Jump to content

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

MacReady

By MacReady
in Green Bay Packers

 Share

Recommended Posts

Fl0nkerton

Fl0nkerton

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Assuming Rodgers is a Jet - what is the absolute highest you would draft another QB? 2nd round? 3rd round? Any names y'all like?

Take a shot at one after the 5th maybe. It sounds like they liked Jaren Hall from BYU and from watching his workouts he’s got some nice tools. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PossibleCabbage

PossibleCabbage

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Assuming Rodgers is a Jet - what is the absolute highest you would draft another QB? 2nd round? 3rd round? Any names y'all like?

I don't think it's the slot so much as the person.  I'd take Hendon Hooker in the 4th but probably not the 3rd, I'd take Jake Haener in the 5th but not higher than that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kampfgeist

Kampfgeist

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

We also won a Super Bowl with how many guys on IR?

I mean, I get it.  But we didn't trade Bakh, or Jenkins or Jaire, so obviously the club saw them as cornerstones to the team.  In fact, they paid large sums of money to retain Jaire and Jenkins.

The Lions looked at Hock and said, naw.  Then went out and won a lot of games.

Why?  Maybe because a good to great tight end is not a needle mover in terms of wins and losses.  Maybe elite TE's are, but there are very, very few truly elite TE's.

I think you could argue that Jaire is as good a corner as Hoch was a tight end, right?  The issue is not the player, it is the position.

I don't think that guards are all that valuable, but we saw what happened when Jenkins went to LG and our entire line got better because of it.  And...a solid O-line does lead to wins.

One example that comes to mind is Miami trading Laremy Tunsil, their left tackle they used a top 15 pick on and widely viewed at the time as one of the big up-can-coming LT's in the league.   Miami wasn't very good at the time and they made the decision to reset and trade a top player at a top position for a number of high picks.   The players ultimately taken by Miami have been integral to their recent success and Houston has a 3-time Pro Bowl LT.   The point being sometimes teams make tough choices re: top players for what they may view as a chance to reset their team.

In fact, the GM for DET said as much when moving TJ - it wasn't a reflection on the player, they viewed themselves still in a building phase and knew they could get premium assets for him.   

Moving a player is a lot more nuanced than you make it out to be in previous posts and nothing can be boiled down so simply as "we won more games without X player so they obviously weren't important."  

My worry now in this discussion is my entire point being misconstrued- Hockenson is pretty damn good (would be absolutely elite if his run-blocking were better).   I am not advocating we take a TE at 15 - although I disagree with the assertion it would be some kind of mistake.

I do NOT believe that if we take any player (with the obvious exception of a specialist) and they go on to arguably be a Pro-Bowler in 3 of their 4 seasons and end season 4 with the 2nd best stats of any player at their position - that you would view it as a wasted choice.    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vegas492

vegas492

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Assuming Rodgers is a Jet - what is the absolute highest you would draft another QB? 2nd round? 3rd round? Any names y'all like?

I wouldn't.  I'd look first Ettling, I really like him.

And I'd look at the Mayfield and Wentz's of the world...they could be very inexpensive.  Heineke, too, though I think he'd push to start.  Maybe even Darnold.  There's only so many starting spots open, so some of them will be backups.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kampfgeist

Kampfgeist

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

We also won a Super Bowl with how many guys on IR?

 

This one line is also a really great example of why the argument "X team did better without X player so obviously they weren't important" is a logical fallacy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vegas492

vegas492

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Kampfgeist said:

One example that comes to mind is Miami trading Laremy Tunsil, their left tackle they used a top 15 pick on and widely viewed at the time as one of the big up-can-coming LT's in the league.   Miami wasn't very good at the time and they made the decision to reset and trade a top player at a top position for a number of high picks.   The players ultimately taken by Miami have been integral to their recent success and Houston has a 3-time Pro Bowl LT.   The point being sometimes teams make tough choices re: top players for what they may view as a chance to reset their team.

In fact, the GM for DET said as much when moving TJ - it wasn't a reflection on the player, they viewed themselves still in a building phase and knew they could get premium assets for him.   

Moving a player is a lot more nuanced than you make it out to be in previous posts and nothing can be boiled down so simply as "we won more games without X player so they obviously weren't important."  

My worry now in this discussion is my entire point being misconstrued- Hockenson is pretty damn good (would be absolutely elite if his run-blocking were better).   I am not advocating we take a TE at 15 - although I disagree with the assertion it would be some kind of mistake.

I do NOT believe that if we take any player (with the obvious exception of a specialist) and they go on to arguably be a Pro-Bowler in 3 of their 4 seasons and end season 4 with the 2nd best stats of any player at their position - that you would view it as a wasted choice.    

Interesting take on Tunsil.  One that I cannot disagree with.

So...I'm not disagreeing, just so we are clear.  And we agree on not advocating for a TE at #15.

Looking up things...

Tunsil and Stills and a 4th and a 6'th were traded for 2 first round picks, one second round pick.  A cornerback and a tackle.

Hockenson and a fourth round pick and a conditional fourth round pick for a second and third round pick.

I think they were either both in the last years of their deal, or maybe Tunsil had a 5'th year left, or something like that.

But...these trades are not really similar in regards to compensation.

You and I agree that Hockenson is a good to very good tight end.  And I won't say he's elite because I feel there are very, very few elite TE's.  He's not in a tier with Kelce, I think is fair to say.

Tunsil was a very good left tackle.

It looks like the NFL values LT more than TE.  Compensation wise via the trade.  I don't think I have to do any digging to see that the NFL values LT's more than TE's in the draft either.  Just going from memory for first round picks tells me that LT's are far more valuable.

I know that this conclusion of mine is not at all anything that you were talking about.  

Rather it confirms what I knew already.  Very good left tackles help you win more than very good tight ends.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kampfgeist

Kampfgeist

Posted
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

 

Rather it confirms what I knew already.  Very good left tackles help you win more than very good tight ends.

 

 

100% agreement.   (look at us having a discussion and hugging it out at the end)

If we didn't have our elite LT in place and multiple options to fill in as needed I'd be screaming for Paris Johnson or Broderick Jones even with a trade-up.    Even with our current options I'd still be happy if we took those guys or another tackle they evaluated as comparable or better.   Having our current pieces already in place, however, I think there is real value in other positions like TE and I'd be fine with the Bijan Robinsons or O'Cyrus Torrences of the world at "non-premium positions" if it meant we may be getting legit Pro-Bowl level talent

Edited by Kampfgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
vegas492

vegas492

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, Kampfgeist said:

100% agreement.   (look at us having a discussion and hugging it out at the end)

If we didn't have our elite LT in place and multiple options to fill in as needed I'd be screaming for Paris Johnson or Broderick Jones even with a trade-up.    Even with our current options I'd still be happy if we took those guys or another tackle they evaluated as comparable or better.   Having our current pieces already in place, however, I think there is real value in other positions like TE and I'd be fine with the Bijan Robinsons or O'Cyrus Torrences of the world at "non-premium positions" if it meant we may be getting legit Pro-Bowl level talent

Nothing but hugs, brother.

Paris Johnson.  Oh my.  I don't care if Van Ness is on the board with Johnson at WR.  If Paris is there, it's a no brainer, right?

I don't try to have crushes on players that I feel have very little probability getting to the Packers pick.  But I have a crush on that guy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arthur Penske

Arthur Penske

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

Assuming Rodgers is a Jet - what is the absolute highest you would draft another QB? 2nd round? 3rd round? Any names y'all like?

I’d take one in the 1st if he’s gutey’s guy. 
 

Favre and Rodgers have taught us you don’t typically  want to be looking for a QB when you need one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...