Hypothetical Draft question for all you draft guru's.

[MantyWrestler]

6 minutes ago, R T said:

Are you talking about a day one starter? 

Yes, they 'could' see a new starter, but history says there will not be 3-4 new day one starters.  

I guess that was kind of that I was thinking although any of them being day 1 starters is a long shot except for our first pick usually. WR kind of was last year but the WR room was a dumpster fire last year at this time. 

[Old Guy]

I'm looking for 5 or 6 day 1 CONTRIBUTORS! We had 2 - 1st and a top 2nd pick and Walker was the only one out of the three that contributed day 1. If you call Watson taking snaps, OK you go. 

[hitnhope]

3 minutes ago, MantyWrestler said:

I guess that was kind of that I was thinking although any of them being day 1 starters is a long shot except for our first pick usually. WR kind of was last year but the WR room was a dumpster fire last year at this time. 

The TE room and Safety rooms are dumpster fires right now.   Very possible that we have 2 starters plus contributors.

[squire12]

22 minutes ago, R T said:

Are you talking about a day one starter? 

Yes, they 'could' see a new starter, but history says there will not be 3-4 new day one starters.  

yes, someone that could assume the starting spot week 1 of the season.

Who is GB starting at the following positions based on players on the roster.....

• TE
• WR
• Safety
• DL
• Edge
• IOL/OL

[squire12]

20 minutes ago, MantyWrestler said:

37 minutes ago, squire12 said:

TE:  pick about any of the top 6-7 ranked TE

DL:  Carter, Bresee, Benton, Smith - I would be shocked if Carter is an option for us. Not sure if Benton or Smith walk in the door and get a starting spot. They both play Clark's spot. Breese... maybe at 5T... I'll give you that. Do you think Benton can play 5T?

EDGE:  Van Ness, Murphy, AA, White, Felix, Foskey - Van Ness or White would need to be a 5T and then maybe. Murphy is an OLB IMO and no way I see him beating out Smith or Gary. Not too sure about Felix or Foskey, are they 5T or EDGE?

Safety"  Branch, Battle, Martin, Brown - Branch... don't think the others would walk in and start.

IOL:  Skoronski, JMS, Torrence, Mauch - Skoronski, I don't believe would not start at OT, maybe OG. None of the others and not sure Skoonski will be available but he should be.

 

Expand  

I guess some of these guys could but not likely for most. I'll give you TE for sure

 

I see a 5T, SS but only Branch, TE and maybe WR but not sure Smith walks in and takes Doubs spot quite yet. Maybe OG but only Skoronski could do so out of the gate.

I am not saying any of those players will, but there are snaps to be had at several spots as the current roster resides.  hell, if Douglas is moved to safety, you could add CB to the mix as an option for a new starter D1 pending Stokes returning from injury.  

as of now, there are over 1000 snaps at TE that are gone from the 2022 roster.  over 1180 on the DL are gone from the 2022 roster.  over 900 at safety.

 

Whether a player is a "starter" or a high rotation/snap count player probably is just semantics

[MantyWrestler]

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

I am not saying any of those players will, but there are snaps to be had at several spots as the current roster resides.  hell, if Douglas is moved to safety, you could add CB to the mix as an option for a new starter D1 pending Stokes returning from injury.  

as of now, there are over 1000 snaps at TE that are gone from the 2022 roster.  over 1180 on the DL are gone from the 2022 roster.  over 900 at safety.

 

Whether a player is a "starter" or a high rotation/snap count player probably is just semantics

oh, I agree, there are snaps to be had. Just don't there are that many starting spots that are really up for grabs which is what i thought you were saying. Take edge for instance. Unless we somehow get Anderson, there is no way EDGE gets a day 1 replacement starter.

TE

5T

S

IOL - but highly unlikely IMO, we have a lot of bodies and after round 1 I'm not sure the talent is any better than what we have.

These are positions where there is a chance for a day 1 starter. It would be nice to hit on 2. Not even sure WR unless you count the slot. Doubs and Watson are pretty talented and another year in. 

[squire12]

2 minutes ago, MantyWrestler said:

oh, I agree, there are snaps to be had. Just don't there are that many starting spots that are really up for grabs which is what i thought you were saying. Take edge for instance. Unless we somehow get Anderson, there is no way EDGE gets a day 1 replacement starter.

TE

5T

S

IOL - but highly unlikely IMO, we have a lot of bodies and after round 1 I'm not sure the talent is any better than what we have.

These are positions where there is a chance for a day 1 starter. It would be nice to hit on 2. Not even sure WR unless you count the slot. Doubs and Watson are pretty talented and another year in. 

depends on where the player is drafted and what progression Enagbare has made.  Someone like Murphy, Van Ness, Felix, Foskey, AA might push for D1 starter snaps.  Same WR.  Doubs and Watson are solid, but I view a 3rd WR as a starter, OR starting 2TE.  

[R T]

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

yes, someone that could assume the starting spot week 1 of the season.

Who is GB starting at the following positions based on players on the roster.....

• TE
• WR
• Safety
• DL
• Edge
• IOL/OL

Sure someone 'could' win a week 1 starting spot, but history tells us those numbers are few. Coaches are going to usually start a journeyman over a more talented rookie to start the season because the vet knows what he is doing. Packer fans have examples of this every year and need only look at Jake Hanson starting open day last year to get their refresher. I had this conversation with a front office person at the 2016 draft. He asked me about my team's draft and of course I was jazzed for the Packers drafting of Kenny Clark and said I thought he was a day 1 starter because it was tee'd up for him to start. Or so I thought. The dude perked right up and said something along the lines that he gladly would wager the bar bill that I was wrong. He was right, Clark didn't start day 1 and started 2 games on the year. He acknowledged we would probably never see each other again in our lifetimes so I could skip the bar bill when I was wrong.  

Who is GB starting at the following positions based on players on the roster.....

• TE - Deguara
• WR - Watson and Doubs
• Safety - Savage and Ford
• DL - Clark, Wyatt and Slaton (even though their base will be 2 DL and 5 DB) 
• Edge - Smith and Enagbare
• IOL/OL - Jenkins, Myers and Runyan

[R T]

26 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Whether a player is a "starter" or a high rotation/snap count player probably is just semantics

Moving the goalposts again from the original comment that was being debated. 

[squire12]

6 minutes ago, R T said:

Sure someone 'could' win a week 1 starting spot, but history tells us those numbers are few. Coaches are going to usually start a journeyman over a more talented rookie to start the season because the vet knows what he is doing. Packer fans have examples of this every year and need only look at Jake Hanson starting open day last year to get their refresher. I had this conversation with a front office person at the 2016 draft. He asked me about my team's draft and of course I was jazzed for the Packers drafting of Kenny Clark and said I thought he was a day 1 starter because it was tee'd up for him to start. Or so I thought. The dude perked right up and said something along the lines that he gladly would wager the bar bill that I was wrong. He was right, Clark didn't start day 1 and started 2 games on the year. He acknowledged we would probably never see each other again in our lifetimes so I could skip the bar bill when I was wrong.  

Who is GB starting at the following positions based on players on the roster.....

• TE - Deguara
• WR - Watson and Doubs
• Safety - Savage and Ford
• DL - Clark, Wyatt and Slaton (even though their base will be 2 DL and 5 DB) 
• Edge - Smith and Enagbare
• IOL/OL - Jenkins, Myers and Runyan

GB either started 2TE or 3 WR, so there is 1 there.  

I think a high pick in round 1 and 2 have a realistic chance to be a starter on D1.  time will tell. 

[R T]

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

GB either started 2TE or 3 WR, so there is 1 there.  

I think a high pick in round 1 and 2 have a realistic chance to be a starter on D1.  time will tell. 

But the original comment that started this conversation was 3-4 starters, this is a long way from 3-4 starters. 

[MantyWrestler]

13 minutes ago, squire12 said:

depends on where the player is drafted and what progression Enagbare has made.  Someone like Murphy, Van Ness, Felix, Foskey, AA might push for D1 starter snaps.  Same WR.  Doubs and Watson are solid, but I view a 3rd WR as a starter, OR starting 2TE.  

I just don't see Van Ness as an EDGE but think he could turn into a great 5T.I just don't know if that's day one for him. Murphy, Felix and Foskey look like EDGE to me but can't believe they would beat out Smith but lots of snaps for all 4 as backups out of the gate.

On a side note, I really like what we saw in Enagbare last year; bright future.

WR, Smith would totally be our starting slot, if that's considered a starter, then for sure. TE too, could see 2 guys at the top of the depth chart even though TE is typically a hard spot to come in and start at. 

[squire12]

6 hours ago, squire12 said:

6 hours ago, Old Guy said:

It's not like our roster is bereft of talent. Please tell me what position someone walks in and starts? 

 

safety, WR, TE, DL/EDGE, IOL are all positions that could see a  new starter for GB

 

20 minutes ago, R T said:

But the original comment that started this conversation was 3-4 starters, this is a long way from 3-4 starters. 

I am not sure where you are getting that from.  See my response to the comment above.  that was my original comment on this.  

[DenverPackFan]

Just playing around with the point values and thinking about my comment the other day about history repeating itself.

In 2018, the Packers traded down from #14 (1100) to #27 (680) with the Saints and then back up to #18 (900) with the Seahawks.  They also received the Saints 2019 FRP, #147 (33), #248 (1) and gave up #76 (210) and #186 (17).  Pretty shrewd trading - moved back 4 spots worth 200 points and gave up 193 points in other picks to get the 2019 FRP.  That's the equivalent of trading pick #51 for a next year FRP.

So looking at this year, the teams are in very similar draft positions:  GB #13, NO #30 and SEA #20.  Could we see GB trading down with the Saints, #13 (1150) for #30 (620) and #40 (510) and #146 (33) and then with the Seahawks for pick #20 (850) for #30 (620) and #78(200) and #146(33)?  We'd end up with picks 20, 40, 42 and 45 and not have to worry about screwing up the 3rd round pick.  Or maybe that first trade is for the Saints 2024 FRP (if history is really repeating itself), #30, #40 and #115 for #13 and #45.  Then we'd end up with picks 20, 40, 42, 115 and the Saints 2024 FRP.

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, MantyWrestler said:

I just don't see Van Ness as an EDGE but think he could turn into a great 5T.I just don't know if that's day one for him. Murphy, Felix and Foskey look like EDGE to me but can't believe they would beat out Smith but lots of snaps for all 4 as backups out of the gate.

On a side note, I really like what we saw in Enagbare last year; bright future.

WR, Smith would totally be our starting slot, if that's considered a starter, then for sure. TE too, could see 2 guys at the top of the depth chart even though TE is typically a hard spot to come in and start at. 

I see LVN more in a Lowry +++ role.  I think that is his best role.  He can stand up on the EDGE, but I didn't see a whole lot of burst from him.  What I did see over and over again was the raw power and hustle he brings.  He could probably be taught EDGE pretty easily, but I like more "twitchy" guys out there.  But we do like those big power guys out there that can bull rush and use those long arms.  Preston has made a lot of money with those skills.  And LVN has them as well.