BrewerFan

LOL...ok...so even if I agree with you, it's 'eh, didn't mean it!' Alright... Yeah...that's my thinking, but if that guy turns out to be an All-Pro who can rush the passer and is a demon vs the run? You would've taken Ray Lewis, right!

Golden is nice also. I think he's underrated. But I like both.

I mentioned Campbell, but that seems unlikely. 3 off-ball in the top 45 in the last 4 years and right after they said they were keeping Quay? But Campbell looks like a safe pick at worst and could be an All-Pro.

That'd be a big outlier pick. You wouldn't be playing him much on 1st or 2nd, but he could probably come in and get 5-6 sacks Yr1. Golden is a 4.29 40 WR who is pretty polished and Johnson is a big CB who...again looked like a top 5 pick after last year. But...Gutekunst did talk about how he'd take a "pass rush specialist" if that guy was special. I'm not sure if that is Pearce in their eyes or not.

I'd be happy with either. I don't see a DT worth taking at this point. Edge...Green? If the Chargers don't take him. Golden is that game breaking speed and there are quite a few CBs we could take in Rd 2.

Ah...that sucks. I hope this isn't like Mitchell where someone jumps us to take him. Harbaugh with the Chargers could take his former CB...but I'm thinking they want to add to their pass rush.

If the Packers go CB, they'll be breaking a trend. Most haven't tested and Barron is doesn't mean their proposed "thresholds" for length. If you would have said at the start of the year the Packers had a chance to draft Will Johnson, I think everyone would have been thrilled. Those 3 Michigan defenders were top 5 on the "way too early" mocks from last year.

Broncos with Hampton. Board is kinda falling how you'd like if you wanted a WR/CB.

Same here... He likely just knew he was going earlier. I thought he left Miami because there was too many "distractions."

I think Will Johnson is coming off the board to Tampa here...hope not, but...he's a great fit.

Seattle with Zabel... That's again pretty early, but he's gonna be an All-Pro...IMO. I loved him for the Packers back when he was being mocked in the ~80 range, but he started really moving up after the Sr. Bowl.

Would you have been opposed to him in the 1st rd? I'm never mad at adding to the OL/DL early on. Seattle goes...Harmon?

Will Johnson available, Barron...who I'm not totally sold on, Harmon, Shemar Stewart. CB will be interesting with so few guys having done all the testing but with really good tape.

Browns fans are losing their minds and that's the best possible move IMO. Hunter is awesome, but he's a smaller dude, so it's risky thinking he'll play 100 snaps. And the Browns, reportedly, viewed him as a WR. He's not worth the #2 pick as a WR. Add that future 1st...not to mention the 2nd and 4th, but that's a great move. The best pick so far(AS a Packers fan) is Loveland to the Bears at 10 when Warren was on the board..if you wanted a TE!

LOL...yeah, it was smart back when they took Zach Martin and...guys like that. They pulled Jerry back from taking too many WR or in that case, Johnny Manziel, but Tyler Booker? He's nice and all, but that's wild. If there's an OL there named Tyron, Tyler, anything close, Jerry's taking him!

I can't believe the Bears just took a TE and ...he wasn't from Penn State. That's a baffling pick to me.

I like the Burch and Williams...I like them a lot better in the 3rd and 4th rds. Williams reminds me of a Craig Newsome type. Just...solid, nothing spectacular.

We definitely need multiple positions. I wasn't arguing that they need to take a CB 1st...though, ideally, you would, but more that you need a CB early and I'd like to see a couple CBs.

It's understood that they WILL be playing those players outside. That's kinda the issue. What I've said...and I feel like this is...really straight forward and "succinct," is that those players, particularly Hobbs, played the majority of their snaps in the slot and he's played much better at slot. He moved outside after a great rookie year in the slot and struggled so they moved him back to the slot. Yeah, we won't be playing them there...but you responded to me replying about drafting Porter, and the TYPE of CBs we should draft and responded with the "lets not pretend we don't have anyone." You guessed right. Played slot. He was one of the top rookies. They moved him outside, he was bad. They then moved him back to the slot. I misspoke. Evan Wiliams out played Bullard. This site has been freezing up on me so I can't go back and read my post. I think Bullard was fine as a traditional safety. He was developing, but Williams came in and played *GREAT* and now there's now...Bullard will either play Slot or a 3rd safety. But the safeties are set, it's McKinney and Williams. As simply as I can say this...MLF hired Hafley because he wanted a more aggressive defense. 1-The post you replied to with me "pretending" we had no depth, it wasn't about the DEPTH we have as LouisEly had the Packers drafting 2 CBs in the top 4 picks, it was about the type of players the Packers will look for at Cornerback. 2-I don't think they're going to look at a guy who started one year and played virtually no press coverage and is not comfortable in press. That's the point I'm making. That was the only real point I'm making...though it's obviously relevant when our CB depth chart at the moment, regardless of where they PLAN on playing guys, goes 4 deep with one of them being a safety and then...and I don't even know why this is a part of the debate, but 2 of the other 3 who have played mostly in the slot. That's not opinion, that's just a fact. It's also just true that they've both graded out higher at slot, particularly Hobbs. So AGAIN, that doesn't mean they have to take a CB at #23. It does mean that's the weakest position on the team at the moment and IF you're going to use a pick on that player high in the draft, it'd make sense that you'd want a player who fits your scheme, right? As I said originally, maybe they think they can coach Porter to play more aggressively, but I didn't agree that they could draft a CB high, that they prefer to play zone and then as a result, draft a zone CB high and then let him develop for a year. You're one injury away from a player who was cut off a 90 man roster from getting snaps. Maybe that player will be Tramon Williams I guess...

That'd be a very nice draft...I just wonder what they'd do with Ersery and Wright. Kick Wright over to the left side? He seems like a better fit at LT than Ersery. Judkins is a stud, Sa'Vion Jones is a good fit in that defense. Felton would give them a good, young WR with size and speed. I'm guessing they're going Will Campbell if he's there or going a little harder after OL overall, but...interesting draft. Really hate seeing the Bears and Lions both having competent front offices. It's just been the Packers and Vikings for a while now.

So we're trading down with KC and then trading up for...Caleb Rogers? Assuming Doubs and Jaire are on the block, where do you think those picks end up? Dallas is apparently high on Doubs. Maybe a swap of 2nd rd picks and one of Dallas' many later picks? Is that a bit too ambitious? Jaire, Cincy seems like a good fit. They've got a pick at...153. I'm not sure we can ask for much more unless we take on some of his salary. This would be much easier with Jaire back. Any thoughts on Slater from Sacramento St or Cornelius? Former Wisconsin OL have surprised me before, I am with you on the Logan Brown sentiment, but...I get the impression it's less about the specific player there than the position. Again, love Buchanan. I think he fits a role on this team very well. I'm still about...50% sure the Packers take a "WTH" pick in Rd1. If Mykel Williams is on the board, is he the pick?

Opinion? That Hobbs and Nixon have played the majority of their time in the slot and that's where they played their best or that CB is a need? I guess we'll find out if the Packers believe that or not based on the draft. As for being better in the slot or outside...I'm just going off past performance. If the Packers don't believe that Hobbs can play outside, that'd be...well, just one of the worst signings they've made in a while. They provide a floor... I didn't rail against the signing of Hobbs, but you're responding to me making the argument the Packers have very little depth at CB, particularly on the boundary. I also don't really think there's much...if any history supporting Hobbs being very good outside of the slot. After a breakout rookie year, he moved to the slot and played very poorly there...so the Raiders moved him back. Did he? He looked pretty solid as a traditional safety...playing the run, playing over the top...but Evan Williams **Took his job and Bullard played worse. I would certainly hope they'd give their 2nd round pick more time, but his coverage in the slot last year was...bad. I would certainly think they expect more out of him, but he didn't play well in the slot. "he played 361 snaps in the slot, he allowed a high completion percentage (84.2%) against him, resulting in a 2024 rookie ranking of 27th among defensive backs." I would certainly think they expect more out of him, but he didn't play well in the slot. Over 8 out of 10 passes when he was in coverage were completed. Could be they brought in Hobbs as some protection in the event Bullard doesn't improve...or they just missed out on the top options. I do disagree that they paid him too much to play slot. 4/48, 16M SB is not hardly out of line for a slot corner in the modern NFL. Ok... well, I went position by position and we have more depth at DE, DT and WR. It's not a ringing endorsement of the depth we have there, I just think it says more about the CB depth we have. As for when they draft a CB, I'd hope they don't draft one at 23 just because it's a need, but I think that position is there biggest hole. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

It makes it tough when they don't clearly articulate how they arrive at those grades. They also just don't know the coverage being called at times so they can't know who is responsible. AS for Valentine, I'd agree he looked better as a rookie, but I also wonder how much of that was just him getting beat because the pass rush wasn't getting home? If you leave him in man and the QB has 3-4 seconds, even the best CBs are going to give up big plays. You can get by with mediocre CB play like the Vikings have if you are getting after the QB and forcing the ball out quickly. We didn't do that a whole lot. Some positions are easier to grade than others. I would think CB would be among the toughest. One more thing about the CB rankings...obviously Hunter is #1, but what are your thoughts on the Browns looking at him as a WR who occasionally plays DB...which seems appropriately backwards for the Browns. I'd give him a few snaps at WR, but have him play CB...but that's why they're picking 2nd....

The CB rankings look...almost perfect...IMO. It's just too hard to nail these guys down without the testing. Barron isn't an ideal fit...he's shorter, but he's just physical and tough. Jaire wasn't a questionable fit as well and despite the situation we're currently in, that was a great pick. The Packers are going to likely have to break some trends. Barron's length, Hairston size, most of these guys didn't do the agility. So they'll have to lean heavily on the tape which favors...IMO, Johnson, Morrison and Revel or they just overlook Barron's length and take him should he fall. Johnson falling like Mitchell would be ideal, Thomas in the 2nd rd of a trade down would be great(either or) and then Williams in the 4th. I don't think he's a star, but I think he could step in and play right away and be a very good all-around player. I think for what they paid Hobbs, Paulson Adebo or DJ Reed seemed like...the most obvious fits. Reed got 3/48M and Adebo got 3/54.. I wonder if the Packers insistence on not handing out guaranteed money beyond the SB hurts them? It seems odd to me they wouldn't pay more for either of those guys...OR maybe they are going to play more of a zone heavy Cover3 like SF does or Seattle did? They want CBs who can come up and play the run and make the tackles in front of them? Or maybe they just tried and those guys wanted to be in New York and Detroit respectively. Hard to say, but Hobbs was a little bit of an odd choice knowing you wanted to move on from Jaire. As for other players, I've watched more Golden and Egbuka. Golden reminds me of a JSN type WR but he has that top end speed. He's pretty smooth and complete. Egbuka...I went back and watched him as well. I think some of these guys you just see for so many years, maybe I'm underrating him, but I would be a lot better with him at #23 than I would have been a couple weeks ago. Especially if you're talking about trading Doubs(which has been rumored). I think both can come in and play at a relatively high level year 1(as opposed to a guy like Thornton from Tennessee who I like, but in a far more limited role early on). I completely agree with this take though...and even did a little silly mock draft. Totally pointless as it gives you WAY too much to trade back, but you can easily go through and eliminate like 4 picks where I got a little redundant, but the top of the draft is how I'd like the Packers draft to look and just a general idea in the middle rds. One big dark horse I have is Jackson Slater, an IOL from little Sacramento State. In this little exercise he was gone in the top 100 which is unlikely, but he's an athlete and he's a really physical player who can slide in and contribute earlier. I also just want to be covered on the OL in case...Morgan doesn't become a really good LT(don't want to pay Walker with those knees). I actually have no positive opinion of Williams from UT, but I wanted to add an OT...which I guess the Oregon kid is, but you can erase that pick as we're not getting that many for trading down(I don't think). Same with Slater, Frazier...Cornelius. I think we'll take 3 if we add picks, but not 4 OL and I have 5(albeit one who won't play this year). Also, just bring in competition. Jenkins is due 20M last year and you don't know how the transition will go(and I don't think he's been the same since the ACL). As for the more...realistic picks.... I went Hairston over Thomas at CB. I may go the other way due to the physical style of play with Thomas. I think Nohl Williams can also play snaps Yr1. I think he's a ballhawk and probably best in press but solid playing zone and a Ball Hawk. Still...a fit. I would love this if they kept Jaire and got a healthy season out of him, but I think this would help solve the depth issue. Plus, we have elite Safety play behind them. DT-Grant and Farmer replace Slaton and then MAYBE help to replace Clark...who is out of GTD money after this year and declined pretty badly last year. I also really like the kid from Toledo, Alexander, but he's got a little too much helium on these mocks. I don't think he's a 1st or 2nd rd pick. Landon Jackson reminds me...a LITTLE of Arik Armstead. He's long, athletic. I think he could also kick inside and play DT in the sub. Jayden Higgins, I love Thornton, but Higgins is a potential #1 WR and he's a big body. After that, if you could give me 2 of the IOL and Cornelius, I'd be thrilled. LB, the kid from Cal is an athlete who can be a demon on STs and help vs the run right away and be an impact between Quay and Cooper long term. Same with Kobe King...who I think goes around the same time, not a late day 3 pick. But the main theme is last year we went with kinda secondary positions. LB, Safety, RB with our 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th pick in the top ~95. We need to hit those premium positions and Gutekunst has said there's more talent later in this draft than normal AND they were older. That may suggest we see a slightly different approach and more guys who wouldn't "fit" the Packers parameters in the past. But I'd definitely like to see an extra day 2 pick and a couple extra day 3 picks to move down ~20 spots and add more talent IF there isn't a guy like Johnson, maybe Stewart, Bolden available. I also think we'll end up with a couple extra as I think we deal a couple guys. Doubs and Ja. Doubs could net us a 4th rd pick from Dallas perhaps? Ja, I have no idea. I wonder if there's any thought to taking on some of his contract, eating some dead money to get a better pick? Maybe 6M we turn into a bonus and maybe we get back a 3rd? More dead money, but could be worth it in this draft.

I am definitely saying the part in bold. We have a big need at CB with Jaire moving. To respond to the part underlined, I'm pointing out that is where 2 of the 3 CBs we have on the roster who have played, have played the vast majority of the time in the NFL and where they have played at their best. Those are just two things that are true. So if we draft a CB in the first two Rds, I'd expect him to play a lot in the first year, to play outside and to be capable of playing the style of Football they've both(MLF, Hafley) have repeatedly said they'd like to play...