Fl0nkerton Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cakeshoppe Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 2 minutes ago, JaireAlex said: So has every late (in the know) mock draft. This is sophistry. Do you have a standard for which mocks are "in the know" other than that they agree with you? You use the fact that someone agrees with you as evidence of their rightness and then go and turn around and use their stances as evidence to support your own. I don't watch College football, I don't know the first thing about draft prospects, and I don't pretend to. But I know a bad argument when I see one, and this is one of several of these rhetorical tools you use over and over that are just fallacious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 30 minutes ago, Outpost31 said: 1. Murray 2. Bosa 3. Haskins (projected trade) 4. Q. Williams 5. White 6. Oliver 7. Taylor 8. Bush/Hockenson 9. Jonah Williams/DK Metcalf 10. Daniel Jones 11. Bush/Hockenson/Metcalf/Dillard I see the third pick as the pick that will determine whether or not we get Ed Oliver or Josh Allen. It would be awesome to get a shot at one of those two, but if the Jets trade, I don't see them trading out of the top 11. The cost to move up that far is too expensive and they will want to make sure they get one of the 6-7 elite players in the draft that are not QBs. I could see someone within the top 8 moving up to get Oliver or Allen. Drew Lock might go before all of the QB's not named Murray, assuming he's still the pick at #1. I really don't see us having any realistic shot at Allen or Oliver at 12. Wishful thinking IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fistfullofbeer Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 3 minutes ago, cannondale said: Did McGinn come out with a mock ? Yeah. Looks like its up there. He has us taking Jeffrey Simmons at 12 (which he calls controversial himself) and Juan Thornhill at 30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PackFan4Life Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 I would be shocked in the pick at 12 is offense. I think the Pack would trade back if the defensive players they like at 12 are gone. I do not think they take Dillard- I think they trade down. Dillard is too much LT only and they already have their LT in his prime. I cannot see them taking a LT only that would be a back up at 12 this year in the draft. At 30? Yes. But I think we all agree it would be if Dillard falls to 30. Based on the offseason and comments from MLF- I think they want offensive linemen with versatility. That is why I think they want Jonah in a trade down if it is offense. I am hoping for a special defensive player if they stay put at 12, and if that special D player is not there, I think they trade back at 12. I keep thinking this is going to be a very offensive oriented draft for the Pack after 12 outside picking up S prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBitzMan Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 4 minutes ago, cannondale said: Did McGinn come out with a mock ? He has Simmons at 12 and Thornhill at 30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
festiveonion Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Just now, TheBitzMan said: He has Simmons at 12 and Thornhill at 30 Theres like 5 Safeties I would be happier with at 30 than Thornhill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
festiveonion Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Hey I'm new to this forum When's an appropriate time to start drinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadmus Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 5 minutes ago, JaireAlex said: Don't worry. Everyone at Huddle report has taken Burns off the Pack pick at 12. (Several had him before, none in the final mocks.) So has every late (in the know) mock draft. I guarantee he's not on the GB board there. Yes, a Mock Draft site that has 6 separate mocks drafts all with Burns going no later than #21 means that Burns definitely won't be on Green Bay's draft board. What the hell did I just read? Rotoworld (Norris), CBSsports and DraftAces all have Burns going to Green Bay. Daniel Jeremiah has Burns going #11 to Cincy in his final mock. Just because you want something to be true, doesn't make it a fact. Also, mock drafts don't mean diddly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadmus Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 7 minutes ago, cannondale said: Did McGinn come out with a mock ? Yes. He gave us Simmons and Thornhill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PackFan4Life Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, festiveonion said: Theres like 5 Safeties I would be happier with at 30 than Thornhill I would love Thornhill but not really at 30. The measurables and production are there - very good S prospect IMO. Not very many S prospects have his INT numbers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Thanks guys ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaireAlex Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Cakeshoppe said: This is sophistry. Do you have a standard for which mocks are "in the know" other than that they agree with you? You use the fact that someone agrees with you as evidence of their rightness and then go and turn around and use their stances as evidence to support your own. I don't watch College football, I don't know the first thing about draft prospects, and I don't pretend to. But I know a bad argument when I see one, and this is one of several of these rhetorical tools you use over and over that are just fallacious. Peter King knows a lot more than he says. His mock has DL going early. He has the DL rising. Now there's talk that Atlanta could move up for Wilkins, Oliver gone early. Some local reporters have great beads on whom their teams are targeting. Teams scour all the reports at the last hour and make bids to jump and get their guys. Gosselin is gone. But some guys know what's up. I think Pauline and McGinn have a very solid record on who the Pack likes. If they don't get players right (often true enough), they get the positions right. But it really seems that there is a frenzy for the top OL and top DL. Lots of teams cool (ie. not thrilled) on the edge class at top. Anyways, Gute has a plan for all contingencies. They will come away with a solid DT or OL in round one, maybe two if things fall right. That's how I read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 Just now, Cadmus said: Yes. He gave us Simmons and Thornhill. I'd be happy with that score. Be nice to pick up Simmons on a trade back. #12 is high for a guy who won't play this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted April 25, 2019 Share Posted April 25, 2019 1 minute ago, Scoremore said: I'd be happy with that score. Be nice to pick up Simmons on a trade back. #12 is high for a guy who won't play this year. So where is his exact value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts