2022 NFL Draft Thread

[ThatJerkDave]

10 hours ago, Sandy said:

I'm not questioning the existence of positional guidelines...I'd just point out that it's not impossible that Gute has evaluated things a bit differently at WR since MLF got there running this offense. Different needs for a different playbook.  And we haven't had enough recent history to know what they are.

I'd just expect to have a GM who can adapt his approach over the years and possess nuance with the types of players targeted at each position.

There have been two total outliers though.  Rico Gafford, and Randall Cobb As far as I can tell the only guys that weren't either at least 6'2 or over 200 lbs.  

Gute WRs:

MVS:  6'4 206

EQ:  6'5 214

J'Mon:  6'3 205

Begelton:  6'0 200

Winfree:  6'3 215

Malik Taylor:  6'1 220

Malik Turner:  6'2 200

Chris Blair:  6'2 198

Funchess:  6'4 225

Amari Rodgers:  5'9 212

Randall Cobb:  5'10 195

Rico Gafford: 5'10 184

 

That is all I can recall.  But there is definitely a type.

[R T]

30 minutes ago, craig said:

Some obvious thoughts, all obvious:

1. Gute isn't going to camp with Cobb, Lazard, Amari, 3rd-day picks, and PS/UDFA's.  He's going to add in some more costly ways.  Duh.
2. Gute tries to avoid urgent needs that get in the way of BPA drafting.  He's done that very well already.  WR is perhaps the only super-urgent spot, thus all the discussion; but we all expect he'll add somebody, MVS-caliber or perhaps better.
3. His draft picks have often factored need (both short-term and long.). They needed a safety, they drafted Savage.  Needed corner, drafted Jaire.  Needed center, drafted Myers.  Needed TE, drafted Jace.  Needed a coverage LB, drafted Burks.  
4. In those cases BPA was not violated; they drafted guys who had the talent to merit where they were taken.  
5. BPA doesn't always meet need.  In those cases, Gute goes BPA and lets needs slide.  I think that's partly why DL is where it is, likewise WR.  
6. BPA and need can be made to match via trade, and Gute has been very active in making that happen.  He traded to get to Jaire.  He traded for Savage.  He traded for Love.  He also traded for Amari and for Burks.  
7. Gute uses perceived-BPA, not retrospective or omniscient BPA.  He perceived that Burks and Jace were BPA.  Oops!  He perceived that Amari and Love were BPA; perhaps those may prove "oops".  But even in the "oops", I don't think perceived-BPA principles were violated.   

All obvious but still amazing how many people don't get it. He is aggressive in trading around to get the players he wants, but when there is no trade and it is his time to select he is taking the BPA on his board regardless of position. After it is over many will justify picks as 'that was a need' but in the end a player of some position is selected and it may be in line with what some think is a need. The Packers very seldom ever go into a draft with 'a need', they have wants, seldom needs. This year won't be any different.    

[vegas492]

14 hours ago, packfanfb said:

Lol, Jeremiah's live Mock on NFL Network just had go back to back with Olave and Dotson in Rd 1. Media is desperate for us to get some WRs. 

That really a bad thing for those guys back to back?  I don't know who was available, but doing that instantly bolsters the WR room now, and when they hit their prime, it could be that they make an inexperienced QB look pretty good.

Guess what I'm saying is....nothing would shock me in this draft from GB.

Part of me is hoping we trade one of those first rounders for a future first rounder and pick in this year's draft.  Could give us ammunition to move up for an "alpha" WR in next year's draft, if there is one.

[MaximusGluteus]

Just now, R T said:

All obvious but still amazing how many people don't get it. He is aggressive in trading around to get the players he wants, but when there is no trade and it is his time to select he is taking the BPA on his board regardless of position. After it is over many will justify picks as 'that was a need' but in the end a player of some position is selected and it may be in line with what some think is a need. The Packers very seldom ever go into a draft with 'a need', they have wants, seldom needs. This year won't be any different.    

Watch everyone's heads explode when Gute drafts another RB in the early to mid rounds.

[pacman5252]

1 minute ago, vegas492 said:

That really a bad thing for those guys back to back?  I don't know who was available, but doing that instantly bolsters the WR room now, and when they hit their prime, it could be that they make an inexperienced QB look pretty good.

Guess what I'm saying is....nothing would shock me in this draft from GB.

Part of me is hoping we trade one of those first rounders for a future first rounder and pick in this year's draft.  Could give us ammunition to move up for an "alpha" WR in next year's draft, if there is one.

I would personally love those 2 back to back.

[beekay414]

Lotta people are going to be pissed when we take a EDGE/DB and OL in the 1st lol.

[packfanfb]

5 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

That really a bad thing for those guys back to back?  I don't know who was available, but doing that instantly bolsters the WR room now, and when they hit their prime, it could be that they make an inexperienced QB look pretty good.

Guess what I'm saying is....nothing would shock me in this draft from GB.

Part of me is hoping we trade one of those first rounders for a future first rounder and pick in this year's draft.  Could give us ammunition to move up for an "alpha" WR in next year's draft, if there is one.

I mean, I'd be happy, but several people on this forum would have to be committed after losing their minds if we went back to back on WRs in the 1st. 

[vegas492]

2 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Lotta people are going to be pissed when we take a EDGE/DB and OL in the 1st lol.

Nothing GB does in the draft is going to make me be pissed off.

Nothing GB does in the draft is going to make me be pissed off.

Nothing GB does in the draft is going to make me be pissed off.

This is my mantra.  Hold me to it.

[Leader]

4 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Lotta people are going to be pissed when we take a EDGE/DB and OL in the 1st lol.

Now, now "Mr. We're gonna draft Love" - put those tea leaves away

[beekay414]

Just now, Leader said:

Now, now "Mr. We're gonna draft Love" - put those tea leaves away

Don't say I didn't tell you! 

[Leader]

Just now, beekay414 said:

Don't say I didn't tell you! 

I never heard of you before

[craig]

I've mentioned this in other threads, without getting much feedback.  But what do you think about the Chandon Sullivan spot?  I don't know how to think about it. 

1. Part of me says that with our two safeties and our three corners, we've got our best five for nickel, so we're good, other than improving depth.  If healthy, we could have an elite nickel group.  Add some depth via PS, and perhaps where it comes to you in the draft. 
2. But part of me says that Sullivan has been a >900-snaps guy for a few years.  Are Sullivan's responsibilities what you want Jaire or Stokes doing?  Is that a role in which Rasul would fit well, and Rasul is the plan?  Or is that a role that's a little different, and where we would want to get a replacement of some kind?  
3. If that isn't Rasul's projected role, will we just reshape the defense a little, so that the role isn't needed and the guys we've got can fill it? 
4. Or, do we have PS depth guys who they think are a good fit?  (If so, who?).   
5. Or, is that a role that we'll be drafting for?  And if that's a >900-snaps role, might that perhaps be a variably high pick, if the right guy comes along for BPA?  
6. Is that a role for a "safety" or for a "corner"?  Chandon came from the Corner group, and has played boundary when needed.  But *if* we were to hypothetically be drafting for a possible replacement, would we be looking at the CB group or more the safety prospects?  
7. Or will Chandon end up being resigned, sooner or later?  If so, what kind of price range might you project?
8. I also wonder about depth.  Secondary seems to be a very high-injury-orientation position.  I love our nickel five, but it's perhaps even less likely to go start-to-finish with all five healthy than to expect that of the O-line.  Do we have existing depth/PS guys that are rising and might be capable next-man-up?  Or might this be a non-trivial priority area for Gute in draft, and/or FA?   

[Mazrimiv]

16 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

That really a bad thing for those guys back to back?  I don't know who was available, but doing that instantly bolsters the WR room now, and when they hit their prime, it could be that they make an inexperienced QB look pretty good.

I can't say I expect it to happen, but I would not be at all shocked if GB selected WR's with both of the picks that came back in the Adams trade.  It would make for some fun "which was better" discussions going fwd.

[beekay414]

I could see something like...

22/28. Daxton Hill | CB/S | Michigan
22/28. Tyler Smith | OT | Tulsa
53. Sam Williams | EDGE | Ole Miss
59. Alec Pierce | WR | Cincinnati
92. Jeremy Ruckert | TE | Ohio State or Charlie Kolar | TE | Iowa State

EDIT - Thought more about it. Ross probably doesn't fit due to health concerns and not being a great athlete. Maybe Romeo Doubs there, if he runs well.

Edited March 23, 2022 by beekay414

[R T]

5 minutes ago, craig said:

I've mentioned this in other threads, without getting much feedback.  But what do you think about the Chandon Sullivan spot?  I don't know how to think about it. 

1. Part of me says that with our two safeties and our three corners, we've got our best five for nickel, so we're good, other than improving depth.  If healthy, we could have an elite nickel group.  Add some depth via PS, and perhaps where it comes to you in the draft. 
2. But part of me says that Sullivan has been a >900-snaps guy for a few years.  Are Sullivan's responsibilities what you want Jaire or Stokes doing?  Is that a role in which Rasul would fit well, and Rasul is the plan?  Or is that a role that's a little different, and where we would want to get a replacement of some kind?  
3. If that isn't Rasul's projected role, will we just reshape the defense a little, so that the role isn't needed and the guys we've got can fill it? 
4. Or, do we have PS depth guys who they think are a good fit?  (If so, who?).   
5. Or, is that a role that we'll be drafting for?  And if that's a >900-snaps role, might that perhaps be a variably high pick, if the right guy comes along for BPA?  
6. Is that a role for a "safety" or for a "corner"?  Chandon came from the Corner group, and has played boundary when needed.  But *if* we were to hypothetically be drafting for a possible replacement, would we be looking at the CB group or more the safety prospects?  
7. Or will Chandon end up being resigned, sooner or later?  If so, what kind of price range might you project?
8. I also wonder about depth.  Secondary seems to be a very high-injury-orientation position.  I love our nickel five, but it's perhaps even less likely to go start-to-finish with all five healthy than to expect that of the O-line.  Do we have existing depth/PS guys that are rising and might be capable next-man-up?  Or might this be a non-trivial priority area for Gute in draft, and/or FA?   

Guessing they are ready to move on from Sullivan. He was a useful player and the kind that is continually needed to fill out a roster, but as the now 6th? DB his price point probably isn't of interest anymore to GB. The Packers may already have someone in house that they feel can replace him in dime situations with Jean-Charles, Ento or Gaines. Or as to stated a DB that is too good to pass up in the draft may end up being the answer.