2023 NFL Draft Day 3 Discussion

[MacReady]

6 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I want to win Super Bowls by saving money on high level starters on rookie deals vs paying out veteran contracts. That way I can plug the holes in my roster at the non premiums with the cap space I save. 

Has nothing to do with revenue and everything to do with how the roster is constructed and salaries divided up.

Quote the rest. 13 1,000 yard rookie receivers since 2011 compared to 12 in every year combined before then since the start of the NFL.

Receivers are easier to find. Regardless of whether or not they’re a premium position in terms of value, they are not a premium position in terms of availability. At any time there are 40 NFL receivers capable of being a number one on a team. Now how many #1 DL, EDGE, QB, OT and CB can you find at any given time in the NFL?

[packfanfb]

I actually feel more at ease with this potential 1st round selection than most years. I would be fine with a WR, TE, OT, EDGE or even Bijan at pick 13. Preferably trade down for the TE, but I won't hate it honestly because you're getting a good player who can help Love right away regardless. Frankly, the only position I am more or less against in round 1 is a CB. I just don't see the point of drafting one unless you're giving up on Stokes. 

[Dubz41]

11 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

I'll be drinking kool aid through my green and gold glasses...

Green and gold:

Ice cold bottle of jagermeister next to my Miller Highlife chasers. Go Pack Go....

[MacReady]

Just now, PackFan13 said:

We took an ILB at 22 last year lol. Such a big difference from top 20. 

Did that ILB or did he not have the dumbest mistake in the past 30 years of Packer history while not being awe-inspiring at any point?

Not a shining beacon there.

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, MacReady said:

Quote the rest. 13 1,000 yard rookie receivers since 2011 compared to 12 in every year combined before then since the start of the NFL.

Receivers are easier to find. Regardless of whether or not they’re a premium position in terms of value, they are not a premium position in terms of availability. At any time there are 40 NFL receivers capable of being a number one on a team. Now how many #1 DL, EDGE, QB, OT and CB can you find at any given time in the NFL?

Believe 10/11 of those were top 50 picks. If you want early impact from a WR, take them early.

[Mox]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

The trade up tells me that we want an OT.  Had to get in front of the Jets for that to happen.

Then along the way, we like some EDGE guys and if one happens to fall, so be it.

JSN maybe sneaks in there, and if he's on the board with an OT or an EDGE, there is going to be a lot of conversation in the GB war room.

There's no rationale explanation as to why we would trade up and take a TE, be it Mayer or Kincaid.

I think the fact that the Packers visited with so many TE's shows they probably feel comfortable with the depth and will take one day two.

[Green19]

1 minute ago, MacReady said:

Quote the rest. 13 1,000 yard rookie receivers since 2011 compared to 12 in every year combined before then since the start of the NFL.

Receivers are easier to find. Regardless of whether or not they’re a premium position in terms of value, they are not a premium position in terms of availability. At any time there are 40 NFL receivers capable of being a number one on a team. Now how many #1 DL, EDGE, QB, OT and CB can you find at any given time in the NFL?

Got it… GB will select, Hooker QB Tennessee! Haha

I think Wright and LVN are the guys most likely.

[Norm]

19 minutes ago, Lodestar said:

Anyone else get hella confused with @Packerraymond and @MacReady avis being the same color?

EVERY SINGLE TIME

[incognito_man]

21 minutes ago, MacReady said:

It’s paid because they sell tickets and bring in revenue, not because they’re difficult to find.

If you want to make money you’re 100% right. If you want to win Super Bowls you’re 100% wrong.

52 players had over 8 yards per target in 2022. That’s up from 40 players in 2008.

In 2003, before the Manning Rule, that number was 32.

This is also reflected in rookie receivers. Olave and Wilson just had 1000 yard rookie seasons.

There have been 12 receivers to have 1,000 yard rookie seasons before 2008. There have been 13 after 2010.

This is 80+, 38 years in the modern era of the NFL having less  than the past 11 years.

If you can’t see how the rule changes have effected the ease with which you can find NFL receivers, you haven’t been paying attention.

It's a zero sum game. If you get relatively cheap production from WR compared to the rest of the league it lets you spend more money elsewhere. WR is, indeed, the 3rd best position to extract surplus value from. WRs who can produce are absolutely worth premium picks. You're wrong on this one.

[Green19]

1 minute ago, Mox said:

I think the fact that the Packers visited with so many TE's shows they probably feel comfortable with the depth and will take one day two.

Honestly I can see GB trading back into the first for the TE because of this reason.

They wanted to for Watson last year. Gute isn’t afraid to trade 2 seconds to move up.

So depending on how the TEs start going… I could see them go up and get Mayer, Kincaid,  Washington, Musgrave, or LaPorta at the end of round 1.

[Leader]

3 minutes ago, Norm said:

EVERY SINGLE TIME

Nope.

OPs got the Jason Bourne drowning man image.

[Kampfgeist]

Going to be interesting seeing the movement at the end of rnd 1.   Philly, KC, Buf, CIN could all use more picks.   Could be a lot of teams chasing that 5th yr option on a player like Hendon Hooker

 

[Green19]

For reference GB could trade 42 and 45 and get as high as 19/20. Based on draft value charts. Granted a team would need to want to move down that far.

But GB, if aggressive could get:

13: JSN/Wright/LVN/whoever

and

20: Kincaid or Mayer

[MacReady]

5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Believe 10/11 of those were top 50 picks. If you want early impact from a WR, take them early.

And you can give zero credence to the strategy of drafting them in 2 a year before they’re needed?

Did that or did it not work for Adams, Nelson, Cobb, Jennings?

Listen… If Gute was hitting on his other first round picks, literally nobody is questioning this strategy.

The Chiefs are following the exact same strategy and they’ve won two Super Bowls in the past five years. They haven’t drafted a first round WR in 10 years.

Why do you think the Falcons and Lions and Bears and Chargers and Dolphins and Jets and Browns and Jaguars and Vikings and Bengals are the teams constantly drafting receivers in round one, high, and teams like the Patriots, Chiefs, Ravens, Steelers, Packers don’t draft receivers high?

@incognito_man, I’m not wrong on this. Call receivers a premium position and I don’t care. Say they should be drafted high and that’s when I care.

If we were going into this season without Doubs or Watson, yeah. It would make sense. But we just invested in the position and they’re going in with a full year. There isn’t a Chase prospect in this draft. From what I can gather, this is one of the least top heavy WR drafts in the past five drafts. Any receiver coming in isn’t getting ahead of Watson anyway considering Watson has a full year.

If you were to take your highest grades receiver in rounds 3-5 that’s giving you the same odds of getting an elite WR in 1 at a significant fraction of draft capital value.

[R T]

27 minutes ago, Kampfgeist said:

La di da Mr. extended pinky drinker.   This is NFL Draft night.  This isn't that kind of fancy schmancy event.   You open a bottle of Old Crow (better yet, you open another bottle of Old Crow) and you annoy everyone in the house by kawing incessantly.    That is NFL Draft night

They're all a bunch pansies, I'm drinking a mixture of lion and grizzly bear blood while urinating into a Vikings helmet.