coverage. 

But let's stick with OT for the sake of argument, would you be as confident taking a RT with Tom seemingly able to play either side at that high level?

My argument against an OT in round 1 is that they've done so well finding O Linemen later on that I'd rather they use it on something else. I'm nitpicking here because I don't have a strong opinion and would be happy with OT, CB

[BrewerFan]

51 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Most Packer fans I know view OT as a huge need, seems like posters here do as well. We think we have our franchise QB, you protect him with an all pro LT if you can. Like others here it’s the only position I would make a big move up for. And with all the QBs and WRs at the top it could get interesting for sure.

Well...we have a higher, more educated class of Packers fan on this board(particularly when they agree with me😁).

But I've argued a bit on Twitter and I just hear how Walker shut down Parsons and I see the W/L rate.

Honestly, I think the Packers' offensive line and their grades have been helped by Rodgers and Love...when the latter was playing well. Getting the ball out, the way they manipulate the pocket, throwing off that backfoot to avoid getting hit and still dropping it in there. The playcalling.

But people see the Packers listed at #8 for Pass Rush W/L rate and...IDK.

Bears fans do it as well with Braxton Jones. He graded out higher than Walker(neither great, IIRC ~68 and ~66). I've said if I was a Bears fan, I'd be taking Caleb Williams, trading up for Alt(or Fashanu). Then you have two GREAT OTs(at least in theory, I think Wright is a really good one) in front of Williams, he has a couple of WRs. You give Caleb all the things he needs to win.

I think if you polled Packers fans, MOST would go CB, OL...but mostly to fill in at RG. And then LBer is hanging over our heads right now. We need a LB to pair with Quay. Even if we are "only" in the 43 15% of the time...(Andy Herman's estimation, I think it's a little low, but we are in sub most of the time)...McDuffie isn't that 2nd guy. He's great as the #3. 

 

[BrewerFan]

57 minutes ago, homer said:

My argument against an OT in round 1 is that they've done so well finding O Linemen later on that I'd rather they use it on something else. I'm nitpicking here because I don't have a strong opinion and would be happy with OT, CB

And I do get that, we could get Morgan or Sumatia(Sp?) at 41 or the kid from Yale, or Blake Fischer, Paul in Rds 2-3-4. 

Washington has a big OT who looks like a prototypical Packers pick. 

I'd just say if you look at the players likely to be available around the Packers pick. Say Wiggings, DeJean, Barton, Jackson-Powers(can't imagine a Center, but he's a really good one)...etc...the player with the most upside is Guyton. 

Here's another...wildly unrealistic trade where I end up moving down and adding a 1st(TB trades up 1 spot and gives up a 3rd). But I moved down each time. The only thing I'd change is I'd have moved up at 58 for Cooper and then I'd have taken Hicks over Bullard.

And Luke McCaffrey is a weird random...gadget guy. A QB who is tough, can run the ball, and throw the ball. He could be a fun player. One helluva gunner also(though I've also said it's pointless to take a WR who likely can't beat out Melton and Heath, but as I'm not Gute and I had about 19 picks...I picked him.

 

[CheezWizHed]

18 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

It seems like not many Packers fans view OT as a need. 

You know where I stand, but...it's not a real commonly held opinion. And I get it, Walker MIGHT keep getting better and the CBs in the Hafley system are going to be in more man coverage. 

But let's stick with OT for the sake of argument, would you be as confident taking a RT with Tom seemingly able to play either side at that high level?

Yes, I think Tom is actually better suited (size wise) for LT.  So unless you plan to grab Alt or some other prototypical LT, I'd have Tom compete with Walker at LT and compete with a rookie at RT.  Then pick the better pair. 

17 hours ago, homer said:

My argument against an OT in round 1 is that they've done so well finding O Linemen later on that I'd rather they use it on something else. I'm nitpicking here because I don't have a strong opinion and would be happy with OT, CB

I tend to prefer picking the key spots in the first round: CB, WR, EDGE, OT, and QB.  Picking a S, LB, DT, G, C, TE or RB in the first typically means the person has to be "special" to bring back the same value at that position.  Surely, a DT with heavy pass rush capabilities will do that.  Or a TE that moves like a WR.  But those are pretty few and far between. 

It is much easier for people at those other spots to produce immediate value. So our need at those spots looks like:

• QB: almost nothing.  Certainly not a 1st rounder
• WR: Could use that "#1 stud" type, but we have great depth and young talent
• Edge: Have 3 strong DEs, one good one on IR, and one decent development candidate.  Hard to spend another 1st round here.
• CB: Alexander and Valentine is a good starting tandem.  Assuming he can stay healthy, Stokes provides more upside than Valentine (or at least competition and a quality backup). You can always use more CBs, but we have decent depth.  And last first round CBs (Kool-Aid and others) look pretty strong too. 
• OT: We have Tom and Walker.  Tom is pretty set at one position.  Walker was good last year and may continue to grow and develop.  But he is replaceable.  And there is zero quality depth (some development pieces that might hit, but odds are low).  

So of those "key spots"... if I'm going to spend 4 draft picks to move up to the top of the draft, I'm going after someone like Alt. 

16 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Well...we have a higher, more educated class of Packers fan on this board(particularly when they agree with me😁).

[OldHeidelberg]

Walker did improve during the season last year and I think he could be an average NFL starting LT but that's a position where you want to be better than average. If Gutes landed bookend OT's in the 4th and 7th rounds of the draft 2 years ago put him in the HOF but I suspect he is not finished there, even Tom was talked about as our eventual starting center not that long ago. If we don't trade up I would be surprised if OL isn't addressed with one of the top 2 picks but I would still bet on a CB first because that's what the Packers do. Getting Alt would be amazing if we could pull it off without giving up our '25 first rounder.  

[BrewerFan]

On 3/26/2024 at 12:30 PM, CheezWizHed said:

Yes, I think Tom is actually better suited (size wise) for LT.  So unless you plan to grab Alt or some other prototypical LT, I'd have Tom compete with Walker at LT and compete with a rookie at RT.  Then pick the better pair. 

It's such a luxury having Tom. I actually still believe his best position would be Center. I think he could be a Kelce-type Center. But, of course, you don't take a successful OT and move him to Center. I can only imagine how fond of that move his agent would be. Speaking of which, as these guys start to become eligible for extensions, Tom has to be near the top of that list after Love. Can't be until after year 3, but he'd likely get 5/100 on the open market. Hopefully they can lock him up next year for ~4/74 on top of the last year. Spread it out. That number could go up with another big year, but I don't think that's crazy with the way the cap is growing.

 

As for moving up, I have seen different mocks where Alt or Fashanu go in the teens. That'd be a tough call though. What's the cost? 25+58+91 to get up to ~13? I think they're worth it, but it's a high cost.

On 3/26/2024 at 12:30 PM, CheezWizHed said:

I tend to prefer picking the key spots in the first round: CB, WR, EDGE, OT, and QB.  Picking a S, LB, DT, G, C, TE or RB in the first typically means the person has to be "special" to bring back the same value at that position.  Surely, a DT with heavy pass rush capabilities will do that.  Or a TE that moves like a WR.  But those are pretty few and far between. 

Brock Bowers is the best College TE I've seen...and he may not go top 10. Kyle Pitts was just such an insane talent, but yes, guys like that are rare. 

I've seen people argue that Graham Barton and the Center from Oregon are those types of talents. I don't know if that's true or if they're just the best Center prospects. Barton wouldn't surprise me at all given his versatility.

I'd still also include DT into that premium position...but they get over-drafted so much that it's exceptionally rare to get a guy who's a good pass-rushing DT and good vs the run. Wyatt for example, he was not and still hasn't shown he's a very good run defender. I think he'll be better in a 4-3 playing one gap.

On 3/26/2024 at 12:30 PM, CheezWizHed said:

Edge: Have 3 strong DEs, one good one on IR, and one decent development candidate.  Hard to spend another 1st round here.

And Brooks was better in College playing as a DE(edit, originally said DT). He could play more outside or Wooden could. He has the more prototypical size. That said, I would not be surprised if a guy like Verse drops or Latu(the FSU/UCLA Edges) drop and Gute takes one. If he's shown one thing as a GM, it's that he wants to get those edges before it's a need. It'd be overkill IMO, but they like keeping them fresh and this is likely Smith's last year. 

Marshawn Kneeland would be an ideal choice at 88. 6'3 275, athletic(9.54 RAS). He's listed as an edge, some teams are calling him a DT...he's aggressive, strong and would be a great developmental prospect. But I agree, I'd definitely not go back to edge in Rd1. 

 

[BrewerFan]

7 hours ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Walker did improve during the season last year and I think he could be an average NFL starting LT but that's a position where you want to be better than average. If Gutes landed bookend OT's in the 4th and 7th rounds of the draft 2 years ago put him in the HOF but I suspect he is not finished there, even Tom was talked about as our eventual starting center not that long ago. If we don't trade up I would be surprised if OL isn't addressed with one of the top 2 picks but I would still bet on a CB first because that's what the Packers do. Getting Alt would be amazing if we could pull it off without giving up our '25 first rounder.  

I hope Walker does keep getting better. There's just the issues with his work ethic from PSU, working on his body and the value of the position that makes me think we should keep trying and improving there.

I did not know until recently when I saw Troy Fatanu(LT Washington) mocked to the Packers...his arms are nearly 35 inches long! I'd viewed him as a Guard, but he was athletic and moved really well. I don't see why he can't play OT in the NFL. He's  physical, good run blocker, and...again, really agile and good vs speed rushers according to scouting reports. 

That's a player we could take who may play Guard early on, but who you'd hope would eventually play OT. Or at least be able to play tackle. Similar to Jenkins.

As for Tom, the talk of him playing Center was primarily among fans, and when you thought Bakh was finally back from injury.

I do think what Gute did with Tom and Walker, that's a HR. If Walker is bad and needs to be replaced or if he continues to get better. 

 

Finally, it's a very...un-Packer like thing to project, but they may very well take another off-ball LB in the first. If you flipped it and said we played in the base the majority of the time and McDuffie could handle ~80% of the snaps, I'd say wait and see, but we know that's not the case. Edggerin Cooper or Payton Wilson may be too good to sit and wait on and too important to this new scheme. 

[CheezWizHed]

14 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Finally, it's a very...un-Packer like thing to project, but they may very well take another off-ball LB in the first. If you flipped it and said we played in the base the majority of the time and McDuffie could handle ~80% of the snaps, I'd say wait and see, but we know that's not the case. Edggerin Cooper or Payton Wilson may be too good to sit and wait on and too important to this new scheme. 

I think us arm-chair GMs types have our "ideals" of what we want to do (e.g. my preference for drafting premium positions in the 1st round), but then there is the reality of running a draft live and being able to execute things under pressure. 

If the Packer's draft Cooper or Wilson, I guarantee you will see many fans jump out and complain they could've traded down an gotten that player 4 picks later (or whatever number, but I saw someone complain like this while wanting to move down 4 spots 🙄).  But the reality is that often the team can't figure out a trade partner and are left drafting a player half a round (or full round) higher than some random online rating board simply because we knew he wouldn't last until the next pick.  And we felt they were the best player in the next 32 picks.  

So you draft him higher and people complain they are a "reach"...which often they are not.  Sometimes you simply don't have the option to get them a few picks later. 

[BrewerFan]

4 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I think us arm-chair GMs types have our "ideals" of what we want to do (e.g. my preference for drafting premium positions in the 1st round), but then there is the reality of running a draft live and being able to execute things under pressure. 

If the Packer's draft Cooper or Wilson, I guarantee you will see many fans jump out and complain they could've traded down an gotten that player 4 picks later (or whatever number, but I saw someone complain like this while wanting to move down 4 spots 🙄).  But the reality is that often the team can't figure out a trade partner and are left drafting a player half a round (or full round) higher than some random online rating board simply because we knew he wouldn't last until the next pick.  And we felt they were the best player in the next 32 picks.  

So you draft him higher and people complain they are a "reach"...which often they are not.  Sometimes you simply don't have the option to get them a few picks later. 

Exactly...on all counts.

These mocks are fun...but they're also largely groupthink. There are some differences of course, but it's not like you'll look at PFF and then NFL.com and see these wildly different rankings for the most part...and then when they are, they're just kinda ridiculous. CBS just had one with Joe Alt as the 20th-ranked player. I'm pretty sure MHJ wasn't the #1 WR(though I have seen some reputable people reporting that Nabers may actually go ahead of him). 

Obviously, if you CAN trade down and get the same player...you do that. But unlike a mock draft simulator, the draft doesn't revolve around what you want. 

The players that I remember being complained about the most...have largely turned into the best players. Rashan Gary and then Jordan Love. Each time I remember people complaining about how they would have been available later and you could have added picks. Maybe. Or maybe not. But if you're sold on a player, you wanna roll the dice?

It's kinda like investing. It's easy to tell someone else what risk they should take, it's easy to say you SHOULD have done this instead years after the fact...but the Packers FO, like the Brewers FO has kinda reached a point where...I'll have my opinions up until the draft pick is made and then I'll buy into whomever they take. 

 

BTW, interesting article from McGinn. The one thing I've always thought he did really well was talk to other executives. Here one is talking about the lack of defensive talent in the top 20 and then arguing that there are better players who'll go in Rd2 than Dallas Turner. 

https://www.golongtd.com/p/mcginns-top-55-wheres-the-defense?utm_campaign=email-post&r=14o28m&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

 

[Joseph Zarr]

Move TE continues to be a sneaky 'need' for the Packers. I said this in my draft thinking previously and this was before Deguara departing for Jax. I continue to feel they grab an H-Back type prospect somewhere in the first 5 rounds. 

[JosephC]

Trade crazy mock draft (for everyone other than Green Bay)

Admittedly I pay little attention to the NFL these days, so I used the following link for team needs as it was the most up-to-date list I could find.  Note that I have a decent grip on what I think the Packers need, so I really didn't follow the list of needs for Green Bay, although it looks like I did.  2024 NFL Draft order, biggest needs for every team, plus key free agent signings, departures for all 32 clubs - CBSSports.com

I did go through every pick through 7 rounds, but was too lazy to type out every pick from rounds 4-7.  Only included picks for the NFC North teams and players that at one time or another played for the Badgers.

Please forgive the occasional typo as I am just too lazy to go back and proof-read it.  At least I was aware enough at the end to go back and replace Redskins with Commanders as I made that mistake more than once.

Round One

1.  Bears – Caleb Williams/QB/USC

Vikings get #2 and #67 (third)…Commanders get #11, #23, #108 (fourth), #167 (fifth) and 2025 first round pick

2.  Vikings – Jayden Daniels/QB/LSU

Raiders get #3…Patriots get #13, #44 (second) and 2025 first round pick

3.  Raiders – Drake Maye/QB/North Carolina

4.  Cardinals – Marvin Harrison Jr./WR/Ohio State

Titans get #5…Chargers get #7, #106 (fourth) and 2025 fourth round pick

5.  Titans – Joe Alt/OT/Notre Dame

Commanders get #6 and #107 (fourth)…Giants get #11 and #40 (second)

6.  Commanders – J.J. McCarthy/QB/Michigan

7.  Chargers – Rome Odunze/WR/Washington

8.  Falcons – Jared Verse/EDGE/Florida State

Jaguars get #9…Bears get #17 and #48 (second)

9.  Jaguars – Malik Nabers/WR/LSU

Colts get #10…Jets get #15, #82 (third) and 2025 fourth round pick

10.  Colts – Quinyon Mitchell/CB/Toledo

Eagles get #11…Giants get #22, #50 (second) and #120 (fourth)

11. Eagles – Terrion Arnold/CB/Alabama

Rams get #12 and #145 (fifth)…Broncos get #19 and #52 (second)

12.  Rams – Dallas Turner/EDGE/Alabama

13.  Patriots – Olumuyiwa Fashanu/OT/Penn State

Bengals get #14…Saints get #18 and #80 (third)

14.  Bengals – Brock Bowers/TE/Georgia

15.  Jets – Brian Thomas Jr/WR/LSU

Cowboys get #16 and #102 (fourth)…Seahawks get #24, #56 (second) and #216 (sixth)

16.  Cowboys – J.C. Latham/OT/Alabama

Cardinals get #17…Bears get #27, #66 (third) and #186 (sixth)

17.  Cardinals – Chop Robinson/EDGE/Penn State

18.  Saints – Troy Fautanu/OT/Washington

Commanders get #19…Broncos get #23 and #100 (fourth)

19.  Commanders – Tyler Guyton/OT/Oklahoma

Bills get #20, #98 (third)…Steelers get #28, #60 (second) and #189 (sixth)

20.  Bills – Nate Wiggins/CB/Clemson

Commanders get #21…Dolphins get #36 (second), #78 (third) and #107 (fourth)

21.  Commanders – Laiatu Latu/EDGE/UCLA

22.  Giants – Graham Barton/IOL/Duke

Chiefs get #23…Broncos get #32, #95 (third) and 2025 fourth round pick

23.  Chiefs – Taliese Fuaga/OT/Oregon State

Rams get #24…Seahawks get #83 (third), 2025 first round pick and 2026 second round pick

24.  Rams – Byron Murphy II/DT/Texas

25.  Packers – Jordan Morgan/OT/Arizona

26.  Buccaneers – Jackson Powers-Johnson/IOL/Oregon

27.  Bears – Darius Robinson/EDGE/Missouri

28.  Steelers – Adonai Mitchell/WR/Texas

Patriots get #29…Detroit gets #34 (second) and #103 (fourth)

29.  Patriots – Bo Nix/QB/Oregon

30.  Ravens – Amarius Mims/OT/Georgia

31.  49ers – Jer’Zhan Newton/DT/Illinois

32.  Broncos – Kool-Aid McKinstry/CB/Alabama

Round Two

Giants get #33 and #240 (seventh)…Panthers get #40, #120 (fourth) and #166 (fifth)

33.  Giants – Jonathan Brooks/RB/Texas

34.  Lions – Cooper DeJean/CB/Iowa

35.  Cardinals – Ennis Rakestraw Jr./CB/Missouri

Falcons get #36…Dolphins get #43 and #109 (fourth)

36.  Falcons – Kamari Lassiter/CB/Georgia

37.  Chargers – T’Vondre Sweat/DL/Texas

38.  Titans – Edgerrin Cooper/LB/Texas A&M

39.  Panthers – Tony Franklin/WR/Oregon

40.  Panthers – Ja’Tavion Sanders/TE/Texas

41.  Packers – Payton Wilson/LB/NC State

42.  Texans – Junior Colson/LB/Michigan

43.  Dolphins – Cooper Beebe/IOL/Kansas State

44.  Patriots – Ladd McConkey/WR/Georgia

45.  Saints – Braden Fiske/DL/Florida State

46.  Colts – Tyler Nubin/S/Minnesota

47.  Giants – Roman Wilson/WR/Michigan

48.  Bears – Kris Jenkins/DT/Michigan

Lions get #49 and #237 (seventh), Bengals get #61, #103 (fourth) and #164 (fifth)

49.  Lions – Xavier Worthy/WR/Texas

50.  Giants – Jeremiah Trotter Jr./LB/Clemson

51.  Steelers – Christian Haynes/IOL/Connecticut

52.  Broncos – Javon Bullard/S/Georgia

49ers get #53 and #161 (fifth)…Eagles get #63 and #94 (third)

53.  49ers – Blake Fisher/OT/Notre Dame

54.  Browns – Patrick Paul/OT/Houston

55.  Dolphins – Ricky Pearsall/WR/Florida

56.  Seahawks – Austin Booker/EDGE/Kansas

57.  Buccaneers – Chris Braswell/EDGE/Alabama

58.  Packers – Dadrion Taylor-Demerson/S/Texas Tech

59.  Texans – Cade Stover/TE/Ohio State

60.  Steelers – Kiran Amegadjie/OT/Yale

61.  Bengals - Ruke Orhorhoro/DT/Clemson

62.  Ravens -Max Melton/CB/Rutgers

63.  Eagles – Cole Bishop/S/Utah

64.  Chiefs – Keon Coleman/WR/Florida State

Round Three

65.  Panthers – Kris Abrams-Draine/CB/Missouri

66.  Bears – Christian Mahogany/IOL/Boston College

67.  Vikings – Xavier Legette/WR/South Carolina

68.  Patriots – T.J. Tampa/CB/Iowa State

69.  Chargers – Kingsley Suamataia/OT/Brigham Young

70.  Giants – D.J. James/CB/Auburn

71.  Cardinals – Trey Benson/RB/Florida State

72.  Jets – Jaylen Wright/RB/Tennessee

73.  Lions – Dominick Puni/IOL/Kansas

74.  Falcons – Michael Hall Jr./DL/Ohio State

75.  Bears – Zach Frazier/IOL/West Virginia

76.  Broncos – DeWayne Carter/DL/Duke

77.  Raiders – Zak Zinter/IOL/Michigan

78.  Dolphins – Mekhi Wingo/DL/LSU

79.  Falcons – Calen Bullock/S/USC

80.  Saints – Malachi Corley/WR/Western Kentucky

81.  Seahawks – Kamren Kinchens/S/Miami

82.  Jets – Theo Johnson/TE/Penn State

83.  Seahawks – Matt Goncalves/OT/Pittsburgh

84.  Steelers – Renardo Green/CB/Florida State

85.  Browns – Jermaine Burton/WR/Alabama

86.  Texans – Mike Sainristil/CB/Michigan

87.  Cowboys – Sedrick Van Pran-Granger/IOL/Georgia

88.  Packers – Caedan Wallace/OT/Penn State (to play OG)

89.  Buccaneers – Cam Hart/CB/Notre Dame

90.  Cardinals – Sataoa Laumea/IOL/Utah

91.  Packers – Andru Phillips/CB/Kentucky

92.  Buccaneers – Cedric Gray/LB/North Carolina

93.  Ravens – Maason Smith/DT/LSU

94.  Eagles – Javon Foster/OT/Missouri

95.  Broncos – Devontez Walker/WR/North Carolina

96.  Jaguars – Adisa Isaac/EDGE/Penn State

97.  Bengals – Brandon Dorius/EDGE/Oregon

98.  Bills – Hunter Nourzad/IOL/Penn State

99.  Rams – MarShawn Lloyd/RB/USC

Round Four

100.  Broncos – Michael Penix Jr./QB/Washington

122.  Bears – Curtis Jacobs/LB/Penn State

126.  Packers – Marcus Harris/DL/Auburn

129.  Vikings – Jordan Jefferson/DL/LSU

Round Five

141.  Panthers – Braelon Allen/RB/Wisconsin

157.  Vikings – Gottlieb Ayedze/OT/Maryland (to play OG)

169.  Packers -Trevin Wallace/LB/Kentucky

Round Six

177.  Vikings – Xavier Thomas/EDGE/Clemson

186.  Bears – Tayvion Robinson/WR/Kentucky

201.  Lions – Nelson Ceaser/EDGE/Houston

202.  Packers – Jordan Travis/QB/Florida State

205.  Lions – Zion Logue/DL/Georgia

206.  Browns – Isaac Guerendo/RB/Louisville

219.  Packers – Patrick McMorris/S/California

Round Seven

227.  Titans – Tanor Bortolini/IOL/Wisconsin (to play OG)

230.  Vikings – Ro Torrence/CB/Arizona State

232.  Vikings – Logan Lee/DL/Iowa

237.  Lions – Millard Bradford/S/TCU

245.  Packers – Eric Watts/EDGE/UConn

249.  Lions – Jaheim Bell/TE/Florida State

255.  Packers – Bub Means/WR/Pittsburgh

[BrewerFan]

On 3/28/2024 at 1:19 PM, Joseph Zarr said:

Move TE continues to be a sneaky 'need' for the Packers. I said this in my draft thinking previously and this was before Deguara departing for Jax. I continue to feel they grab an H-Back type prospect somewhere in the first 5 rounds. 

I've been banging the drums for Jaheim Bell from FSU. I think he's a nice fit for what they need. They could go with the kid from TCU Wiley. He's not really an H-Back, but he's big, fast and a good blocker or the K-State kid Sinnott, but he seems to be moving up.

Bell has played RB, FB, TE, WR and when he plays WR, he looks like a legit WR tracking balls over the middle and high-pointing them. Could be an incredible weapon. Would have to improve his blocking, but he'd be a major offensive threat in the pass game right now.

[patrickgpe]

On 3/25/2024 at 10:20 AM, reillymcshane said:

NFL draft is one month away. In the latest Mock Draft from the Athletic, they had the Packers trading up to #12 with Denver and selecting CB Quinyon Mitchell of Toledo. 

Packers give up 1st (#25), 2nd (#58), 3rd (#91) and a 7th (#245).

If you're wondering about the draft capital chart values, here's the breakdown:

Packers get: 1st (#12) - 1200 pt value

Denver gets: 

#25 - 720 pts
#58 - 320
#91 - 136
#245 - 1 
TOTAL: 1177 pt value

Of course, that's if you trust the value charts out there. 

Thoughts?

if you do that trade, Quinyon better be an all-pro by year 2. I think by staying the course or by not being so  aggressive, they can fill multiple needs rather than just one. Also I'd look elsewhere at 12, like Latham or Fashanu. 

[BrewerFan]

On 3/29/2024 at 9:01 AM, patrickgpe said:

if you do that trade, Quinyon better be an all-pro by year 2. I think by staying the course or by not being so  aggressive, they can fill multiple needs rather than just one. Also I'd look elsewhere at 12, like Latham or Fashanu. 

Latham would be a good story...the Oak Creek kid drafted to the Packers.

I'm not sure he's worth that trade package either. Fashanu feels a lot like Sewell. A guy who everyone's been talking about, but lost a little bit of the luster as he's been projected so high for so long people start to focus on the negatives.

 I've also seen more questions/negative scouting reports about Alt...so hopefully they keep coming! 

I do agree with you. I could see a 3rd to move up a couple of spots, but unless there is a player who they think is so good, he can change the franchise, they're not giving up that much capital.

[BrewerFan]

By the way, anyone think Joe Milton to GB at ~169 is just a PERFECT fit?

6'5, built like a TE, extremely athletic, has a comically strong arm...and Tom Clement is still in GB. 

I've seen people speculate that we'll hold onto Clifford for another year or two and then flip him like we used to do, but I don't think he's got that type of value. He's a really nice backup, not sure he's the type of guy you'll get much for though. Hope I'm wrong there.

But Joe Milton is a guy who possesses the tools to be a franchise QB and he'd again be in a situation where he can sit and wait. 

 

I know the physical aspect of the sport is a relatively small part of being an elite QB at this level, but Milton has tools that don't come along often and I think it'd be worth it to try and develop him. And hell, he could be used in packages early on in his career. With his size and speed?

If the Packers don't use a pick or 3 to move up or acquire a veteran as Gutey said they were open to doing(or they could do, however he articulated it)...I think he's worth a flier. 

[Matt Breen]

I am fascinated by Notre Dame tackle Joe Alt. 

To get Alt, I'm thinking any team would have to get up to the #6 spot - the Giants - as I've seen often Alt mocked to the Titans at #7.

So, just for fun, here's a proposal:

Packers get 1st (#6) and 4th (#107) from the Giants.

Value breakdown:

#6 = 1600 pts
#107 = 80 pts
Total: 1680 pts

Giants get 1st (#25), 2nd (#41), 2nd (#58) and 3rd (#88) from the Packers.

Value breakdown:

#25 = 720 pts
#41 = 490 pts
#58 = 320 pts
#88 = 150 pts
Total: 1680 pts

If Alt was on the table at #6, would you do this? We would still have a 3rd round pick, plus a pair of 4th rounders, to find some depth. But those are riskier than 2nds and 3rd rounders.

Personally, I don't think the Packers would do it - as they want the extra picks to fill other holes in the roster. 

I'm using the draft value chart found here: https://www.drafttek.com/NFL-Trade-Value-Chart.asp