2019 Draft Discussion

[Norm]

1 hour ago, PossibleCabbage said:

I mean the reason he fell from a projected high/mid first round pick was precisely because he was deemed to not be a stable, responsible, reliable individual... which might have had something to do with his recreational choices too.  Like this was a guy who stood up at the combine and talked about how he could play all 11 positions on the defense better than anybody else.  It's conceivable his overestimation of his own abilities got harshly confronted with the aforementioned accident.

I would have traded up to one to take him if I saw him say that

[JaireAlex]

1 hour ago, Leader said:

I've not made any sort of analytical study of this......but in a general sense I considered GB & SEA would be fishing in similar waters for TE and FS. So having them just ahead us at 29.......I dont know, but could lead to some leap frogging at the end of Round 1. Ultimately it will depend on how the GB/SEA boards mesh and who we/they want when. We shall see.

 

I think we have very different boards at both safety and TE from Seattle. There's like  ten similar grade safeties in this draft but very different fits. Most teams will get a guy they like. As to TE, the good value will be roud 3-4 with a lot of guys there. I don't see anyone worth a two, except Hock and he's going to go a lot higher. We have two starters next year, we need development.

[Arthur Penske]

Some scout (brief) takes on Packers safeties and those in the draft 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/23/its-safety-first-packers-when-looking-plug-roster-gaps/3502581002/

[James Lofton]

Here's what my dream draft would look like:

1) edge rusher who teams have to scheme against and still manages to get double digit sacks  -- to me that's either Sweat or Burns.

2) A fast safety who can cover deep - ideally Juan Thornhill or Darnell Savage.

3) A right tackle of the future

I'm not overly concerned about getting a top shelf TE or WR or CB or RB or QB

 

[OneTwoSixFive]

Jacksonville makes the Packers a draft trade deal, BUT they have to finalise the swap before draft day.

Question: Would you trade the Packers second rounder (#44 worth 460 points on the J.J. chart) and their second, round 4 pick (#118 worth 58), for Jax's 38th pick (worth 520 points).

I think I probably would do it, but it's a tough choice when you don't know who will be on the board. Every year I end up wanting a high 2nd rounder because there always seem to be prospects i like, that are projected to go there

[rcon14]

Just now, OneTwoSixFive said:

Jacksonville makes the Packers a draft trade deal, BUT they have to finalise the swap before draft day.

Question: Would you trade the Packers second rounder (#44 worth 460 points on the J.J. chart) and their second, round 4 pick (#118 worth 58), for Jax's 38th pick (worth 520 points).

I think I probably would do it, but it's a tough choice when you don't know who will be on the board. Every year I end up wanting a high 2nd rounder because there always seem to be prospects i like, that are projected to go there

fwiw on the Rich Hill TVC, the trade looks like this:

GB receives: 157
JAX receives: 158

So it seems like a fair deal from that perspective. Again, it's tough to say w/o knowing what the board looks like. I'd be inclined to say no in a vacuum because I generally don't value moving up all that highly.

[incognito_man]

16 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Some scout (brief) takes on Packers safeties and those in the draft 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/23/its-safety-first-packers-when-looking-plug-roster-gaps/3502581002/

Can't help but think Pettine loves Taylor Rapp.

[James Lofton]

30 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Some scout (brief) takes on Packers safeties and those in the draft 

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2019/04/23/its-safety-first-packers-when-looking-plug-roster-gaps/3502581002/

Can someone explain to me why the article doesn't even include Darnell Savage, S, Maryland? Is it because he's only 5'11"? He's fast. Seems like he could be a descent free safety to me, which is when we really need.

[Scoremore]

19 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Jacksonville makes the Packers a draft trade deal, BUT they have to finalise the swap before draft day.

Question: Would you trade the Packers second rounder (#44 worth 460 points on the J.J. chart) and their second, round 4 pick (#118 worth 58), for Jax's 38th pick (worth 520 points).

I think I probably would do it, but it's a tough choice when you don't know who will be on the board. Every year I end up wanting a high 2nd rounder because there always seem to be prospects i like, that are projected to go there

Maybe a fair trade but I'd sit back and let the draft fall.  Wouldn't want to give up a 4th to move up 6 spots in the second round.

[Fl0nkerton]

1 minute ago, James Lofton said:

Can someone explain to me why the article doesn't even include Darnell Savage, S, Maryland? Is it because he's only 5'11"? He's fast. Seems like he could be a descent free safety to me, which is when we really need.

It's honestly a pretty dumb article with little new information, so that would be why. Just something they threw together to get clicks before Thursday.

[Arthur Penske]

17 minutes ago, James Lofton said:

Can someone explain to me why the article doesn't even include Darnell Savage, S, Maryland? Is it because he's only 5'11"? He's fast. Seems like he could be a descent free safety to me, which is when we really need.

I wondered that too.

14 minutes ago, Fl0nkerton said:

It's honestly a pretty dumb article with little new information, so that would be why. Just something they threw together to get clicks before Thursday.

Eh, I agree but I'd rather read that than some opinion piece by a beat writer who dosen't really know anything about evaluating football players. 

[Fl0nkerton]

3 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

I wondered that too.

Eh, I agree but I'd rather read that than some opinion piece by a beat writer who dosen't really know anything about evaluating football players. 

This is true. I wasn't trying to **** on your link lol. Sorry if it came across that way.

[Arthur Penske]

4 minutes ago, Fl0nkerton said:

This is true. I wasn't trying to **** on your link lol. Sorry if it came across that way.

No biggy. I get it.

As much as I really don't agree with McGinn and think he's kind of a grumpy old man at this point, at least he tries to incorporate football talk in there with "his scouts" instead of me reading Pete Daugherty's opinion column on who they should draft, when I'd probably rather listen to who FF people think we should draft. Or Maybe Ryan Wood die on the sword of wins are a QB stat.

Many of the beat writers just pander to the TT/ Justin Harrell level haters.

[Leader]

1 hour ago, JaireAlex said:

I think we have very different boards at both safety and TE from Seattle. There's like  ten similar grade safeties in this draft but very different fits. Most teams will get a guy they like. As to TE, the good value will be roud 3-4 with a lot of guys there. I don't see anyone worth a two, except Hock and he's going to go a lot higher. We have two starters next year, we need development.

Well, thats subjective. Understand and respect the opinion, but we might need a bit more than that going forward - starting this year - not next year.

Although we have Graham, Lewis, Tonyan (and some guy named Baylis) on the roster at the moment - based on last years offense, we functionally have one TE.

Interestingly, Spotrac has Tonyan listed as a WR - that not with standing - no one other than Graham is expendable for the 2019 roster and going forward. I know Tonyan has been working out with Kittles - so high hopes can be placed there - but again, based on the past - its a position in need of upgrading.

Now - the addition of MLF may change the character of those players roles. Could be. But, adding a top line TE this year wouldnt be a reach at all IMO. Our offense could more than use the infusion of positional talent. 

Now - be that a top line guy to get field time this year and produce - versus - a Sternberger, Warring, Raymond, Dox......and such. That would be up to Gute in conference with MLF but a top guy's gonna cost us more than a Round 2 draft pick.

I'd personally like Burns at 12. Thats clear - so that makes that 30th pick all sorts of interesting IMO. Who (of the perceived top talents) is gonna last till then - and what (if anything) will we do to get them. Only time will tell at this juncture.

[PossibleCabbage]

53 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Can't help but think Pettine loves Taylor Rapp.

I mean, it's possible he's great but I really hope they don't take him just because that 40 time is going to haunt me and if he's bad, people are going to crow about it forever.  So I really hope they take someone else, or someone else takes Rapp first.