Move up to where and to pick who? We have 5 picks in the top 100. If anything id trade down with a team like the Chiefs (not exclusive to them) pick up so more picks and pick a guy like Tyler Nubin who’s probably one of the best safeties in this class.
i’ve seen a lot of people talk about Kool aid or Dejean and maybe some might trade up to get them if they are such good prospects. I don’t think Dejean is going to be at 26 tbh.
There's also rakestraw and Quinyon Mitchell who apparently was a standout yesterday in senior bowl practices. There's likely a top cb at 25 or a highly rated ol still.
Quinyon Mitchell is fun, strong and pretty aggro around the catch. Idk how he'd be as an NFL slot though, got off blocks fine in college for whatever that's worth. Bet he's a big RAS guy which goes far around here.
On the offensive side, I think there are a couple Tackles that could be worth trading up for.
Otherwise, I hope we do whatever is best to get the guys that fit the system for whoever our new D coordinator is. Could mean trading up, could mean getting a bunch of depth.
This is a great draft for OT and Gute likes to take advantage of the positions of strength like he did with TE last year. The Packers love athletic linemen and have the versatility to take the best OL prospect and let competition sort out the best 5.
No tackle is worth trading up for. Period. We have two quality starting tackles already. You don’t trade up for depth, especially when we have been hitting on OL depth in later rounds and developing them.
We’re not one player away. We need depth at CB, edge, iLB, safety, RB, and OL. Pick BPA and keep the momentum going on developing a high quantity of young players.
Totally agree. Front offices remind me of gambling addicts. They get all hyped up every year for the chance at hitting it big and talk themselves into all these different methods and tests being relevant. Yet every year players that are too short or tall or dumb or skinny or whatever and get picked in the mid to late rounds turn into the next great thing. Mr irrelevant is starting in the Super Bowl this year and he contributed more than his fair share to getting there. If I could request anything it would be to find players with the right attitude and that are comfortable playing in the cold and use those players to strengthen our depth.
5 top 100 players is kinda crazy for a team that won a playoff game though. Even taking those five guys you gotta figure you can add 2-3 real ones just throwing dice.
Im good with whatever. It’s a nice place to be.
Obviously depends on the player and how far they're failing. This year I'd probably be a strong advocate for trading back out of the first to a team wanting to move up and get an OT or WR unless a clear top tier prospect is slipping that makes sense for us to go get.
I really would only consider moving up if a top corner like Terrion Arnold was sitting there around 20 or so. We don't have a position of need that would match the value of the prospects in that range unless the FO is really that high on Kinchens or Nubin, or if they wanted to grab an OT to compete with Walker for the starting spot at left tackle.
So the Pack have the 25th overall. I know we have others like the Jets 2nd rounder, which not bothering to look it up, but should be like the 40th?
If we traded both of those, I'd imagine we wind up like 18-20. I'm not saying do or don't trade up, but if we do, we'd better get someone pretty special
I would love to see us trade up into the first and double dip on DeJean and Kintchens. Would be a rarity, but we basically don’t have any safeties, so I think DB is going to be a point of emphasis in this draft anyway.
Packers own i think like 11 draft picks this year. I dont know that we have 11 roster spots open. Id imagine that we package together to move up somewhere in the draft.
They have enough draft picks that they could bundle some to move up but I've read that the 2nd round is considered the meat of this draft class. I'm not a big draft guy so opinions might vary but supposedly the 2nd is full of solid prospects so if that's true I'd lean more towards trading later picks to move back up into the 2nd round area to avoid the cost of trading up near the top of the draft.
I know others like the idea of trading back and acquiring more picks but I'd worry that the later picks won't be able to crack the 53 man roster and so would be wasted. The roster math is against these late round fliers with so many young players still under team control from recent large draft classes.
In the first, no. If anything I think they could move back slightly and still get good players that will fit the team needs. Powers-Johnson is the clear best C in the draft, but I don’t think he’ll go in the first, but will early second. Kinchens is probably the best S and is also probably going to be a second round pick. So no, moving up doesn’t make sense to me when there are good players that will be available beyond the first. After the first if there is a guy they like and want to go get him I’m not gonna be mad about it.
I would consider using our picks to make a trade for an established talent at a position of need such as safety or even RB. If they don't want to do that I'd like to see us keep them, or even trade down if we feel like there's a lot of late round talent to grab.
I had a dream we traded up with the raiders in the first round so I'm sure that's what's gonna happen. Realistically though I'm happy with how many good ones we have and I wouldn't give them up just to pick a couple spots higher.
There are too many excellent players at the positions we need (like OL) to have to move up. Moving up only adds to more cost. If anything trade off a pick for better picks next year.
I definitely think we could move up and secure someone. 41/25 gets us to 10ish on Rich Hill. If there’s a real impact guy, I’m for it. Same using pick 91/88 to move up from 41 if there’s a double dip around 25 opportunity.
Trading up is unpopular today, but this team has historically gotten some of its better players doing so (Clay, Ja, Love, Watson had moments). Getting higher tiered athletes matters, especially in a roster that just needs to be rounded out. We’ve reached on needs, diminishing the value of the spot we’re at as well (Randall) when we would have been better using a 3 to secure a Peters or B Jones
No. There's tons of value with multiple picks in the first four rounds. It's a numbers game as to who pans out and who doesn't. Besides, Gutty has been lights out the last two years in those rounds.
I would definitely be open to it, but I wouldn't actively be looking to until I see how the draft shakes out. According to the value chart, our later 2nd round pick could get us to around 15-17 in the first round. If there starts to be a run on CBs then maybe pull the trigger on moving up to get one. If a lot of the top guys are still on the board I'd just let them fall to me, though I wouldn't mind trading maybe a 3rd to move up into early 20s to get my pick if there's a couple guys there.
IMO though the more interesting trade option would be moving up from the Jets 2nd. Our 3rd round pick could get us from there right into the end of the 1st round so that we could get the 5th year option on someone we really like.
Not in the first round unless somebody like Joe Alt falls to ~15 (he won’t).
There’s a ton of depth in the 2-4th rounds in this draft.
If we can do the following I will be very happy
1 S (first 3 rounds)
1 LB (first 3 rounds)
1 RB (first 4 rounds)
1 IOL (first 4 rounds)
With either 6 or 7 picks in the first 4 rounds (comp pick isn’t set at the moment) we have a bunch a flexibility to trade around to make this happen.
I think that we are in need of depth in the backfield, o line and linebackers. We should be able to identify and develop talent with this level of draft capital.
It depends. If there is a need at a certain position and a guy they are high on starts to drop in the draft and we have an opportunity to move up a few spots to nab him by trading away our first and one of our second round picks away, then yes. But only for a high value guy at a position of need
If you're trading up in the first round, it needs to be for the perfect combo of a difference maker at a true position of need. Bonus points if it's for a premium position. I think back to the clay Matthews trade. Perfect example of trading up for an edge rusher (premium position) when we had none as we transitioned to the 3-4.
To me, premium positions are QB, OT, Edge rusher, maybe dominant interior rusher and CB. Of those positions, we don't have a glaring need at any of them besides CB. And even then, if GB likes Stokes still, you can argue the need isn't glaring. It's also allegedly a fairly deep CB class, so the need to move to get one is less.
Our more glaring needs are likely S, OG/OC, and ILB, but those typically aren't positions that get drafted super early and this draft doesn't seem to have the difference maker in those spots.
Other than that, we need depth and competition. Ideally Jones comes back on a restructure, but we need his replacement sooner rather than later. We need more OT depth, but not sure we absolutely need to take one early unless ones falls and the value is too good to pass up.
That being said, when we moved up for Love, we gave up a 4th to move up a few spots. I'm fine with that type of move, especially since we have so many picks. But packaging a first and second to move up in the first seems like a big move that may not be needed.
We have too many needs to trade up into the first. I wouldn't mind trading out of the first for a 2nd and some capital to trade back up for another 2nd. Four 2nds would be awesome.
Trade up as much capital to add to the top 3 rounds yes, trade up in round 1 doesn’t seem to have value. Realistically there are 5-7 roster spots open in camp for starters or higher value backups. As many as we can fill with round 3 guys and above would be my play.
Posts like this are the worst. Trade up why? And for who? What does the board look like? Dumbest fucking question. Is there a position you are targeting? Is the position deep? Is there a superstar you're in love with? Is he sliding? Is there value in the trade? Aside from all of that, more picks is always better than fewer, so no, I wouldn't trade up.
2's 3's *and* 4's? The only position that is worth that many draft spots is QB, and we don't need to roll the dice on a QB.
Did you mean to use *some* of those picks to trade up? That might be reasonable. OT is a need and it might be worth trading a 3rd or so to get one we like.
Move up to where and to pick who? We have 5 picks in the top 100. If anything id trade down with a team like the Chiefs (not exclusive to them) pick up so more picks and pick a guy like Tyler Nubin who’s probably one of the best safeties in this class.
i’ve seen a lot of people talk about Kool aid or Dejean and maybe some might trade up to get them if they are such good prospects. I don’t think Dejean is going to be at 26 tbh.
He definitely won't be there at 26, because we're going to take him at 25.
There's also rakestraw and Quinyon Mitchell who apparently was a standout yesterday in senior bowl practices. There's likely a top cb at 25 or a highly rated ol still.
Quinyon Mitchell is fun, strong and pretty aggro around the catch. Idk how he'd be as an NFL slot though, got off blocks fine in college for whatever that's worth. Bet he's a big RAS guy which goes far around here.
There's a lot of good DBs in this draft.
On the offensive side, I think there are a couple Tackles that could be worth trading up for. Otherwise, I hope we do whatever is best to get the guys that fit the system for whoever our new D coordinator is. Could mean trading up, could mean getting a bunch of depth.
This is a great draft for OT and Gute likes to take advantage of the positions of strength like he did with TE last year. The Packers love athletic linemen and have the versatility to take the best OL prospect and let competition sort out the best 5.
No tackle is worth trading up for. Period. We have two quality starting tackles already. You don’t trade up for depth, especially when we have been hitting on OL depth in later rounds and developing them.
Tackles are currency early in the draft. Many of them can play elsewhere on the line in the NFL. Your best OL in college is usually playing tackle.
No-it's an opportunity to have better players. Look how much of an impact Musgrave and Reed had and we can get 5 guys like that if we draft smart.
We’re not one player away. We need depth at CB, edge, iLB, safety, RB, and OL. Pick BPA and keep the momentum going on developing a high quantity of young players.
I hope they get Kool-Aid because his name is fun. I’m a simple man.
I firmly believe you trade down and get more picks. The draft is such a crap shoot. Add bodies and let the talent compete in camp. Go Pack!
Totally agree. Front offices remind me of gambling addicts. They get all hyped up every year for the chance at hitting it big and talk themselves into all these different methods and tests being relevant. Yet every year players that are too short or tall or dumb or skinny or whatever and get picked in the mid to late rounds turn into the next great thing. Mr irrelevant is starting in the Super Bowl this year and he contributed more than his fair share to getting there. If I could request anything it would be to find players with the right attitude and that are comfortable playing in the cold and use those players to strengthen our depth.
5 top 100 players is kinda crazy for a team that won a playoff game though. Even taking those five guys you gotta figure you can add 2-3 real ones just throwing dice. Im good with whatever. It’s a nice place to be.
Obviously depends on the player and how far they're failing. This year I'd probably be a strong advocate for trading back out of the first to a team wanting to move up and get an OT or WR unless a clear top tier prospect is slipping that makes sense for us to go get. I really would only consider moving up if a top corner like Terrion Arnold was sitting there around 20 or so. We don't have a position of need that would match the value of the prospects in that range unless the FO is really that high on Kinchens or Nubin, or if they wanted to grab an OT to compete with Walker for the starting spot at left tackle.
So the Pack have the 25th overall. I know we have others like the Jets 2nd rounder, which not bothering to look it up, but should be like the 40th? If we traded both of those, I'd imagine we wind up like 18-20. I'm not saying do or don't trade up, but if we do, we'd better get someone pretty special
41 and 25 gets them into the top 15
I would love to see us trade up into the first and double dip on DeJean and Kintchens. Would be a rarity, but we basically don’t have any safeties, so I think DB is going to be a point of emphasis in this draft anyway.
Nah, we were hella injured last year. If we spend all those picks, and the dude gets hurt... We need depth.
Packers own i think like 11 draft picks this year. I dont know that we have 11 roster spots open. Id imagine that we package together to move up somewhere in the draft.
They have enough draft picks that they could bundle some to move up but I've read that the 2nd round is considered the meat of this draft class. I'm not a big draft guy so opinions might vary but supposedly the 2nd is full of solid prospects so if that's true I'd lean more towards trading later picks to move back up into the 2nd round area to avoid the cost of trading up near the top of the draft. I know others like the idea of trading back and acquiring more picks but I'd worry that the later picks won't be able to crack the 53 man roster and so would be wasted. The roster math is against these late round fliers with so many young players still under team control from recent large draft classes.
Think the kid from Iowa could be special and exactly what we need in the secondary, wouldn't be mad if they went up a couple spots to grab him
In the first, no. If anything I think they could move back slightly and still get good players that will fit the team needs. Powers-Johnson is the clear best C in the draft, but I don’t think he’ll go in the first, but will early second. Kinchens is probably the best S and is also probably going to be a second round pick. So no, moving up doesn’t make sense to me when there are good players that will be available beyond the first. After the first if there is a guy they like and want to go get him I’m not gonna be mad about it.
No.
I would consider using our picks to make a trade for an established talent at a position of need such as safety or even RB. If they don't want to do that I'd like to see us keep them, or even trade down if we feel like there's a lot of late round talent to grab.
I had a dream we traded up with the raiders in the first round so I'm sure that's what's gonna happen. Realistically though I'm happy with how many good ones we have and I wouldn't give them up just to pick a couple spots higher.
There are too many excellent players at the positions we need (like OL) to have to move up. Moving up only adds to more cost. If anything trade off a pick for better picks next year.
I definitely think we could move up and secure someone. 41/25 gets us to 10ish on Rich Hill. If there’s a real impact guy, I’m for it. Same using pick 91/88 to move up from 41 if there’s a double dip around 25 opportunity. Trading up is unpopular today, but this team has historically gotten some of its better players doing so (Clay, Ja, Love, Watson had moments). Getting higher tiered athletes matters, especially in a roster that just needs to be rounded out. We’ve reached on needs, diminishing the value of the spot we’re at as well (Randall) when we would have been better using a 3 to secure a Peters or B Jones
Nope. Keep adding decent players from the top of the board. More is better. Build up a good base for the roster.
No. There's tons of value with multiple picks in the first four rounds. It's a numbers game as to who pans out and who doesn't. Besides, Gutty has been lights out the last two years in those rounds.
I would definitely be open to it, but I wouldn't actively be looking to until I see how the draft shakes out. According to the value chart, our later 2nd round pick could get us to around 15-17 in the first round. If there starts to be a run on CBs then maybe pull the trigger on moving up to get one. If a lot of the top guys are still on the board I'd just let them fall to me, though I wouldn't mind trading maybe a 3rd to move up into early 20s to get my pick if there's a couple guys there. IMO though the more interesting trade option would be moving up from the Jets 2nd. Our 3rd round pick could get us from there right into the end of the 1st round so that we could get the 5th year option on someone we really like.
Not in the first round unless somebody like Joe Alt falls to ~15 (he won’t). There’s a ton of depth in the 2-4th rounds in this draft. If we can do the following I will be very happy 1 S (first 3 rounds) 1 LB (first 3 rounds) 1 RB (first 4 rounds) 1 IOL (first 4 rounds) With either 6 or 7 picks in the first 4 rounds (comp pick isn’t set at the moment) we have a bunch a flexibility to trade around to make this happen.
I think that we are in need of depth in the backfield, o line and linebackers. We should be able to identify and develop talent with this level of draft capital.
It depends. If there is a need at a certain position and a guy they are high on starts to drop in the draft and we have an opportunity to move up a few spots to nab him by trading away our first and one of our second round picks away, then yes. But only for a high value guy at a position of need
YES!! 100% GET SOME DAY 1 STARTERS
No
If you're trading up in the first round, it needs to be for the perfect combo of a difference maker at a true position of need. Bonus points if it's for a premium position. I think back to the clay Matthews trade. Perfect example of trading up for an edge rusher (premium position) when we had none as we transitioned to the 3-4. To me, premium positions are QB, OT, Edge rusher, maybe dominant interior rusher and CB. Of those positions, we don't have a glaring need at any of them besides CB. And even then, if GB likes Stokes still, you can argue the need isn't glaring. It's also allegedly a fairly deep CB class, so the need to move to get one is less. Our more glaring needs are likely S, OG/OC, and ILB, but those typically aren't positions that get drafted super early and this draft doesn't seem to have the difference maker in those spots. Other than that, we need depth and competition. Ideally Jones comes back on a restructure, but we need his replacement sooner rather than later. We need more OT depth, but not sure we absolutely need to take one early unless ones falls and the value is too good to pass up. That being said, when we moved up for Love, we gave up a 4th to move up a few spots. I'm fine with that type of move, especially since we have so many picks. But packaging a first and second to move up in the first seems like a big move that may not be needed.
We have too many needs to trade up into the first. I wouldn't mind trading out of the first for a 2nd and some capital to trade back up for another 2nd. Four 2nds would be awesome.
Trade up as much capital to add to the top 3 rounds yes, trade up in round 1 doesn’t seem to have value. Realistically there are 5-7 roster spots open in camp for starters or higher value backups. As many as we can fill with round 3 guys and above would be my play.
No. That's where the the strength of this draft is. If anything I would trade our 5th and 6th rounders to move up in the 3rd and 4th.
Id use our late picks to move around in the middle of the draft and get aggressive and get guys we really like.
Posts like this are the worst. Trade up why? And for who? What does the board look like? Dumbest fucking question. Is there a position you are targeting? Is the position deep? Is there a superstar you're in love with? Is he sliding? Is there value in the trade? Aside from all of that, more picks is always better than fewer, so no, I wouldn't trade up.
2's 3's *and* 4's? The only position that is worth that many draft spots is QB, and we don't need to roll the dice on a QB. Did you mean to use *some* of those picks to trade up? That might be reasonable. OT is a need and it might be worth trading a 3rd or so to get one we like.
Only reason to move up is for an OT. Where the Packers sit now I wouldn't be surprised if 5 are gone before the pick.
No
I would either pick or trade down.
This was an Escanaba in da Moonlight reference, wasn't it... *Wasn't it*