2022 NFL Draft Thread

[packfanfb]

38 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

I think at least one (maybe both) of those Packer first round picks is going to the OL or DL/Edge. 

Depends on the board. Right now, it's looking like picks 15-30 are going to be deeper at WR versus EDGE and OT. Unless the Packers really like one of the 2nd tier EDGE guys, the top 4-5 likely won't be there. Conversely you might see 1 or 2 WRs taken in the top 15 if that. Packers will need a guy or two to fall at those other positions.

[Mazrimiv]

3 hours ago, Old Guy said:

You seem to be looking for trouble 13 posts in. Might be barking up the wrong tree.

It took far less than 13.  Every post I saw from them was antagonistic nonsense.  A new record for making my ignore list.

Edited March 28, 2022 by Mazrimiv

[thrILL!]

What's the word on Thornton?  Seems to be flying under the radar compared to the other usual WR prospects.

[OneTwoSixFive]

Wide receivers.
What do the Packers want and where are those they might want, be located ?

I don't break down player tape as some here do, but I do pay at least some attention to what is said about certain players and I do have an idea on what the Packers could be looking for.

Firstly, I don't think the Packers want the very slight build receivers. Generally they like their guys to block, and while they have Cobb and Amari Rodgers (who are not that big), they are probably more concerned with acquiring starter-level outside receivers, over slot guys - and we know they like guys there who can block. They value the Lazard's of the world (though I'm sure they'd like someone faster).

Since the Pack need a no.1 receiver type, who are they likely to target ?
GROUP1
Jameson Williams 6'1.5" 179
Garrett Wilson 6'0", 183
Jahan Dotson 5'11", 178
Chris Olave 6'1", 188
Skyy Moore 5'9.5", 195

Thedraftnetwork has all these guy falling in the 12-40 pick range. All the above guys are rather slight of build or rather short. I doubt their blocking skills are up to much (Moore does have the necessary body density with 195 lbs on a short frame, but receivers under 5'10" are less common playing outside. Olave is probably the closest guy from this group to being in the window of what the Packers like.

GROUP 2
Drake London 6'4", 219
Treylon Burks 6'2", 225

Both London and Burks have enough height and the build to be effective blockers..............but neither are very fast and AR just doesn't like throwing jump balls/contested catches at guys.......... and these receivers will see many occasions where that will be what is needed.

GROUP 3
Christian Watson 6'4", 208
George Pickens 6'3", 200
David Bell 6'1", 212

These three guys have enough speed and reasonable to good length. Although they are ranked lower than the guys in groups 1&2, they fit the profile of GB receivers better. Using Thedraftnetwork as a guide, they are all listed as being in the 47-65 range, so they are in the wheelhouse for either of the Packers second round picks.

So, now comes the question. Does the Packers love for any of the earlier picks count for more than them not being the ideal profile ?  Sometimes talent just trumps physical dimensions and the Packers might simply go for best overall talent. However, because the group 3 guys are all in the round 2 window, the Packers may just pre-target that area for a WR, if the draft pans out ok.

Finally, I just looked at the Bleacher site where Connor Rogers and another guy are making up a mock draft. They had the Packers trading up for Jameson Williams, giving up their first (22) and both second round picks to move up (to 12 ?) to get him. Yeah, right........I don't think that is anywhere close to what the Packers do, to get a 6'1"+ guy who is a biscuit toss under 180, for all his skill. If he was still there at #22 they might be interested, but he should be gone by then.

Oddly enough, if asked who I think the Packers WILL draft, my guess would be Drake London (if available at 22) first, then Watson (at 53), Bell (at 59), or Olave (at 22). I chose London first, as an 'outside the box' pick, whose ability outvalues his moderate speed.

What do the rest of you think ?

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by OneTwoSixFive

[TheEagle]

14 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Wide receivers.
What do the Packers want and where are those they might want, be located ?

I don't break down player tape as some here do, but I do pay at least some attention to what is said about certain players and I do have an idea on what the Packers could be looking for.

Firstly, I don't think the Packers want the very slight build receivers. Generally they like their guys to block, and while they have Cobb and Amari Rodgers (who are not that big), they are probably more concerned with acquiring starter-level outside receivers, over slot guys - and we know they like guys there who can block. They value the Lazard's of the world (though I'm sure they'd like someone faster).

Since the Pack need a no.1 receiver type, who are they likely to target ?
GROUP1
Jameson Williams 6'1.5" 179
Garrett Wilson 6'0", 183
Jahan Dotson 5'11", 178
Chris Olave 6'1", 188
Skyy Moore 5'9.5", 195

Thedraftnetwork has all these guy falling in the 12-40 pick range. All the above guys are rather slight of build or rather short. I doubt their blocking skills are up to much (Moore does have the necessary body density with 195 lbs on a short frame, but receivers under 5'10" are less common playing outside. Olave is probably the closest guy from this group to being in the window of what the Packers like.

GROUP 2
Drake London 6'4", 219
Treylon Burks 6'2", 225

Both London and Burks have enough height and the build to be effective blockers..............but neither are very fast and AR just doesn't like throwing jump balls at guys.......... and these receivers will see many occasions where that will be what is needed.

GROUP 3
Christian Watson 6'4", 208
George Pickens 6'3", 200
David Bell 6'1", 212

These three guys have enough speed and reasonable to good length. Although they are ranked lower than the guys in group 1&2, they fit the profile of GB receivers better. Using Thedraftnetwork as a guide, they are all listed as being in the 47-65 range, so they are in the wheelhouse for either of the Packers second round picks.

So, now is the question. Does the Packers love for any of the earlier picks count for more than them not being the ideal profile ?  Sometimes talent just trumps physical dimensions and the Packers might simply go for best overall talent. However, because the group 3 guys are all in the round 2 window, the Packers may just pre-target that area for a WR, if the draft pans out ok.

Finally, I just looked at the Bleacher site where Connor Rogers and another guy are making up a mock draft. They had the Packers trading up for Jameson Williams, giving up their first (22) and both second round picks to move up (to 12 ?) to get him. Yeah, right........I don't think that is anywhere close to what the Packers do, to get a 6'1"+ guy who is a biscuit toss under 180, for all his skill. If he was still there at #22 they might be interested, but he should be gone by then.

Oddly enough, if asked who I think the Packers WILL draft, my guess would be Drake London (if available at 22) first, then Watson (at 53), Bell (at 59), Olave (at 22). I chose London first, as an 'outside the box' pick, whose ability outvalues his moderate speed.

What do the rest of you think ?

 

Bell is slower than Burks and probably London. I agree with most of this, but I think Burks and London fit their profile. Bell may not.

[OneTwoSixFive]

Bell is no stellar athlete, but I think he could be good enough. I don't think his 4.65 40 time does him justice but you could be right there.

Later (after an internet check): Given his 2.72 RAS rating (which I've just looked up) he is looking less and less like a Packers choice - they do like their high RAS guys. On your recommendation I've now struck him out (in my original post) as a premium choice behind London.

You will note my last paragraph, where I said my first choice as the guy I thought the Pack would draft, was London (if there) at 22. I'm not a great fan of Burks.

Edited March 28, 2022 by OneTwoSixFive

[{Family Ghost}]

18 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Wide receivers.
What do the Packers want and where are those they might want, be located ?

GROUP1
Jameson Williams 6'1.5" 179
Garrett Wilson 6'0", 183
Jahan Dotson 5'11", 178
Chris Olave 6'1", 188
Skyy Moore 5'9.5", 195

GROUP 2
Drake London 6'4", 219
Treylon Burks 6'2", 225

GROUP 3
Christian Watson 6'4", 208
George Pickens 6'3", 200
David Bell 6'1", 212

Oddly enough, if asked who I think the Packers WILL draft, my guess would be Drake London (if available at 22) first, then Watson (at 53), Bell (at 59), Olave (at 22). I chose London first, as an 'outside the box' pick, whose ability outvalues his moderate speed.

What do the rest of you think ?

 

I think the Packers value size at WR above all, so I would expect London, Burks, Watson and Pickens to be the guys to watch for.  I think London and Burks have the look of #1 wideouts that can handle high volume targets.  As for where we are picking I think Burks could be the guy at #22 or #28 .. London will be gone in the teens.  In round two I think the Packers will have their eye on Watson and Pickens. 

Group one has Williams, Wilson and Olave that will interest the Packers, but all three will probably be gone by 22, and I don't think the Packers will want to trade up far for any of the three.  If Jameson Williams falls to #22 I could see the Packers snagging him .. elite speed.  He was a top 10 guy prior to the injury and probably the top WR in the class.

[Leader]

6 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I'm not a fan of Burks.

Burks has a bigger Deebo Samuel's feel. He might not be the quickest route runner / quick cutter - but there's nothing not to like about his receiving skills and speed.

[Leader]

3 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

If Jameson Williams falls to #22 I could see the Packers snagging him .. elite speed.  He was a top 10 guy prior to the injury and probably the top WR in the class.

Jameson has the look of a guy that can score from all over the field. Now - how that translates into the faster NFL, probably means that college TDs go for long gainers at the next level. We could use some of that. Havent had it in quite awhile.

[The Truth]

I think Pickens is the guy and they may pick in rd 1 just to secure him.

[moretti19]

6 minutes ago, The Truth said:

I think Pickens is the guy and they may pick in rd 1 just to secure him.

He’s my draft crush!

[R T]

9 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Wide receivers.
What do the Packers want and where are those they might want, be located ?

I don't break down player tape as some here do, but I do pay at least some attention to what is said about certain players and I do have an idea on what the Packers could be looking for.

Firstly, I don't think the Packers want the very slight build receivers. Generally they like their guys to block, and while they have Cobb and Amari Rodgers (who are not that big), they are probably more concerned with acquiring starter-level outside receivers, over slot guys - and we know they like guys there who can block. They value the Lazard's of the world (though I'm sure they'd like someone faster).

Since the Pack need a no.1 receiver type, who are they likely to target ?
GROUP1
Jameson Williams 6'1.5" 179
Garrett Wilson 6'0", 183
Jahan Dotson 5'11", 178
Chris Olave 6'1", 188
Skyy Moore 5'9.5", 195

Thedraftnetwork has all these guy falling in the 12-40 pick range. All the above guys are rather slight of build or rather short. I doubt their blocking skills are up to much (Moore does have the necessary body density with 195 lbs on a short frame, but receivers under 5'10" are less common playing outside. Olave is probably the closest guy from this group to being in the window of what the Packers like.

GROUP 2
Drake London 6'4", 219
Treylon Burks 6'2", 225

Both London and Burks have enough height and the build to be effective blockers..............but neither are very fast and AR just doesn't like throwing jump balls/contested catches at guys.......... and these receivers will see many occasions where that will be what is needed.

GROUP 3
Christian Watson 6'4", 208
George Pickens 6'3", 200
David Bell 6'1", 212

These three guys have enough speed and reasonable to good length. Although they are ranked lower than the guys in groups 1&2, they fit the profile of GB receivers better. Using Thedraftnetwork as a guide, they are all listed as being in the 47-65 range, so they are in the wheelhouse for either of the Packers second round picks.

So, now comes the question. Does the Packers love for any of the earlier picks count for more than them not being the ideal profile ?  Sometimes talent just trumps physical dimensions and the Packers might simply go for best overall talent. However, because the group 3 guys are all in the round 2 window, the Packers may just pre-target that area for a WR, if the draft pans out ok.

Finally, I just looked at the Bleacher site where Connor Rogers and another guy are making up a mock draft. They had the Packers trading up for Jameson Williams, giving up their first (22) and both second round picks to move up (to 12 ?) to get him. Yeah, right........I don't think that is anywhere close to what the Packers do, to get a 6'1"+ guy who is a biscuit toss under 180, for all his skill. If he was still there at #22 they might be interested, but he should be gone by then.

Oddly enough, if asked who I think the Packers WILL draft, my guess would be Drake London (if available at 22) first, then Watson (at 53), Bell (at 59), Olave (at 22). I chose London first, as an 'outside the box' pick, whose ability outvalues his moderate speed.

What do the rest of you think ?

 

Agree in principle with this, think there is little to no chance they select someone from group one. I would add Alec Pierce to your group 3. Like Eagle pointed out, not sure Bell is of interest until day 3 if even then. London very well may be the only WR they would consider at #22 and Burks the only one at #28. 2nd round order Pierce, Pickens and Watson. 

Edited March 28, 2022 by R T

[R T]

25 minutes ago, The Truth said:

I think Pickens is the guy and they may pick in rd 1 just to secure him.

Because of the injuries Pickens has the profile of a 2021 Terrace Marshall Jr. or 2020 Denzel Mims, both with some 1st round buzz but ended up late 2nds because of the question marks. 

[packfanfb]

41 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Bell is no stellar athlete, but I think he could be good enough. I don't think his 4.65 40 time does him justice but you could be right there.

Later (after an internet check): Given his 2.72 RAS rating (which I've just looked up) he is looking less and less like a Packers choice - they do like their high RAS guys. On your recommendation I've now struck him out (in my original post) as a premium choice behind London.

You will note my last paragraph, where I said my first choice as the guy I thought the Pack would draft, was London (if there) at 22. I'm not a great fan of Burks.

Don't think the Packers will be into Bell...at all. You can add Ross to that list. Guy is a poor athlete. Also don't see Burks having a 1st round grade from the Packers. I know the guy plays faster on the field, etc., but I don't see the Packers drafting anyone with his 3-cone and overall athletic profile. Gute has a type in the first round and Burks isn't it. 

A guy to watch in the 2nd in Jalen Tolbert. Fits the Packers' WR profile very well. Still think Olave fits there as well. If he was 5 pounds heavier, he's hit every benchmark the Packers typically require in the athletic profile for their WRs. Other guys there would be Watson, Pickens even though their profiles are incomplete due to no 3-cone/other agility drills from the combine. 

[Sandy]

Overall pretty good assessment, I too think Bell might not quite fit in with that group.

Someone mentioned adding Pierce to group 3, I also think Melchie can be added to group 1.  I personally wouldn't include Ross as someone with a top-64 grade.

I think if like to take a 1 early and a 3 in the second or third round. The 2s are appealing but I feel some other team will fall in love with their measurables and take them before some more polished receivers.