Jump to content
CWood21

Packers Forum 2018 NFL Draft Discussion (NO SPOILERS!)

Recommended Posts

On 5/4/2018 at 3:12 AM, OneTwoSixFive said:

Looking at how the draft fell out, I don't think Fitzpatrick was a target. He was still on the board at the 11th pick, so if the Packers really wanted him they would have moved up - it was only three places. Of course they would have had to persuade Arizona (10th) or Miami (11th) to move down, but that doesn't quite fit with him (Gute) saying they were interested in trading up AT FIRST, until the guys they wanted were taken (which suggests the guys they wanted went a few picks earlier).

Given how they drafted, that suggests Ward (went 4th) and possibly Roquan Smith (went 8th) were the alternatives to Alexander and Burks, as the type of players that Pettine obviously wanted to craft his defense..

I'd be leery about making that assumption.  They really didn't have an opportunity.  Indianapolis had their guy at 6, Buffalo offered WAY more than what Green Bay would have at 7, Chicago had their guy at 8 and I believe they explored moving up, and San Francisco was taking McGlinchey at 9.  The only real trade partner that Green Bay realistically had was Oakland at 10.  Arizona traded their 1st, 3rd, and 5th round picks in order to move up.  Have to imagine that the Packers offer probably wasn't that much.  And Miami seemed pretty fixated on Fitz from what I've seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 8:03 AM, squire12 said:

Read/heard that most of the trade discussions that GB did in the first round had been negotiated in the 2-3 days leading up to the draft.   GB knew that SEA wanted to acquire more picks, so moving back up with them was a high likely situation.  What NO was willing to give to move up from 27, was also mostly negotiated ahead of time. 

They almost certainly didn't have a framework in place, but not knowing which teams want to move up or move down and knowing the prices is the legwork leading up to the draft. They knew New Orleans was without their 2nd round pick, which meant the Saints were limited in their ability to move up.  If they wanted to move up, they'd either have to dig into future picks or deal all of their picks this year.  Unfortunately, their picks this year weren't early enough to really push their original first up the board so they'd be only able to move up a few spots.  So it meant that the only way the Saints could make a notable move up the board was with the Saints' 19 1st included.  On the other hand, Seattle only had one pick in the top 100 which meant if they picked at 18 they wouldn't pick again until 120.  So either go almost 100 picks without making a selection, or move down.  Next year, Chicago, NY Jets, LA Rams, Baltimore, and Seattle will be in the same boat as New Orleans this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'd be leery about making that assumption.  They really didn't have an opportunity.  Indianapolis had their guy at 6, Buffalo offered WAY more than what Green Bay would have at 7, Chicago had their guy at 8 and I believe they explored moving up, and San Francisco was taking McGlinchey at 9.  The only real trade partner that Green Bay realistically had was Oakland at 10.  Arizona traded their 1st, 3rd, and 5th round picks in order to move up.  Have to imagine that the Packers offer probably wasn't that much.  And Miami seemed pretty fixated on Fitz from what I've seen.

Oh...but wait.....that would mean that the Packers could/would select Edmunds @ 14 right?

(Sorry....dont mind me. Its a systemic thing which hasnt worked its way completely out yet. Give me a few more weeks and I'll be fine) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'd be leery about making that assumption.  They really didn't have an opportunity.  Indianapolis had their guy at 6, Buffalo offered WAY more than what Green Bay would have at 7, Chicago had their guy at 8 and I believe they explored moving up, and San Francisco was taking McGlinchey at 9.  The only real trade partner that Green Bay realistically had was Oakland at 10.  Arizona traded their 1st, 3rd, and 5th round picks in order to move up.  Have to imagine that the Packers offer probably wasn't that much.  And Miami seemed pretty fixated on Fitz from what I've seen.

For Green Bay, the upper limit of a moving-up trade wouldn't be higher than #9 (imo). That is because I do not believe the Packers ever had any intention of giving up a 2nd round pick.

The Packers 1st rounder, 3rd rounder, and their comp 4th, would have just barely got them up to SF at #9. That deal might have looked good to SF, who seem (to me) have reached a little for their OT. However, if Roquan and Ward were the targets, Ward was gone way too soon (at 4th) while Roquan went to the Bears at #8, just a bit higher than the Packers wanted to move (and I'd never expect the Bears to do a deal with the Packers anyway). The two prospects that I think they wanted most simply went too soon.

It's not impossible the Packers wanted Fitzpatrick, achieving that would have depended on a deal most likely with the Dolphins (who took him). I don't think that was what they wanted, as they didn't get a similar type player later in the draft.

you don't appear to be arguing against me, when you say they never had a chance. I think the same - the guys they were interested in going up for, went higher than they were willing to pay (or their trade partner was unlikely to deal.....eg Chicago). Gute did say there were guys they were interested in going up for......until they went off the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a report today that there was a debate inside the Dolphins room about whether to trade back or take Fitzpatrick?  I could see that as potentially weighing a specific offer to move back, which could have come from GB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said:

Wasn't there a report today that there was a debate inside the Dolphins room about whether to trade back or take Fitzpatrick?  I could see that as potentially weighing a specific offer to move back, which could have come from GB.

The recent report was that their owner, Stephen Ross, wanted them to move back but the FO guys talked him out of it and took Fitz instead.  I don't think there's any reason to believe that the Dolphins passed on a fair offer.  I think the FO was pretty set on Fitz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Leader said:

Oh...but wait.....that would mean that the Packers could/would select Edmunds @ 14 right?

(Sorry....dont mind me. Its a systemic thing which hasnt worked its way completely out yet. Give me a few more weeks and I'll be fine) :)

You'd have to figure that if Edmunds was in that "elite tier" that was referenced earlier, that Gute would have went ahead and selected him.  But they didn't and they moved down the board, so I think it's pretty safe to assume that his value wasn't overwhelming for them.  My guess is that the Packers had a cluster of players (probably included Edmunds, James, and Jaire) that when he saw Edmunds and James go off the board he felt more pressure to move back up.  Fortunately, Seattle had a strong desire to move down.  MY guess is that the three I mentioned were all in the mix at 14, but none of them were overwhelmingly good value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

For Green Bay, the upper limit of a moving-up trade wouldn't be higher than #9 (imo). That is because I do not believe the Packers ever had any intention of giving up a 2nd round pick.

The Packers 1st rounder, 3rd rounder, and their comp 4th, would have just barely got them up to SF at #9. That deal might have looked good to SF, who seem (to me) have reached a little for their OT. However, if Roquan and Ward were the targets, Ward was gone way too soon (at 4th) while Roquan went to the Bears at #8, just a bit higher than the Packers wanted to move (and I'd never expect the Bears to do a deal with the Packers anyway). The two prospects that I think they wanted most simply went too soon.

It's not impossible the Packers wanted Fitzpatrick, achieving that would have depended on a deal most likely with the Dolphins (who took him). I don't think that was what they wanted, as they didn't get a similar type player later in the draft.

you don't appear to be arguing against me, when you say they never had a chance. I think the same - the guys they were interested in going up for, went higher than they were willing to pay (or their trade partner was unlikely to deal.....eg Chicago). Gute did say there were guys they were interested in going up for......until they went off the board.

No, I don't think I'm arguing against you.  LIS, from everything I've read everyone from 4-9 had their guy and they wouldn't trade down if their guy was available.  Buffalo's already leaked that they had a deal in place with Denver, but fell through when Chubb fell.  They reached out to Indianapolis, but Colts told them as long as Nelson was on the board they weren't going to pass on him.  I truly do believe that Fitz was the last guy the Packers would have considered moving up for, but the Dolphins' interest in moving down was pretty much limited to the owner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Edmunds and Derwin were elite tier but getting 2 first round CBs without using up a first round pick was even more elite tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jaegybomb said:

Maybe Edmunds and Derwin were elite tier but getting 2 first round CBs without using up a first round pick was even more elite tier.

There was no way they could know Jackson was still going to be there in the 2nd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×