2024 NFL Draft Discussion

[Dubz41]

2 hours ago, beekay414 said:

It's much, much harder to find impact DL than it is those positions and you cannot ever have too many bodies on the DL. 

Byron Murphy. It is the way.

Forget Sweat, he got gassed in 1 on 1s. He is not the way.

[PossibleCabbage]

20 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Forget Sweat, he got gassed in 1 on 1s.

NFL S&C and Nutrition program is going to work wonders with that kid though.

[Old Guy]

21 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Byron Murphy. It is the way.

Forget Sweat, he got gassed in 1 on 1s. He is not the way.

So did Jalen Carter last year at his pro-day. Sweat is going to have to drop some weight, no doubt. I'm just not writing the kid off because he got worn out at the Senior Bowl. 

[Scoremore]

1 hour ago, Tperk said:

Would anyone be upset if we just decide to take the top player on our board no matter the position or pre-draft ranking, sorta like what Detroit did in last years draft?

 

Would we grab our top rated safety at 25 even if he was ranked somewhere closer to 35-45 on most draft boards or grab our top rated RB at 59 even if most think he would maybe be available at 88/91?

No way to run a draft.  Go BPA always.  If close then let need be the tie breaker.  If Gute covets a guy he can always manuever around the board until need=value.  Really best to go BPA and then supplement in FA.   Might have a bit of room this year so he may sign a few FA's prior to the draft to free up the ability to go BPA.  

Gute knows we are pretty close.  Expect some serious moves this offseason. Shore up LB, DB, and RB positions.  Add depth to OL.

[ThatJerkDave]

58 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

No way to run a draft.  Go BPA always.  If close then let need be the tie breaker.  If Gute covets a guy he can always manuever around the board until need=value.  Really best to go BPA and then supplement in FA.   Might have a bit of room this year so he may sign a few FA's prior to the draft to free up the ability to go BPA.  

Gute knows we are pretty close.  Expect some serious moves this offseason. Shore up LB, DB, and RB positions.  Add depth to OL.

I want to add, I do like the idea of moving up or down the board to get our pick of RB or S.  But I don't think that we should be taking a guy 30 spots before he is likely to go.  The Packers have a lot of picks this season, and what appears to be relatively few holes.  Maneuver around the board, but don't give up thirty spots of value.  

[ThatJerkDave]

So far, the two funnest reels that I have watched are:

Oregon WR Troy Franklin:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NjsBaGc9mM&ab_channel=PrinceHighlights

Tennessee RB Jaylen Wright:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dGIPoVKoIg&ab_channel=BreakshotMedia

 

 

[fattlipp]

10 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

So far, the two funnest reels that I have watched are:

Oregon WR Troy Franklin:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NjsBaGc9mM&ab_channel=PrinceHighlights

Tennessee RB Jaylen Wright:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dGIPoVKoIg&ab_channel=BreakshotMedia

 

 

Yeah Jalen Wright looks undervalued to me, kid can fly, might have best RAS of any of the backs over 195

[ThatJerkDave]

38 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

So far, the two funnest reels that I have watched are:

Oregon WR Troy Franklin:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NjsBaGc9mM&ab_channel=PrinceHighlights

Tennessee RB Jaylen Wright:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dGIPoVKoIg&ab_channel=BreakshotMedia

 

 

let me add Louisville RB Jawhar Jordan to the list.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9m_cPnjWGIQ&ab_channel=ACCDigitalNetwork

 

[OneTwoSixFive]

6 hours ago, Scoremore said:

No way to run a draft.  Go BPA always.  If close then let need be the tie breaker.  If Gute covets a guy he can always manuever around the board until need=value.  Really best to go BPA and then supplement in FA.   Might have a bit of room this year so he may sign a few FA's prior to the draft to free up the ability to go BPA.  

Gute knows we are pretty close.  Expect some serious moves this offseason. Shore up LB, DB, and RB positions.  Add depth to OL.

Simplistic answer, but I don't think this is simple.

For example, suppose the BPA at each of the first two picks is a pair of QBs, or maybe two WRs ?  Need is always factored in, sometimes even when the value drop is significant. Here is another example. The guy you really want, you project (looking at other teams needs) as going at around picks 35 to 38 and your pick is at 41. You try to trade up and down to that spot but get no offers you can accept. Do you go and get the guy you want at 25............or do you go elsewhere at 25 and miss out on the player you wanted the most ? 

You must also consider the heirarchy of needs. For example, you consider safety to be your biggest need, but for the first two picks of the draft you have been unable to turn down great bargains at other spots. The need to get a safety increases as the amount of guys that can play single high at the level your DC wants, is reduced to one good guy and then a real dropoff to the others. When your third pick comes around there is again a higher rated player at a non-safety position and the safety you want is a tier below them. Now I suspect a GM would find it very difficult not to grab that last good safety.

BPA has almost become a meme, like 'playing an aggressive defense'. Sure, most of us want more aggression but if a more passive defense never worked then no-one, absolutely no-one in the NFL would play it, ever. There would be no Joe Barry's or anyone like them in the NFL. Sometimes that 'Keep everything in front of you' defense is the right call, sometimes it is not and the best defenses switch between them to confuse offenses.

Perhaps the best thing to hope for is described by two sets of sliding scales. The first sets chart the talent level at each position and how fast it drops off. The second is points on a vertical line showing the degree of need at each position, with the highest need at the top of the line and the spacing showing the degree of need. By examining the second scale, along with all of the first scales, you try and work out what is the optimum strategy to get both the best guys AND fill the most pressing needs.

Sometimes you reach a little bit for a position of need, sometimes you take the highest rated guy on the board, but overall you try to achieve both goals. Remember that a players rating is not a thing set in stone as to what they will end up like, it is a projection, a well-informed guess, really. Picking well is an art as well as a science, both intuition and stats.

As for making big moves in FA, that has been a rarity in Green Bay. They like to develop their own guys which makes a lot of sense as long as you draft well. It is when you have drafted poorly that you are most likely needing to get an expensive veteran from elsewhere. It was when they had had a couple of poorer drafts that they went out and got Amos and the two Smiths in that memorable year - they were expensive, but they filled a need.

When you have drafted well, you are getting the maximum number of guys on low contracts for several years, which is very important if you need to afford to pay a top QB $50m pa or more. The Packers might make a big splash somewhere, but they don't do it very often and tend to pick up a couple of lower-tier players at positions of need BEFORE the draft, which allows them more flexibility IN the draft to go elsewhere early on if their board shows very good value at another position. It doesn't mean they will or must go elsewhere, it is just a little bit of insurance.

[spilltray]

There's a reason NFL teams are refered to as having a draft board rather than a list. Teams don't rank players individually like a media draft guide might. You might have a tone of guys with similar grades. Is a 6.3 s better or worse than a 6.3 RB? What about a 6.4 fullback? 

It's a much more broad and fluid process. 

[OneTwoSixFive]

22 minutes ago, spilltray said:

There's a reason NFL teams are referred to as having a draft board rather than a list. Teams don't rank players individually like a media draft guide might. You might have a tone of guys with similar grades. Is a 6.3 s better or worse than a 6.3 RB? What about a 6.4 fullback? 

It's a much more broad and fluid process. 

In addition, a grade isn't everything you are considering. You project a players future. For example, a player with great talent, but in a small school program might be pretty green compared to one who has been in a big program. you consider not only the skill now, but the trajectory in the future including a  projected floor and a ceiling. You also consider whether the player was a good fit for the scheme he played in at college. There is also a huge factor that is only partially accounted for in a grade and that is the mental side of the player. As @spilltray alluded to, positional value also plays a part - so does age.

Edited February 5 by OneTwoSixFive

[Scoremore]

6 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Simplistic answer, but I don't think this is simple.

For example, suppose the BPA at each of the first two picks is a pair of QBs, or maybe two WRs ?  Need is always factored in, sometimes even when the value drop is significant. Here is another example. The guy you really want, you project (looking at other teams needs) as going at around picks 35 to 38 and your pick is at 41. You try to trade up and down to that spot but get no offers you can accept. Do you go and get the guy you want at 25............or do you go elsewhere at 25 and miss out on the player you wanted the most ? 

You must also consider the heirarchy of needs. For example, you consider safety to be your biggest need, but for the first two picks of the draft you have been unable to turn down great bargains at other spots. The need to get a safety increases as the amount of guys that can play single high at the level your DC wants, is reduced to one good guy and then a real dropoff to the others. When your third pick comes around there is again a higher rated player at a non-safety position and the safety you want is a tier below them. Now I suspect a GM would find it very difficult not to grab that last good safety.

BPA has almost become a meme, like 'playing an aggressive defense'. Sure, most of us want more aggression but if a more passive defense never worked then no-one, absolutely no-one in the NFL would play it, ever. There would be no Joe Barry's or anyone like them in the NFL. Sometimes that 'Keep everything in front of you' defense is the right call, sometimes it is not and the best defenses switch between them to confuse offenses.

Perhaps the best thing to hope for is described by two sets of sliding scales. The first sets chart the talent level at each position and how fast it drops off. The second is points on a vertical line showing the degree of need at each position, with the highest need at the top of the line and the spacing showing the degree of need. By examining the second scale, along with all of the first scales, you try and work out what is the optimum strategy to get both the best guys AND fill the most pressing needs.

Sometimes you reach a little bit for a position of need, sometimes you take the highest rated guy on the board, but overall you try to achieve both goals. Remember that a players rating is not a thing set in stone as to what they will end up like, it is a projection, a well-informed guess, really. Picking well is an art as well as a science, both intuition and stats.

As for making big moves in FA, that has been a rarity in Green Bay. They like to develop their own guys which makes a lot of sense as long as you draft well. It is when you have drafted poorly that you are most likely needing to get an expensive veteran from elsewhere. It was when they had had a couple of poorer drafts that they went out and got Amos and the two Smiths in that memorable year - they were expensive, but they filled a need.

When you have drafted well, you are getting the maximum number of guys on low contracts for several years, which is very important if you need to afford to pay a top QB $50m pa or more. The Packers might make a big splash somewhere, but they don't do it very often and tend to pick up a couple of lower-tier players at positions of need BEFORE the draft, which allows them more flexibility IN the draft to go elsewhere early on if their board shows very good value at another position. It doesn't mean they will or must go elsewhere, it is just a little bit of insurance.

Well that's pretty much what I said.  However reaching on that last safety and passing on a player rated much higher always gets you in trouble.  Kevin King more pressing need but we passed up TJ Watt.  Prime example.  As far as QB's that may be the one exception we are pretty well set there.  If that situation came up it we would be in prime position to trade down to a team that needed one.  

BPA is a draft philosophy.  As Gute has stated what is a perceived need now may not be come end of training camp.  They have a pretty good idea where guys are going to go and will trade around accordingly.  Most often rookies need time to develop.  So to try to fill an immediate need is usually not a good idea anyway.  We'll see what FA's we sign prior to the draft.  

Lots of ways to build a roster besides the draft.  Still maintain reaching for need is a cardinal sin that usually ends up biting you in the arse.  

[St Vince]

I think Sweat is the guy if he's on the board. Gute traded out as soon as Vita Vea was drafted. Think he wants that type of player on the DL.

[OneTwoSixFive]

2 hours ago, St Vince said:

I think Sweat is the guy if he's on the board. Gute traded out as soon as Vita Vea was drafted. Think he wants that type of player on the DL.

It has been many years since the Packers have gone really big, both on the D line and the O line. It would seem that 320-325 is the higher end of what they like, no more Big Grease, Raji, or the Gravedigger, it seems........conditioning is so hard to achieve with the super-bigs.  That is why I'm guessing no Sweat, no J.C.Latham (probably gone before the Packers pick anyway) and no Amarius Mims, either.

[spilltray]

3 hours ago, Scoremore said:

Well that's pretty much what I said.  However reaching on that last safety and passing on a player rated much higher always gets you in trouble.  Kevin King more pressing need but we passed up TJ Watt.  Prime example.  As far as QB's that may be the one exception we are pretty well set there.  If that situation came up it we would be in prime position to trade down to a team that needed one.  

BPA is a draft philosophy.  As Gute has stated what is a perceived need now may not be come end of training camp.  They have a pretty good idea where guys are going to go and will trade around accordingly.  Most often rookies need time to develop.  So to try to fill an immediate need is usually not a good idea anyway.  We'll see what FA's we sign prior to the draft.  

Lots of ways to build a roster besides the draft.  Still maintain reaching for need is a cardinal sin that usually ends up biting you in the arse.  

I think reaching for need is usually more of a media accusation than reality. The talking heads will say a guy is a reach because he was further down their lists. The teams know more than the media "experts" usually, so that is an arrogant position to take.

Edited February 5 by spilltray