Random Packer News & Notes

[Old Guy]

2 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I've been looking at a couple of 2024 mock drafts recently. Two things strike me. One is how high they have Packers drafting (and I'm not talking about the pick from the Jets), like between pick 3 and 8........... and the other is how much drafters seem to want to give the Packers another offensive tackle.

As for the tackle, I understand it is a premium position pick, but even if Bakhtiari leaves after 2023, the Packers are still ok at tackle, with Walker, Tom and Nijman (if he is kept) and still have Tenuta and Jones back as developmental guys.

Even though it is seriously early to start looking at what the Packers need we can see weaknesses right now at Safety, Inside Linebacker and maybe Guard, none of which are usually considered premium positions.

So what would you like to do with your (I'm assuming) two first round picks and second rounder (put the Packers own pick wherever you like) ? There are a good few DTs which might interest the Packers early, but the best ILBs, Safeties and Guards seem like top of round two prospects. Do we break years of tradition and take a round one WR ?

The question remains, are Walker, Jones and Tenuta NFL ready tackles? I think the jury is still out. Most who haven't followed the Packers closely in preseason would assume, Bak and Nijman are gone so who do we have? Those prognosticators don't even believe in Tom at this point of the process. 

It still might be a priority, it may not even be on our radar until mid-rounds where we will definitely get an interior O-lineman or two as well. 

I don't see us between 3-8 unless it is the Jets pick. 

[pgwingman]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

IMHO, If a premium T is there, you take him. No brainer. Second round I'd be looking at S. 

I agree with you thought process, but in a weird way it's a little backwards from the Packers track record. Bakh and Tom are your starters and were both, what, 4th round picks? It seems a little awkward to spend a top 10 pick on a position we develop so well. 

 

[Zycho32]

39 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

I agree with you thought process, but in a weird way it's a little backwards from the Packers track record. Bakh and Tom are your starters and were both, what, 4th round picks? It seems a little awkward to spend a top 10 pick on a position we develop so well. 

 

The team that develops middle-level prospects does so out of necessity, not out of style.

[pgwingman]

2 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

The team that develops middle-level prospects does so out of necessity, not out of style.

I agree, but it's a parody league. If you think you have the ability to develop specific positions from later rounds, I'd say you have to let it factor into your decision making.

[Brat&Beer]

9 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

The team that develops middle-level prospects does so out of necessity, not out of style.

Every team needs to develop middle round prospects. You can't build a team with just 1st and 2nd round picks.  Some just do it better than others. 

[Brat&Beer]

Aaron Nagler discussing Packers Safety situation. 

 

[Mr. Fussnputz]

1 hour ago, pgwingman said:

I agree with you thought process, but in a weird way it's a little backwards from the Packers track record. Bakh and Tom are your starters and were both, what, 4th round picks? It seems a little awkward to spend a top 10 pick on a position we develop so well. 

 

Yeah, but Bulaga was a number 1 pick. Jenkins and Myer were number 2 picks, so they will go high if the talent is there. 

OTOH, if Love flops that changes everything!

[Uffdaswede]

33 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

The team that develops middle-level prospects does so out of necessity, not out of style.

Hmmm…I mean, the 32nd pick is like the first pick in the second round. But, yeah, the last two times we had top five picks we had an incredible bust and a solid ten year starter. We’ve gotten better players later.

Thinking about your post some more, I think we may be agreeing that the important thing is to get as many picks right as you can no matter where they are in order. Nonetheless, the Packers seem to have some “style” aspects: First round premium positions, RAS, size parameters positionally, 4th round O line grabs, attacking weak positions with multiple picks, and 2nd round receivers or defensive backs.

 

[Zycho32]

3 minutes ago, Uffdaswede said:

Hmmm…I mean, the 32nd pick is like the first pick in the second round. But, yeah, the last two times we had top five picks we had an incredible bust and a solid ten year starter. We’ve gotten better players later.

Thinking about your post some more, I think we may be agreeing that the important thing is to get as many picks right as you can no matter where they are in order. Nonetheless, the Packers seem to have some “style” aspects: First round premium positions, RAS, size parameters positionally, 4th round O line grabs, attacking weak positions with multiple picks, and 2nd round receivers or defensive backs.

 

In truth, the point I was trying to make was, for all the reasons we might have to pass on an OT that high up, it should never be because we have a track record of development in the later rounds at that same position. That's simply a lack of proper dilligence when, yes, you need to get as many picks right as possible.

[squire12]

CB  and Edge are possible options if GB is picking top 5-8.  

Preston is likely gone.  Gary might be asking for way more than GB is willing to pay, and is a bit of an unknown coming off his injury.

Douglas is a 1 year performer and who knows if that was the outlier in his performance.  Stokes is coming off a down 2nd year and an injury.  Valentine looks like a find, but still was a 7th rounder, so jury still out on him.

[OneTwoSixFive]

4 minutes ago, squire12 said:

CB  and Edge are possible options if GB is picking top 5-8.  

Preston is likely gone.  Gary might be asking for way more than GB is willing to pay, and is a bit of an unknown coming off his injury.

Douglas is a 1 year performer and who knows if that was the outlier in his performance.  Stokes is coming off a down 2nd year and an injury.  Valentine looks like a find, but still was a 7th rounder, so jury still out on him.

Yeah, I thought about both those positions, It would certainly fit into the historical Packer profile. They may not be popular picks, as they are not seen as being particularly 'thin' positions, but the Packers could certainly go that way in 2024. If Preston goes at the end of 2023, a high pick will be maintaining a very deep edge rusher room. Same with Stokes. If he plays poorly when he comes back from pup, or gets injured again, he may cause the Packers to go CB again.

As for going OT in round one, I think that choice in part depends on a) whether Nijman is with the Packers in 2024 and b) whether Walker continues his progress. If a) and b) work out the Packers don't go OT in round 1. If Nijman is gone, or Walker shows he can't handle being a starter, or even both, then an OT is a very likely pick.

[squire12]

39 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

Yeah, I thought about both those positions, It would certainly fit into the historical Packer profile. They may not be popular picks, as they are not seen as being particularly 'thin' positions, but the Packers could certainly go that way in 2024. If Preston goes at the end of 2023, a high pick will be maintaining a very deep edge rusher room. Same with Stokes. If he plays poorly when he comes back from pup, or gets injured again, he may cause the Packers to go CB again.

As for going OT in round one, I think that choice in part depends on a) whether Nijman is with the Packers in 2024 and b) whether Walker continues his progress. If a) and b) work out the Packers don't go OT in round 1. If Nijman is gone, or Walker shows he can't handle being a starter, or even both, then an OT is a very likely pick.

certainly a lot of the discussion on what position GB might be targeting in early rounds of 2024 (specifically their 1st) hinges on the questions that several players at "premium" positions have.

• OT
  • Bahktiari is aging and with a balky knee and due a hefty salary
  • Nijman is an UFA
  • Tom/Walker/Jones/Tenuta are unknowns on their ability to play OT at a quality level
• EDGE
  • Preston is aging and performance might not match the cap hit.   though GB does not get a big amount in ap savings in 2024 if he is cut/traded.  $2.5M in cap savings
  • Gary is coming off injury and needs a new contract.   hard to see GB not getting an extension done, but that also depends on what Gary is looking for in a new contract
  • LVN is an unknown, high draft capital investment
  • Enagbare is a nice find should slot into the top 3 rotation
  • Cox, Hollins are more depth pieces that top 3 rotational players
• CB
  • Jaire is set and locked into 1 CB spot
  • Douglas would be entering the last year of his deal.  has several void years that might warrant a short extension to soften that some.  still a 1 year performer and a bit unknown on the outlier or not year
  • Stokes returning from injury and 2nd year drop in performance
  • Nixon is expiring with a void year 
  • Valentine is an unknown

 

 

I think with Preston having a smaller cap savings probably lessens his chance of getting cut and moves EDGE a little lower vs OT and CB

[wgbeethree]

It's kinda hard to imagine a scenario where we finish with a top ten pick and there is a position room we still feel strongly enough to pass on BPA. Maybe the TE room but I'd assume that's a position we'd be extremely unlikely to take that high regardless of who we have on the team. 

[Leader]

 

[thrILL!]

3 hours ago, Brat&Beer said:

Aaron Nagler discussing Packers Safety situation.