Cwood is a nerd and so are all the Packer Favorite Prospects: 2023 Draft Discussion Thread

[PossibleCabbage]

I would take Bijan before any TE in this class 10 times out of 10.

The value proposition for RBs is bad (you might not compete for anything before the guy is washed) but the value proposition for TEs is worse (you might not get anything out of him for the 3-4 years it takes guys to adapt to the NFL.)

Edited April 9, 2023 by PossibleCabbage

[PackFan13]

1 minute ago, {Family Ghost} said:

You can find quality backs in the 4th round on.  If we spend a mid first on one it would be lunacy.  

Agreed. If a team like the eagles want Bijan it makes sense to get an elite guy. To have him be our second best RB for a year to one of the few strengths on the team would be really bad. Kincaid or WR before RB of all positions. 

[HokieHigh]

20 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Really good breakdown on Bijan. Agree with everything this dude says:

https://youtu.be/cAFge73BlCg

based on this, it seems like he would have no problem with bijan at 15.

IMO next year it works if you then spend jones and dillon's money in the trenches. unless you have a premiere prospect, most draft picks need a year or two in an nfl weight room to hit their peak anyways and are effective a couple years into their 30s. second contracts are the prime for them. 

[Mazrimiv]

5 minutes ago, R T said:

Yet we have people pounding the table for a TE in the first. I'm not stating a case for either, but an RB is lunacy, and a TE is fine?

Yeah, the RD1 TE talk is blowing my mind.  I'd rather be dumb with the RB.

[beekay414]

If we're talking Texas RBs, I think we're more likely to grab Roschon Johnson on day 3 than we are to take Bijan at 15.

[HokieHigh]

6 minutes ago, R T said:

Yet we have people pounding the table for a TE in the first. I'm not stating a case for either, but an RB is lunacy, and a TE is fine?

if it was pitts at 15 i would be fine with it. bijan is one of the best prospects this year, top 5 IMO. 

[Mazrimiv]

1 minute ago, HokieHigh said:

if it was pitts at 15 i would be fine with it. bijan is one of the best prospects this year, top 5 IMO. 

Would you be willing to trade Pitts for #15?  He's a player I haven't followed at all other than glancing at his stat sheet.

[HokieHigh]

1 minute ago, Mazrimiv said:

Would you be willing to trade Pitts for #15?  He's a player I haven't followed at all other than glancing at his stat sheet.

no he tore his mcl in 2022

[PackFan13]

12 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

I would take Bijan before any TE in this class 10 times out of 10.

The value proposition for RBs is bad  (you might not compete for anything before the guy is washed) but the value proposition for TEs is worse (you might not get anything out of him for the 3-4 years it takes guys to adapt to the NFL.)

We'd get way more out of Kincaid than we would Bijan year one. I understand the logic to replace Jones but not with a first. Aaron Jones being the perfect example as to why you don't take a rb round one. TE isn't a premier position until you have a premier TE. 

Travis Kelsey is the best offensive pass catcher in the league. A better Ertz in Kincaid is going to help way more than a RB that will sit behind Jones for a year. The board is going to be brutal for us, pass catcher is the answer. Kincaid is better than hock while being 7 picks later.

Edited April 9, 2023 by PackFan13

[Mazrimiv]

4 minutes ago, PackFan13 said:

We'd get way more out of Kincaid than we would Bijan year one. I understand the logic to replace Jones but not with a first. Aaron Jones being the perfect example as to why you don't take a rb round one

I'd say James Starks is an even better example.  You can't really "plan" on finding RB's like Jones late in the draft, but you can probably find a Starks.  Most offenses (including MLF's) shouldn't need elite talent at RB to be successful.  A good RB is usually fine, and good (but not great) RB's aren't too hard to find.

[{Family Ghost}]

29 minutes ago, R T said:

Yet we have people pounding the table for a TE in the first. I'm not stating a case for either, but an RB is lunacy, and a TE is fine?

It has to do with our RB and TE rooms too.  We have literally nothing at TE and are basically loaded at RB.  We need a #1 and maybe a #2 TE.  All told though I would be more apt to wait until round two to select a TE despite the need, because the depth at the position is pretty strong. 

[PossibleCabbage]

I don't think Kincaid would record a single start for this team in year 1.  He's really a below average blocker.

[Refugee]

9 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I'd say James Starks is an even better example.  You can't really "plan" on finding RB's like Jones late in the draft, but you can probably find a Starks.  Most offenses (including MLF's) shouldn't need elite talent at RB to be successful.  A good RB is usually fine, and good (but not great) RB's aren't too hard to find.

I agree with this. SF has basically just churned through a bunch of RBs and been successful. Need a “back of all trades” guy for this offense but not necessarily an elite guy. With that being said, they traded for CMac and that might be a better marriage than whatever Shanny has going on at home. If CMac is healthy this year, he will dominate even more than he already has in that offense. 

We won’t go RB in the1st unless there is a big trade down or we gain an extra luxury pick. 

[NFLGURU]

11 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

I don't think Kincaid would record a single start for this team in year 1.  He's really a below average blocker.

I dont think he's the pick at 15, but the Packers would know his blocking or lack of it going in.  

Edited April 9, 2023 by NFLGURU

[Leader]