What is your one trade you'd like to see the Packers make on day 1 of the draft?

[OneTwoSixFive]

Besides the trade I mentioned on page 1 of this thread (53 and 92 to Seattle for 41), another trade that looks possible is one with the Giants.

For that trade the Packers give up 28 and 92, for 36 and 67 (value virtually even). I always seem to love early round 2 picks and this year is no exception. The Packers should be able to pick up one of Pickens, Watson, Pierce at 36, or a good D lineman like Winfrey or Jones, or T/G Tyler Smith (who I like a lot and would expect him to play tackle), or even a top Safety like Cine. Lots of options if the draft falls vaguely close to expectations (though of course they do differ, over different sites). 

That third round pick at 67, instead of 92, should also put the Packers in a higher tier of player.

In short, lots to look forward to on this years draft days, with many options for Gurekunst to trade up and down every which way, to land where they want to be as the draft unfolds.

Looking at the draft picks the Packers had after a trade back from 22, i did a mock draft database simulator, and got:
28  WR Pickens
36 DE Logan Hall
53 OT Tyler Smith
59 WR Alec Pierce
67 Edge Josh Paschal
92 TE Cade Otton
132 Edge Dominique Robinson
140 TE Jelani Woods (a pure best value pick since I'd taken Otten at 92)

Edited April 18, 2022 by OneTwoSixFive

[ThatJerkDave]

So, I know I have been banging the drum for staying put and taking a good player who will fall.  BUT according to the value chart, 22 + 28 can get us up to pick number 8 in value.  Is there anything that we would want if we were to make that trade?

[spilltray]

Just now, ThatJerkDave said:

So, I know I have been banging the drum for staying put and taking a good player who will fall.  BUT according to the value chart, 22 + 28 can get us up to pick number 8 in value.  Is there anything that we would want if we were to make that trade?

I'd probably be more interested in packaging a 3 or 4 to move up a bit than dealing both 1s.

[ThatJerkDave]

Just now, spilltray said:

I'd probably be more interested in packaging a 3 or 4 to move up a bit than dealing both 1s.

do you have a specific target that you like?  Personally, I don't really know that there is.

 

 

 

Would anyone be opposed to trading with the Lions?  Say 22 and 59 for 32 and 34?

 

[vegas492]

My ideal trade is seeing how far up we can get with #22 and a fourth round pick, heck I may even go 3rd round and take 4'th or 5'th back.

If....if Olave or Williams gets by pick #16.  Secure the pass catcher.

If I can't have that, draft defense with #22, then trade down from #28 and target Pickens at the top of round 2.  

And above everything else, find a way to draft Pierce.

[Pugger]

6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

But I'm sure you'll tell me in 6 months how the Packers betrayed Rodgers, how Rodgers was all in, and the Packers didn't do their part. 

Unless Gute doesn't draft a WR or sign another FA then wouldn't you too say the Packers didn't do their part?  I'm not too concerned about Gute not drafting a couple of WRs.  It will be interesting to see how he addresses this rather gaping hole on this roster now with Adams and MVS gone.

This isn't the first time AR skipped a voluntary OTA.  I agree, he should be there, especially after the draft so he can begin to work with the new guys.  If he doesn't and things don't go well with the new WRs/TEs we might sign then it is all on Rodgers.

[OneTwoSixFive]

How much difference do people think there is between picks 25 and 45 ?

If the answer is 'not much', then a trade back from 28 to the low 40's could be a good move.

[Old Guy]

9 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

So, I know I have been banging the drum for staying put and taking a good player who will fall.  BUT according to the value chart, 22 + 28 can get us up to pick number 8 in value.  Is there anything that we would want if we were to make that trade?

Kayvon Thibodeaux is the only guy I'd move up for if he made it to 8. The problem is you don't want to go too much further than 42 to 45 to get a WR. I'm not for packaging two more picks to get there in the second as well. 

 

[OzPackfan]

Id like to see 2 trades on day 1:

 - Trade picks 22, 140 and 2023 4th Rounder for pick 17

- Trade picks 28 and 92 for picks 35, 69 and 117

[pacman5252]

I'd say my ideal trade(s)

Background- I think we're kind of in a win "more" now mindset where we need the impact guy over quantity (we also have the capital to do this). When your concerns are mostly depth/23 FA needs, you are in a good spot. We don't need 12 rookies this year, just 7-10 and just like every year, half will be 5th-UDFA to fill out specials.

 

My dream trade is Garret Wilson or Thibedeaux falls to like 15 and we got up and get him (22, 3rd, plus a late pick) would do it. Wilson is my WR 1 (best route runner without injuries). Thib is the high ceiling rusher who could go anywhere from 2 to 15.

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by pacman5252

[Old Guy]

1 hour ago, pacman5252 said:

I'd say my ideal trade(s)

Background- I think we're kind of in a win "more" now mindset where we need the impact guy over quantity (we also have the capital to do this). When your concerns are mostly depth/23 FA needs, you are in a good spot. We don't need 12 rookies this year, just 7-10 and just like every year, half will be 5th-UDFA to fill out specials.

 

My dream trade is Garret Wilson or Thibedeaux falls to like 15 and we got up and get him (22, 3rd, plus a late pick) would do it. Wilson is my WR 1 (best route runner without injuries). Thib is the high ceiling rusher who could go anywhere from 2 to 15.

 

I don't see Thibodeaux getting outside of the top 8 picks. End of the day he's just too talented. I also predict Stingley is the first CB off the board. Talent wins! I wouldn't trade up for any of the WR's in this draft. There is too many guys who are very close to the top guys you can grab in round 2. 

[Green19]

I’d like them to trade one of the first rounders, and either their third or one of the second rounders to get 2 high second rounders. And example would be trading 22 and 92 for Seattle’s 40 and 41.

that way they have like 28, 40, 41, 53 and 59. I think there is more value to be had in the second round this year. So being able to get something like that would be ideal for me, if I was GM.

[Sandy]

16 minutes ago, Green19 said:

I’d like them to trade one of the first rounders, and either their third or one of the second rounders to get 2 high second rounders. And example would be trading 22 and 92 for Seattle’s 40 and 41.

that way they have like 28, 40, 41, 53 and 59. I think there is more value to be had in the second round this year. So being able to get something like that would be ideal for me, if I was GM.

This exactly. I was thinking the Seattle picks too. They might be interested in trading up for a QB too, making sure they leap ahead of where the Lions might trade up to. 

[OneTwoSixFive]

9 hours ago, OzPackfan said:

Id like to see 2 trades on day 1:

 - Trade picks 22, 140 and 2023 4th Rounder for pick 17

- Trade picks 28 and 92 for picks 35, 69 and 117

28 and 92 for 35,69,117, is not a fair trade (at least not on the JJ trade value chart).

If you remove pick 117 from the equation it's pretty even - value 792 (GBs picks), 795 (NYJ picks).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Equally, the @Green19 suggestion of 22 and 92 for Seattle's 40 and 41, is valued 912 to 990, besides it being very likely Seattle does not want to give up BOTH their high round 2 picks.

An alternative (that is fairly even) is pick 22 for picks 40 + 72, + an exchange of round 4 picks (GBs 140 worth 36 for Seattle's 109 worth 76). The points comparison on that deal is 780 to 770, which is at least in the ball park. If you were to also swap 5ths (GBs 171 for Seattle's 152 or 153), it would make it very close to even (just 2.4 points difference if I calculated correctly).

GBs picks after this trade would be: round 1 (28), round 2 (40, 53, 59), round three (72, 92), round 4 (109, 132), round 5 (152) and three 7th rounders (12 picks in all).

The Packers could also consider giving up their 28th pick instead, for Seattle's 41 and 72 (value 660 to 720) and to balance the books they also swap their late third (92) for Seattles high 4th (109) for a final value of 792 to 796.

This is all very mock-draft-mayhem, but fun to theorise. Also the JJ chart isn't the only one out there - the Harvard chart is another that has attempted to make the JJ chart more logical - their chart values pick one at 494.6 and pick 224 at 31.1. It is rather different from the JJ chart where the combined picks from the same point in two adjacent rounds would be enough points to move up about 8 or so spots (in the higher of the two rounds) early in the draft, and later on (factoring in the comp picks in the higher round) enough to move up about 20 spots.

In the Harvard chart, for example, pick 42 (the 10th pick in round 2), plus 74 (the 10th pick in round 3) equals 282.8 points, which is roughly the value of pick 12 (283.6). This chart does not value the higher picks nearly as much as the JJ chart, where the same picks would only get you up to pick 26. Take your pick which chart you prefer.

Edited April 19, 2022 by OneTwoSixFive

[Skippy]

Trade Aaron Rodgers to Denver for 3 first rounders and other picks, lol.