2023 NFL Draft Day 3 Discussion

[ThatJerkDave]

9 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Every year GB fans are stoked about the day 3 "steals" that were landed at WR, and fret about how hard it will be to sneak them onto the PS.

 

28 minutes ago, R T said:

Interesting. For me every year day 3 is my favorite day, rounds 4-7 and the UDFA's to fill out the 90-man roster is the best part. IMO   

I think these posts go hand-in-hand.  That is what makes this day fun.  There are a handful of guys that we still know, but there are others that we simply didn't have the time to look at that turn out very intriguing.  

[Mazrimiv]

You read the scouts takes from someone like McGinn and there are for sure scouts who think these guys aren't very good.  It's only logical that there will be fans who have similar views.

[packfanfb]

My biggest takeaway on the Day 2 grouping of Musgrave, Reed and Kraft - Packers wanted to add pieces to specifically help Love attack the MOF. All three of those guys are capable of doing that, even as they grow and learn the rest. 

[mikemike778]

25 minutes ago, R T said:

Interesting. For me every year day 3 is my favorite day, rounds 4-7 and the UDFA's to fill out the 90-man roster is the best part. IMO   

Its particularly interesting this year. With the various cap moves, there are a lot of positions with a clear path to the active roster.

• QB2
• WR5
• DT4
• SFTY 1
• K

That's five prominent roster positions that the day 3 guys have a real chance of taking. As well as that we also have

• RB3
• TE4
• DT5
• SFTY2

We have guys there but they are very replaceable. And that's before injuries and before things like carrying 3 QBs or 6 WRs.  I don't think we will pick 9 times today but if we did then there is very much room for a lot of Day 3 players to make the team.

There are some positions that really we needed (but couldn't due to the need to get weapons for Love) in Days 1 and 2 like Safety and DT.  So we could go for the triple day 3 dip in the same position to give a few shots of hitting so quantity to make up for quality. Kind of like when we had no running backs so triple dipped in day 3 at running back to get AJ, Williams and the other guy whose name escapes me. 

 

[Leader]

 

[Ragnarok]

8 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Going to way disagree with you on Van Ness.  He is a lot like Rashan Gary was when we drafted him.  Bull in a china shop type of guy.  If he puts in the work, we have two very athletic, very strong, very big, very young edge rushers as soon as 2024.  And he is in a very good situation to get playing time but also not be overwhelmed as a rookie.  

I too am not a big fan of the second rounders, but I may have just talked myself into Reed a little.  And I think Kraft is going to be boss. 

I think that 'only knows how to bullrush' and 'bull in a China shop' are pretty similar.  He needs a lot of technical work, but all the physical traits are there.

[Kepler]

4 hours ago, Jaegybomb said:

Kind of random but I saw a study where they compared public consensus big boards vs where the GMs actually picked players and GMs weren't actually any better or worse at choosing players that "succeeded" in the league than the public.

Almost, but not really. This study comes to the conclusion that:

"What this all tells me is that drafting well is a lot of luck, mixed with some skill and an extra layer of a random "jackpot" on top (the one or two later-round picks each draft that become unexpected Hall of Famers). This would explain the data we see (including the outliers) pretty well. The Seahawks are probably pretty good at drafting, but also had some crazy luck in hitting three jackpots in a row (Wilson, Wagner, and Richard Sherman). What this should tell NFL teams is that you need to roll the dice as many times as you can (trading down for additional value whenever possible), get the best GM you can possibly find, and get the top coaches in the league to develop the talent you draft -- which is what we already see consistently good teams generally do."

[Mazrimiv]

1 minute ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I think these posts go hand-in-hand.  That is what makes this day fun.  There are a handful of guys that we still know, but there are others that we simply didn't have the time to look at that turn out very intriguing.  

If nothing else, it's an interesting filter to see how fans interpret what is essentially an unknown.  Some fans only see the flaws and are already convinced these guys all suck, while others focus on the positive traits and project how they can fit.  For me, it's just more fun to look at the positive traits vs focusing on the flaws.  To each their own.

[PackFan13]

Not getting one of the tier one TEs is a bummer.  I wanted LaPorta after Kincaid rightfully went round one. 

[packfanfb]

1 minute ago, PackFan13 said:

Not getting one of the tier one TEs is a bummer.  I wanted LaPorta after Kincaid rightfully went round one. 

Getting 2 of the top 6 isn't bad though. Really top 5 given Washington's potential medical issue...

[ThatJerkDave]

53 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

So who's your 4th round "my" guy? Personally as much as I'd love to see the Packers nab a DB and DL soon, my guy is:

Israel Abanikanda

I too like Abanikanda, a lot.  But I do wonder if there is any use for him in 2023.  Jones and Dillon are very good, and thus command most of the carries.  Still, having a good 3rd RB is not the worst problem to have.

 

I guess I will put together a few of my day 3 guys, from this point on, I don't really know who slots into which round.

WR:  AT Perry, BFW, Justin Shorter, Ben Landers, Jadon Haselwood

RB:  Keaton Mitchell, Israel Abanikanda

OL:  Nick Saldiveri, Chandler Savala

DL: Jerrod Clark, AA

And all of us draft geeks really like Zack Kuntz.

I also wonder why Kelee Ringo is still on the board.

[ReadyToThump]

2 minutes ago, PackFan13 said:

Not getting one of the tier one TEs is a bummer.  I wanted LaPorta after Kincaid rightfully went round one. 

? Musgrave > LaPorta

Kraft is next in line considering Washington was probably off most teams boards 

[Ragnarok]

5 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

This sort of post annoys me.

Its fine saying you hate the pick or you wish we had picked someone else is fine. But to flat out say a pick is awful is essentially stating that you are a better talent evaluator that a professional front office NFL scouting team and a highly paid professional general manager.

The level of off-the-charts absolute arrogance is incredible.

You don't know a pick is bad until we have seen them in the NFL. And at this stage I'm sorry but Gutey is better at this than you. His opinion is worth 1000 times what yours is. And he presumably doesn't think its an awful pick.

Like I said, its fine debating picks, whether you like them and what you would have done and how you think they will do. But flat out saying a pick is awful just makes you look a fool.

Considering that Gute has hit on zero players in the 3rd round and drafted one pro bowl caliber player in the 2nd(though hopefully Christian changes that) since taking over, let's stop pretending like he is infallible.

I hope I'm wrong about these guys and ill happily eat crow if I am, but sometimes a pick is bad from the minute its made.

[PackFan13]

4 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Getting 2 of the top 6 isn't bad though. Really top 5 given Washington's potential medical issue...

I'm hopeful at least one will work out. I love the idea of giving Love weapons we need. Fingers crossed

[Leader]

I agree with this theory......one reason I wasnt as hot to trot as others to usher in the BigDog2 era. Didnt think another "OT" would help the passing game....as much as it needed it IMO.