I want 2 edge rushers in this draft

[PACKRULE]

15 hours ago, jleisher said:

Not good, he was hurt.  I can see one each DL, ILB and Edge, but not two.  Example, Wilson ILB, Z. Allen DL, Crosby Edge, rds 2, 3 and 4.  We can agree to disagree on two edge picks.

I think my point was missed is he wouldn't have had to play great with that D. If he plays for that D last year they go further and or are a SB fave. Of the 4 teams left every year how many have top 10 or 5 scoring D's?? Just my take but investing in the D with stud players that will be cheap for a few years is great when the Smiths come off the books we have their money waiting for them.

Add to that in our past when we are a top contender or SB winner our D has been top5-10. Number 1 in 96 and what number 5 in 2010?

Edited April 17, 2019 by PACKRULE

[jleisher]

8 hours ago, PACKRULE said:

I think my point was missed is he wouldn't have had to play great with that D. If he plays for that D last year they go further and or are a SB fave. Of the 4 teams left every year how many have top 10 or 5 scoring D's?? Just my take but investing in the D with stud players that will be cheap for a few years is great when the Smiths come off the books we have their money waiting for them.

Add to that in our past when we are a top contender or SB winner our D has been top5-10. Number 1 in 96 and what number 5 in 2010?

I see your point, and agree with the facts on the defense rankings during our Super Bowl days.  However, I think we need to provide protection for Rodgers, which means some top OL picks and we need a TE and another RB.  They can't just focus on defense alone.

[PACKRULE]

2 minutes ago, jleisher said:

I see your point, and agree with the facts on the defense rankings during our Super Bowl days.  However, I think we need to provide protection for Rodgers, which means some top OL picks and we need a TE and another RB.  They can't just focus on defense alone.

I can be on board with what you’re saying and agree. I beg for those 2 firsts to be on D though heck even 44

[Cadmus]

How do we have room for multiple OL selections in an already very crowded room?

You already have at least 12 OL that have a legitimate shot to make the final roster. 

How many guards and centers have we been connected to thus far?

Edited April 17, 2019 by Cadmus

[jleisher]

21 hours ago, MantyWrestler said:

The reason I’d be ok with 2 Edge is that this is such a good class for them. That said I’d live an edge and DL with 2 of the first 3 picks to go with a FS. 

Free agency got us a nice Player along with Madison for either IOL or backup RT. Also got a nice SS. Last years WR should all improve giving us some nice options there. MLF like well rounded TE’s which we can find from 3-5 round. Think we’ll do fine with drafting DL and EDGE.

This plus Daniels and Lowery are up for contracts next year plus we should extend Clark. 

Lowery should be a cheap resign.  Daniels, isn't playing up to his contract.  The Packers need talent on both side of the ball, IMO it doesn't make sense to double down on a position you doubled down on in FA.  

[jleisher]

2 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

I can be on board with what you’re saying and agree. I beg for those 2 firsts to be on D though heck even 44

I can see one edge LB and one DL selections within the first 4 rounds, but I wouldn't lock myself into a round or number.  IMO, even with Madison coming back, OL is a need.  Will be interesting to see how the board falls.  

[Cadmus]

1 minute ago, jleisher said:

Lowery should be a cheap resign.  Daniels, isn't playing up to his contract.  The Packers need talent on both side of the ball, IMO it doesn't make sense to double down on a position you doubled down on in FA.  

It does when you consider 1] How Za'Darius has been used in the past/will be used during the upcoming season (Do you believe that Green Bay honestly signed him to a fat contract to use him in a completely different manner than BAL did?) , 2] This is likely the final year for Fackrell in GB, and 3] This is the most talented EDGE class in years. 

[jleisher]

1 minute ago, Cadmus said:

It does when you consider 1] How Za'Darius has been used in the past/will be used during the upcoming season (Do you believe that Green Bay honestly signed him to a fat contract to use him in a completely different manner than BAL did?) , 2] This is likely the final year for Fackrell in GB, and 3] This is the most talented EDGE class in years. 

I can agree with everything you and the others are stating, I understand the argument.  If the board falls to the point that the BPA is an Edge in the lower rounds, then I might be able to live with that selection.   Just like Lowry, Fackrell isn't going to be a expensive resign if the Packers want him back.  IMO, they just can't ignore other positions, whether it's OL, TE, RB or ILB.

[Cadmus]

Just now, jleisher said:

I can agree with everything you and the others are stating, I understand the argument.  If the board falls to the point that the BPA is an Edge in the lower rounds, then I might be able to live with that selection.   Just like Lowry, Fackrell isn't going to be a expensive resign if the Packers want him back.  IMO, they just can't ignore other positions, whether it's OL, TE, RB or ILB.

The UDFA RBs class will be fantastic this year, I'm not sure you need to spend a DP on one unless you really like a player as a potential 3-Down RB or an OW. 

Even if you draft an OL, TE, ILB, and 2 S. You still have five selections left... just think the strength of the class will dictate at least two EDGEs based on value. 

[AlexGreen#20]

2 minutes ago, Cadmus said:

The UDFA RBs class will be fantastic this year, I'm not sure you need to spend a DP on one unless you really like a player as a potential 3-Down RB or an OW. 

Even if you draft an OL, TE, ILB, and 2 S. You still have five selections left... just think the strength of the class will dictate at least two EDGEs based on value. 

Realistically you get three shots at a premium in rounds 1 and 2. If you're lucky, one will hit into an average to plus player.

Then you get a handful of shots at the non premiums in rounds 3-5. If you're lucky, one will hit into an average to plus player.

Then your late round picks are just lottery tickets.

You can't go into the draft thinking you're going to plug gaps with fifth round picks.

[Cadmus]

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

Realistically you get three shots at a premium in rounds 1 and 2. If you're lucky, one will hit into an average to plus player.

Then you get a handful of shots at the non premiums in rounds 3-5. If you're lucky, one will hit into an average to plus player.

Then your late round picks are just lottery tickets.

Fully aware. 

I'm not sure if you're attempting to explain this to me or the board as a whole?

Your response doesn't really make sense to me based on what I typed, I guess that's why I'm confused. 

[MantyWrestler]

29 minutes ago, jleisher said:

I can agree with everything you and the others are stating, I understand the argument.  If the board falls to the point that the BPA is an Edge in the lower rounds, then I might be able to live with that selection.   Just like Lowry, Fackrell isn't going to be a expensive resign if the Packers want him back.  IMO, they just can't ignore other positions, whether it's OL, TE, RB or ILB.

Well, no RB is worth 12 IMO. MAYBE 30. OL? I’d hear that argument too but Madison and the other dude, who’s name escapes me, should help a ton on the line. TE, I feel what MLF wants he can get in round 3-5. ILB, I wouldn’t touch that high unless I was loaded everywhere else. 

Real reason for me is the class is so good for EDGE. Even so I agree as well, id look at EDGE and then DL or FS but wouldn’t be upset to see 2 edge in the first 3 picks although it would handcuff is a little in hitting all the needs. 

[cannondale]

Just from a numbers standpoint alone I could see 2 Safeties drafted minimum

[vegas492]

15 hours ago, jleisher said:

I can agree with everything you and the others are stating, I understand the argument.  If the board falls to the point that the BPA is an Edge in the lower rounds, then I might be able to live with that selection.   Just like Lowry, Fackrell isn't going to be a expensive resign if the Packers want him back.  IMO, they just can't ignore other positions, whether it's OL, TE, RB or ILB.

I think the bolded part is wishful thinking.  10.5 sacks last year.  He's gonna get plenty of snaps and opportunity this year.  If he can manage even 5 sacks, he is going to line himself up a nice "Smith" like payday.  And it shouldn't be from GB.

Low end, let's say he gets 2 sacks, what is that worth?  My guess?  More than what GB will be willing to pay him.

HIgh end, let's say he gets 9 sacks, what is that worth?  My guess?  Waaaay more than what GB will be willing to pay him.

He is kind of in "no man's land" in terms of a GB contract.  

[cannondale]

"Insert name here" isn't going to be expensive to re-sign is all relative to how much cap is available and what other teams are stupidly willing to offer. We've seen other teams make stupid offers time and time again. Sitton, Lang, Burnett, etc etc. Also, everyone who isn't a scrub, and looking for a second contract is gonna be expensive. Gonna have to start thinking about handing Clark 100 million. The biggest thing for me is the need to start getting productive players on rookie deals, ie stop drafting like poop. You can't survive with entire draft classes busting. We can't spend 180 million in FA every year. Graham, Daniels and Bulaga are coming off the books next year, but we are up against the cap already. Some fringe guys that would be nice to keep are gonna find more money elsewhere.

Edited April 18, 2019 by cannondale