2018 NFL Draft Discussion

[CWood21]

25 minutes ago, squire12 said:

I think a trade down 5-7 spots and taking at EDGE there while adding another mid 2nd to take a second swing at an EDGE with that pick.  

Move down to ~20 and add a 2nd .  Allows GB to maybe get an EDGE at 20 and then move up to take another in the early 2nd.  There are more variables to play out, but that seems like an OK strategy.

Depending on what the board shakes out to be, that's probably my "ideal" scenario.  We're not going to be in a range where it's worth making a move up, and the pool gets diluted quite a bit after the top 6 or so picks.  We're in a prime trading spot with Arizona picking right after us.  Right now, I've got four QBs going before our pick, which would leave Arizona as the "next" team up to select a QB.  A team like Buffalo who has an extra 1st round pick this year could package their highest 1st along with their 2nd round pick to move ahead of Arizona to select Lamar Jackson if they desired.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

What other TE do you see as UFA that are worth what they might get in contracts?

Jimmy Graham is the only TE who changes the Packers' offense in a meaningful way.  You could probably grab Tyler Eifert on a decent 2 year deal with low guarantees given his history injury.  But you're betting he stays healthy, which he hasn't been able to do so.  Then you've got guys like Anthony Fasano, Ed Dickson, Austin Sefarian-Jenkins, etc., but I think counting on them to be big time part of the offense is unlikely.

[squire12]

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Jimmy Graham is the only TE who changes the Packers' offense in a meaningful way.  You could probably grab Tyler Eifert on a decent 2 year deal with low guarantees given his history injury.  But you're betting he stays healthy, which he hasn't been able to do so.  Then you've got guys like Anthony Fasano, Ed Dickson, Austin Sefarian-Jenkins, etc., but I think counting on them to be big time part of the offense is unlikely.

Luke Willson might be an option for something like $3-4M APY on a 3-4 year deal.

[CWood21]

12 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Luke Willson might be an option for something like $3-4M APY on a 3-4 year deal.

Is Luke Willson really an upgrade over Lance Kendricks?

[packfanfb]

3 hours ago, CWood21 said:

We're not going off the reservation with Gute, so that concept probably needs to go out the window.  Given my expectations, I think the best way to describe the Packers' activity in FA WR would be classified as opportunistic at best.  I think in a most likely scenario, they extend Jordy Nelson (think 3 years, $21M) to lower his cap hit and let Randall Cobb play his contract out.  The Packers draft their replacement for Randall Cobb, and after next season they move Jordy Nelson into the slot.  That to me, is the most realistic scenario.

I just don't see how you can possibly pay Cobb nearly $13 million this year. He's worth half that. I get extending Nelson and keeping Bulaga at $7 million but you have to take Cobbs money and give to a defensive player IMO.

I'd take a Butler/Fuller + Ridley/Kirk over a Cobb + Ward/Jackson.

[squire12]

13 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

25 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Luke Willson might be an option for something like $3-4M APY on a 3-4 year deal.

Is Luke Willson really an upgrade over Lance Kendricks?

Maybe, maybe not.  I think he is a better physical target than Kendricks for the middle of the field. 

[packfanfb]

3 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

Perhaps they might trade Cobb as part of a draft day move....and then use a combination of a restructured Jordy and rehabbed Monty to handle the bulk of the slot WR duties in 2018. They'll also add more WR's via the draft.

Cobb could be a good fit in Cleveland, where the former Packers Pro Personnel guy currently resides. He'd also fit in SF where Shanahan and his protege Jimmy G need a vet WR with a high football IQ. I can see the J-E-T-S being interested as part of their WR re-build

I've valued Cobb at a mid- 4th for draft trade purposes and those teams above are swimming in cap space and could potentially use a vet like Randall Cobb

I'd love to trade Cobb. Cleveland certainly has the cap but it probably only happens if Cobb is willing to enter into a new deal. I can't see any team desperate enough to take on his contract for a guy who is basically a No. 3 slot receiver.

[packfanfb]

46 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Jimmy Graham is the only TE who changes the Packers' offense in a meaningful way.  You could probably grab Tyler Eifert on a decent 2 year deal with low guarantees given his history injury.  But you're betting he stays healthy, which he hasn't been able to do so.  Then you've got guys like Anthony Fasano, Ed Dickson, Austin Sefarian-Jenkins, etc., but I think counting on them to be big time part of the offense is unlikely.

Personally TE is one position where I would not spend FA money. We barely utilized Bennett through 5 games, its almost like RBs...Rodgers doesnt utilize them in the passing game and he doesnt really use the middle of the field much with TEs. Unless the philosophy changes, I don't see the payoff in a Graham type signing. I'd rather just draft a TE in the 2nd or 3rd and roll with the group we have. We need an outside WR more IMO so we can slide Jordy inside.

[Mr. Fussnputz]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Pretty much.  LIS, I don't see the Packers spending in FA on a WR, given what they already have and their success getting talent through the draft.  I'd venture a guess we're going to draft a WR in the 2nd or 3rd round.  And we don't need burner, we just need someone whose got enough speed.  Davante Adams ran a 4.56 at the Combine, and nobody is complaining about that right now.  Give me a great route runner over a guy who runs a 4.3 forty every day of the week.  And given the trust issues that Rodgers has, I'm not sure a rookie WR is going to get a ton of balls thrown to him.  Either way, a 4.3 WR is the least of my worries.  As for TE, historically they're not big producers as rookies which is why my preference is for a veteran TE.  Jimmy Graham is the gem of the class, but he's also the most expensive one and is going to have enough suitors.  Fortunately, it's a pretty good TE class so if they miss out on Graham signing a veteran while we mold a young TE is also a possibility.

I mentioned that good pass rushers rarely become available in FA, and my opinion hasn't changed on that.  And the few decent ones that are available get overpaid.  It's essentially draft and develop your own pass rushers.  As for CB, we need at least one veteran corner.

Thanks for letting me pick your brain!

[{Family Ghost}]

15 hours ago, squire12 said:

What other TE do you see as UFA that are worth what they might get in contracts?

Tyler Eifert is intriguing .. might be able to get him on a prove it deal heavy on incentives.  It's hard to count on that guy after so many injury issues, but if he manages to stay health he can be a force.  He's sure due for some luck and he's just 27 years of age.

[Packerraymond]

14 hours ago, packfanfb said:

Personally TE is one position where I would not spend FA money. We barely utilized Bennett through 5 games, its almost like RBs...Rodgers doesnt utilize them in the passing game and he doesnt really use the middle of the field much with TEs. Unless the philosophy changes, I don't see the payoff in a Graham type signing. I'd rather just draft a TE in the 2nd or 3rd and roll with the group we have. We need an outside WR more IMO so we can slide Jordy inside.

Rodgers numbers with a healthy Finley, Cook and Bennett far exceed his numbers with Rich Rod and Donald Lee.

It's not box score scouting for catches and yards, it's part of the bigger picture. When you have a good TE the safeties have to keep an eye on the seams. When you don't, they can dedicate their focus to the boundaries and feel comfortable with the LBs in coverage. When we play Minny, Kendricks or Barr could cover Rich Rod/Kendricks with a brat in one hand and a beer in the other. It's why we struggle so much with them (unless they organize a mutiny and decide not to cover Jordy) Smith and Sendejo can keep all their focus on Jordy, Cobb and Davante.

I look at the TE market and there is obviously Graham, but I'm on the Burton train as well. Think he can be a top 12 TE in the league and obviously will never get the chance in Philly with Ertz. I'd throw 3/18 at Burton and see what happens. The obviously if Graham has huge interest. He should be the #1 target we're pursuing this offseason. Extend Matthews/Jordy, cut Cobb, use Cobb's money on Graham and the extension money on a cheap slot (like John Brown from ARI) or put Jordy in the slot and go after a vet WR for the boundary.

[packfanfb]

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

Rodgers numbers with a healthy Finley, Cook and Bennett far exceed his numbers with Rich Rod and Donald Lee.

It's not box score scouting for catches and yards, it's part of the bigger picture. When you have a good TE the safeties have to keep an eye on the seams. When you don't, they can dedicate their focus to the boundaries and feel comfortable with the LBs in coverage. When we play Minny, Kendricks or Barr could cover Rich Rod/Kendricks with a brat in one hand and a beer in the other. It's why we struggle so much with them (unless they organize a mutiny and decide not to cover Jordy) Smith and Sendejo can keep all their focus on Jordy, Cobb and Davante.

I look at the TE market and there is obviously Graham, but I'm on the Burton train as well. Think he can be a top 12 TE in the league and obviously will never get the chance in Philly with Ertz. I'd throw 3/18 at Burton and see what happens. The obviously if Graham has huge interest. He should be the #1 target we're pursuing this offseason. Extend Matthews/Jordy, cut Cobb, use Cobb's money on Graham and the extension money on a cheap slot (like John Brown from ARI) or put Jordy in the slot and go after a vet WR for the boundary.

You make a move on Graham and you probably lose the ability to sign a top CB. I think the latter is more important and necessary if we want a SB trip. If we had $70 mil to spend I'd be all for getting both. We just don't and have to prioritize. The Burton idea at least allows us to address the CB position as well assuming Burton takes a mid range deal.

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

You make a move on Graham and you probably lose the ability to sign a top CB. I think the latter is more important and necessary if we want a SB trip. If we had $70 mil to spend I'd be all for getting both. We just don't and have to prioritize. The Burton idea at least allows us to address the CB position as well assuming Burton takes a mid range deal.

I have no interest in the top CB's. Butler is going to be a nightmare for whoever signs him, Trumaine Johnson has been franchised too many times, he'll get a long-term deal where he'll be in his mid 30s, I don't think his game ages well (no corners really does). Kyle Fuller is a zone guy, I love him for Damarious' role but I don't like him for one of the outside guys.

Really the only two CB's that interest me are Bashaud Breeland and Rashaan Melvin. I would cap my interest in them at 8m per. Now we don't have enough for one of them if we keep all of Cobb, Nelson, CMIII at their current deals and sign Graham. However, if we cut one of those 3, we could fit both.

[blankman0021]

17 hours ago, packfanfb said:

Personally TE is one position where I would not spend FA money. We barely utilized Bennett through 5 games, its almost like RBs...Rodgers doesnt utilize them in the passing game and he doesnt really use the middle of the field much with TEs. Unless the philosophy changes, I don't see the payoff in a Graham type signing. I'd rather just draft a TE in the 2nd or 3rd and roll with the group we have. We need an outside WR more IMO so we can slide Jordy inside.

You're probably not going to see any TE utilized this year outside of Graham. I'm not sure Graham's future contract will be affordable, and his play probably won't match the deal. MM's offense sure did roll nicely with JMike pulling coverage down the middle though. We really could have used a TE to develop last year, and the same applies for this year. 

If you want production - it almost has to be a vet. But no matter who you get, there's a good chance they won't be comfortable in the offense until Year 2. I bet we would have seen Bennett get increased responsibilities this year, had he stayed with us.

[JBURGE]

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

I have no interest in the top CB's. Butler is going to be a nightmare for whoever signs him, Trumaine Johnson has been franchised too many times, he'll get a long-term deal where he'll be in his mid 30s, I don't think his game ages well (no corners really does). Kyle Fuller is a zone guy, I love him for Damarious' role but I don't like him for one of the outside guys.

Really the only two CB's that interest me are Bashaud Breeland and Rashaan Melvin. I would cap my interest in them at 8m per. Now we don't have enough for one of them if we keep all of Cobb, Nelson, CMIII at their current deals and sign Graham. However, if we cut one of those 3, we could fit both.

I'm not a Breeland fan at all.. I think he would fit in well with the last few years of Packers secondaries...

And Melvin isn't going to get $8m based on 1 year of work. I could see someone signing him for 2 years, $4m a year.