Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

The Many Directions Brian Gutekunst Might Take in This Year's Draft

By Category

The Many Directions Brian Gutekunst Might Take in This Year's Draft

Fatigue From Draft Speculation:

With ten picks in this year's draft, there are many different directions in which Brian Gutekunst and the Packers could choose to take.  Thankfully, we are just eight short days away from the 2019 NFL Draft which will put an end to all of the mock drafts, rumors, speculation, and heated arguments about who the Packers should select.  

In the meantime, I wanted to highlight a few of the strategies which have caused some debate during this draft season.  

Trading First Round Picks to Move Up:

This is probably the most controversial topic to bring up to the Packer fan base around draft time. However, if you're Brian Gutekunst and you have two first-round draft picks, isn't exploring all of your options an advantageous thing to do?  

No one is saying you have to trade both picks to move up to the number 4 pick but if for example, Ed Oliver is the best player on your draft board and he gets past Detroit at 8, maybe you should at least consider moving up a few spots to get him.

Drafting a Running Back in the First Three Rounds:

I understand LaFleur's run-heavy philosophy and its benefits to helping protect Aaron Rodgers and the passing game, but there are way too many holes in this roster to spend one of your four premium draft picks on a running back.  The fact of the matter is Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams combined for almost 1,200 yards, 11 rushing touchdowns and rushed for a combined figure of almost 4.7 yards per attempt in limited carries in Mike McCarthy's system last season. Couple that with the fact, the Packers could probably still land Duke Johnson for a 2020 conditional 5th round pick or even add a veteran running back to the fold before training camp begins.

My hope is for the Packers is to either draft a third running back in the fifth round or later, or bring in a veteran player before training camp begins.   

Staying Away From High-Risk Players:

This concept reigns supremely true in the first and second rounds of the draft where it is essential to add impactful starters. In this year's draft, it is even more crucial for the Packers to stay away from players with character or injury issues because they need to bring in as many starting players as possible with their draft picks in order to become a winning team again.  

With this in mind, I would eliminate DK Metcalf entirely from the discussion at 12 and would examine Montez Sweat with a fine tooth comb because of his past off the field issues.  Jeffrey Simmons would be a different case entirely since he is already on the mend from his ACL injury this past February.  Right now, I would prefer to pass on him at 12 and potentially put him back in the discussion at 30 depending on what the medical reports say.    

What Approach Should the Packers Take With Their First Round Draft Picks?:

The more and more mock drafts I see, the dizzier and dizzier I become.  At this point, I would be fine with Gutekunst identifying the team's five weakest areas on the fifty-three man roster, and then drafting the best player available at any of those five positions (with each premium pick).  This philosophy would probably see the Packers first-round mock draft board looking slightly different than we once thought it would.  

Consider this: Ed Oliver, Montez Sweat, and Brian Burns are all off the board by the time the Packers draft at 12 which propels Brian Gutekunst to trade the 12th pick to the Raiders for the 24th and 35th picks.

Round 1 Pick 24: TE Noah Fant, Iowa/ LB Devin Bush, Michigan

Round 1 Pick 30: Edge Clelin Ferrell, Clemson/ OT Dalton Risner, Kansas State 

Round 2 Pick 35: S Juan Thornhill, Virginia

Round 2 Pick 44: OT Kaleb McGary, Washington/ TE Irv Smith Jr, Alabama

Under this scenario, the Packers could address any remaining deficient areas with their third and fourth-round picks and then draft the best player available with their remaining picks.

The more I analyze this draft the more I realize Brian Gutekunst probably cannot screw it up too bad even on his worst day.  All he has to do is stay away from a running back early on and avoid taking major risks on players like DK Metcalf.

-------------------

David Michalski is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @kilbas27dave 

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 6 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (171) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

flackcatcher's picture

David, I agree with all of your main points. The reality is the draft is always a crap shoot. Now that Murphy is out from interfering in front office and player personal decisions, things should return to normal in the GM office. With all the drama leaking out, the picture of a dysfunctional front office is pretty depressing. At least now that IAMGUTE has the backing of the executive committee, I am looking forward to see what kind of moves he and his team make for this coming year.

Lare's picture

Definitely a crapshoot at this point with many trades being discussed. Just have to roll with the punches and take the BPA when our time comes.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Yes!

BPA

Hawg Hanner's picture

Where do you come up with "Now that Murphy is out from interfering in front office and player personal decisions."? When did he start this? Chapter and verse please.

IceBowl's picture

Hawg Hanner,

I wondered the same. I don't know where people get their info. This site is fairly informed, but I haven't seen behind the door info yet.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Murphy restructured communication in the FO so the GM, DC, & HC would all talk. Didn't happen under MM, TT, & Dom. People saw it as a power grab by Murphy along with Gute's inability to fire the HC. I saw it as Murphy getting involved with the Packers after being distracted by his Lambeau expansions. As for the drama it's been shown that most of that was made up.

dobber's picture

I think you hit on the key thing that made most of us cringe: if BG is responsible for putting the roster together and performance of the roster, he should be responsible for who's coaching it. The current structure implies a disconnect between the coaching staff, the roster, and the ultimate on-field result that just isn't there in reality.

I was hoping that with the selection of the new coach, LaF would slide under BG in terms of the organizational structure and things would start to realign appropriately. It could be that has essentially happened (if not formally happened), but on the surface it doesn't look that way. I'm not saying that it can't work.

WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

Plenty of other teams use this structure. For several clubs, both the GM and HC report to the owner (Murphy represents the owner in GB). It works fine. It's the GM's job to build the best roster. He doesn't have to supervise the coach to do that. They can work as a team. By having them both report to Murphy, it makes certain they are ALL communicating with each other. Apparently that didn't happen towards the end with Thompson and McCarthy.

John30856's picture

AGREED, NO BASIS IN FACT

ricky's picture

Who should be more fearful? The deer or other hunters?

Johnblood27's picture

Dick Cheney says "Other hunters should have a healthy respect for the firearms of others"

flackcatcher's picture

I stand by my comment. I have been questioning Mark Murphy's actions since 2016 when Thompson had announce his retirement in 2015 and made it very clear(in Ted speak) that it was time for him go. IAMGUTE was forced on Murphy by the board when it was clear by his actions he did not want to hire a new GM. Heck, the board had even gave GUTE the final say on hiring the coaching staff and player personal decisions over Murphy's objections. Those are all on the public record. Maybe Murphy was right, but he was so ham handed in the way he did it, it only made things far worse. And we all know the result. Read my comments on Murphy and Ted threads if you don't believe me. GUTE has shown himself to be a asute GM so far. All in all, I think the Packers are in good hands in dealing with player personal, and as we all know that is where teams start with the foundation to win.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

What are you talking about, Flak?

ILPackerBacker's picture

'not screw it up'

yes and neither could the draft guru named thompson

albert999's picture

hopefully burns falls to us

4zone's picture

I have gotten to the point where I am not fixated on any player, or players I hope the Packers pick, I'm more interested in seeing how they go about it all. From a stratigic perspective that is. It's way more interesting to me for some reason.

Your statement: "I would be fine with Gutekunst identifying the team's five weakest areas on the fifty-three man roster, and then drafting the best player available at any of those five positions (with each premium pick). " pretty much sums up what I'm thinking. There is no way to fill all the needs, the question is, how does it all play out and which ones actually get filled. We have a great shot at landing several guys with great potential.

One thing is for certain, this run up to the draft certainly could use one less week than we currently suffer through.

Tundraboy's picture

I know what you mean. I've come to the same conclusion, this past week.

albert999's picture

That’s always the conclusion and that’s what he will do

4zone's picture

And on a different note, Welcome back Kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhn.

Handsback's picture

Two 1st round picks are indeed a lot of draft capital to play with. I'm sure there will be moves that all of us will go....Really why did he do that? Bottom line, I think Gutsy will do a heck of a job with those picks.

Jax's picture

I see no way we would take Metcalf. To be real he has done nothing but run a 4.33 40 and lift some weights. His on field production is by no means worth even a 4th rd pick.
DL, Edge, Safety, ILB and OL are our needs and not in that order. This draft is a strong Defensive draft so solidify the middle of ours as Lombardi use to say and we are back in as a top team and possibly better.

PeteK's picture

I think we might fill the needs or at least address them--T, ILB , S, RB , DT, CB. Unless Hock or Oliver are available at 12. Also, if Miles Sanders is there in the 3rd round I would grab him. I personally would love to have a dominant running game. It helps the defense, fits in with GB weather, and with Rogers's passing ability is a championship formula.

dblbogey's picture

Oliver seems to be a possible character issue, shouldn't we avoid him? Definitely not trade up for him. No running back early? We could use a real quality back to go with Aaron Jones. If a running back is the best player available with our 2nd or 3rd pick, why wouldn't you take him?

Tundraboy's picture

I would.

holmesmd's picture

Jones isn’t quick enough?! Huh? RB/returner in the middle rounds. No need for taking one any sooner IMO

sonomaca's picture

Is there a future all-pro QB hidden in plain sight this year? Haskins, Lock, Jones?

If so, Pack should snag him, since they’re unlikely to be picking this high in near future.

Either that, or trade #30 to Jets, Fish, Raiders, Bucs, or other bad team for 2020 1st rounder.

leche's picture

This draft is pretty weak at QB overall, IMO. Compared to what's due to be coming out next year, I wouldn't waste a 7th rounder on a QB this year. With this much time left on Rodgers contract and with no rumors or speculation of him hanging it up (unlike we had with Favre), there's no reason to start looking that far ahead yet

D Ernie's picture

There are five good qb contenders this year. All five could be craps or diamonds?

Tundraboy's picture

I'd prefer a nasty hard nosed OL or two to protect the QB we already have, this year.

Nick Perry's picture

Me too TB... I think that's exactly what Gute will do too.

Cubbygold's picture

I would think there's a QB prospect out there that has potential, but needs time to develop, and can be had with a later round pick. I'm biased because I have friends whi went to EIU, but Jimmy G was an excellent example of this.
GB should use the next 5 years to their advantage and try that option while they can.

Every team (and their fans) is optimistic about their future, would be awesome if Gute could use that to his advantage and turn that 30 into a 15 or better. There is something to be said though for using the pick this year so that rookie can contribute during Rodgers final years.

jannes bjornson's picture

Stay at #30 for the five-year option you have on that player. Get another good football player. The List has not changed. D line /EDGE, OT, Safety. from the top three picks. MAybe a trade-down to #13 or 15 if those teams are hunting a QB to garner another three pick? Miami and Washington can wait until next year's QB class which is better overall. TE in the third and pick up depth for DT and RB in the fourth. There should be some dealing going on from pick number one on down the line. Why tie yourself to Murray and Kingsbury??

dobber's picture

I think that come midnight on Thursday next week, the discussion around here will be equal parts jubilation at what has been done, questions about how it all fits together, and lamenting over what might have been.

holmesmd's picture

Isn’t that always the case Dobber?;) LoL

dobber's picture

Yyyyyyyyup!

SCLI's picture

I agree with everything you said. You are spot on. Somewhere between the 4th & 6th Rds we need to pick up an OL or two. We have 5 picks within the 4th & 6th rds. & there should be a Good TE available in the 3rd rd.

draftpete's picture

Like the thoughts here. Trading back is fun to talk about but is there a willing partner. It all depends on how it falls before the #12 pick comes up and how the Packer Board rates the Edge, ILB, and DL guys. I would prefer trading back from #12 if a number of equal options are still on the board and another team is willing. Unless a trade is too good to pass up I would not go back further than about 17. Those extra picks could be used to help get back up from #30 to possibly #21 where Seattle is as they may be looking for more picks with only 4 total. I think that there are many other teams thinking the same thing with Seattle, especially New England.

Tundraboy's picture

Agree.

Old School's picture

We recommitted to Jimmy Graham, resigned Marcedes Lewis, and signed Tonyan again....but somehow, we still think we're drafting a TE high.

We got two edge rushers by spending big dollars on free agents, and we resigned Gilbert, but we still think we're getting an edge rusher early.

We were last in the league in rushing attempts, and Jones was broken....again....after less than 200 touches. But we don't need someone to help shoulder the load.

Meanwhile, we KNOW we don't have a QB behind our 36 year old starter. We didn't draft a QB last year, we didn't sign one in free agency.

I think a bunch of y'all are going to be hugely surprised on draft day.

Isherwood's picture

You're high if you think he's taking a quarterback in the first 4 picks. That's not how you acquire a QB that, if everything goes according to plan, will never play. That's a stupid waste of resources. Drafting a QB at any spot in this draft still gives you ZERO backup insurance. If Gute wants to throw a mid-late round pick on one for depth and a possible spot start in the future (Brett Rypien, anyone?) that's one thing.

He's not going to draft a QB with any pick above #100.

Old School's picture

I guess it's a good thing then that things usually go according to plan.

4thand10's picture

Sure...they drafted Rodgers and he sat on the bench for 3 years...just sayin.

jannes bjornson's picture

The plan is to keep Rodgers around for five more years,maybe six. They are still two men short at the Pass rush position/ DT. Follow the board. The strength of this draft has not changed. D line and EDGE people. Next a good group of lineman at RT/guard and a better group of Centers. The safety position is a gaping NEED in the deep middle. This safety class is strong through the second round. If Grier or Stidhem fell into the third spot Gutekunst would have to think about it. Is Kizer his guy or a Mc Carthy
dropout from QB university?

D Ernie's picture

I just read a mock draft having us taking lock at 30. He is a big strong drop back guy with rocket arm.
While I agree not a huge need now with all the holes we have, I say you go for it, he is that good.

blondy45's picture

If is that good, WHY did Twenty Nine teams pass on him? Supposedly 5-6 teams Need a QB now. SMOKESCREEN!

4thand10's picture

Because he is more like a Nick Foles....take some time to really get going in the NFL. But the system he’s in now...he plays well.

IceBowl's picture

Old School,

You make me smile. Same story every year, every team, every draft. Holes and needs and contracts.

The only thing that changes are this years draft position and team needs and cap space.

And you are surely right, surprises during the draft. Theirs and ours.

SpurgeonsCigar's picture

I agree Old School and see them drafting Devin Bush at number 12. Smart ,fast and a true difference maker. I would rather see Bush than Sweat or Burns. They may trade up from 30 to try and get Fant. Those two players would make me light up my cigar.

BoCallahan's picture

Cigar,
What part of OS’s position are you agreeing with? He wants a QB at 12 and NO TE at 30.

Old School's picture

No, Bo. I'd try to trade down from 12, or move up from 30 to get a QB.

BoCallahan's picture

Thanks for the clarity Old School.

dobber's picture

I think it's very possible that there'd be no need to move up from 30. I think Jones will be there and Lock will be gone at or before 12. Matter of fact, I would argue that Jones being available at 30 might create beneficial trade-down scenarios as teams look to land him with a 5th year option.

Old School's picture

I agree that Jones could well be there at 30, if you think Jones is the guy. I'm not sure that Lock goes that quickly.

After that, I don't think any of the remaining QBs are guys I'm interested in. I do kind of like Rosen if the Cardinals move him.

dobber's picture

I'm not all that hot on any of the QB candidates this year, but I think the past has shown us that even guys with an outside chance of being better-than-average starters find their way into the upper parts of round 1...so who's to say?

Rosen is one of those guys who has a lot of pluses and seems to be a good fit for the offense outlined by LaF, but there's been questions about what goes on between his ears...a flaky kind of guy. As a backup to #12, I think he'd be great on that rookie deal, but what do you have to part with to get him?

David Michalski's picture

I think we’re a year away from drafting Rodgers replacement, probably going to see how the rebuild continues in year 2 of the Gutekunst era. Also can say according to multiple reports, the Packers have no interest in Rosen. (That’s what I’m reading and hearing but it is lying season so who knows)

jannes bjornson's picture

Maybe Gettleman takes Jones or another QB at #17

fastmoving's picture

including you, including you OS…..You will be the most suprised person...…..thats the only sure thing on Draft day.

Old School's picture

I won't be surprised because I have no expectations. I mean, I can see what the team has done already, personnel wise. I can see the places where we'd like to improve the roster. But the only thing about Gutekunst that I know is that he's willing to move around in the draft. He could go any direction, as the article says. I know the direction I'd like him to go, but that means squat.

David Michalski's picture

Fair take, I'm thinking we need to focus more on the infrastructure of the team this year, all of the weak areas. I'm thinking we're a year from drafting Aaron's replacement, I just think they're too many holes to fill to do it this year.

Addressing the tight end situation, Lewis probably gets limited targets and a lot of reps as an extra blocker in running situations and rpo's in LaFleur's run-heavy offense (so limited targets for him). And unless Tonyan is going to emerge as the second pass-catching tight end option, I could see the Packers making a run at Fant, Irv Smith Jr. or Sternberger. I really think the Packers could benefit from having two threats at the tight end position who can stretch both the middle and the outside.

Addressing the running back position, I really would rather add a veteran or draft a running back in the fifth round.

Old School's picture

David, the Lewis thing is kind of key. He's going to get a lot of reps, but very few targets. He's essentially a 6th offensive lineman in many ways. Meaning we have four weapons on the field most of the time.

IMO, Adams-MSV-ESB-Allison-Graham-Jones-Williams are the current 7 man weapons rotation. We were last in the league...by a lot...in rushing attempts and I really think/hope that's going to change, but you have to be concerned about Jones' availability AND wearing him out and breaking him before we really need him in December and January.

Until we resigned Tonyan, I thought we'd get a TE on the first or second day. But the timing of the signing has made me believe the staff has looked at the prospects, looked at the film, looked at the draft, and concluded they don't want to go in that direction this year.

If I'm the GM, I need a starter at safety alongside Amos. I need a starter at ILB alongside Martinez (who is in the final year of his rookie deal).

After that, it's backups. Obviously the offensive and defensive line. But we need a guy to help carry the mail, and we don't have a QB who can win a game in the NFL behind Rodgers.

Now, we did sign a vet OL, and apparently they're still holding out hope for Madison. We signed some edge rushers. But no action at all in the offensive backfield. So that makes me think that they've seen guys in the draft they think they can get.

I suspect that the first two days....and the two early 4th round picks... will have us getting a safety, an ILB , and some offensive backfield help. We'll find out in about a week.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

There is no "timing" to the Tonyan deal. GB tendered him by March 13 as required, and Tonyan signed his tender on April 8 when he came to Green Bay. It is completely within the discretion of the player when to sign the tender. Kumerow signed on April 8 while Patrick signed right away (3-16-19). It is just a matter of convenience to the player.

Old School's picture

I stand semi-corrected. By March 13, the Packers tendered Tonyan. IMO, if the Packers were seriously considering adding a top tier TE it makes little sense to recommit to Graham, sign Lewis, and tender an offer to Tonyan.

jannes bjornson's picture

They should have a TE on board by round three.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Sorry. Tendering Tonyan makes sense since it costs nothing save one of 90 roster spots. I agree, but I think the key is giving Marcedes $500K a signing bonus and of course paying Graham $5M big ones.

holmesmd's picture

Bush & Adderley would really help solidify the middle of the defense. Don’t forget about Burks who by all accounts has been working feverishly to gain weight & watch film. I think he can be a very good cover backer. It would be nice if the scheme discipline & no penalty light turned on for Jones. He’s a heck of an athlete but he’s not a cover guy. Early down disrupter who is a very good blitzer from in the box. There are pieces on the roster in addition to intriguing draft prospects that could allow GB to have a top 10 defense IMO

fthisJack's picture

sorry....no QB or RB until at least the fourth round. if any trading for a QB is done it will probably be moving down from 12 for a QB hungry team. i do like Justice Hill in the 4th round though.

John30856's picture

LET'S FACE IT NONE OF US IN HERE HAVE A CLUE AS TO HOW IT'LL GO. Sit back and enjoy it next weekend

holmesmd's picture

Old School, what about Williams? He’s pretty good IMO and certainly can move the pile and run between the tackles! There are a few talented guys on the PS at RB as well I believe?

dobber's picture

A good run-blocking OL will make an average NFL RB into a pro-bowler (which, admittedly doesn't mean that much) and prevent the need to invest a day 2 pick on a high-attrition position. A good pass-blocking OL will give #12 the chance to be #12 on third down again. An OL that's good at both will give GB a top 5 TOP and scoring offense. Build the line!

Archie's picture

Hard to argue against either strategy i.e., build OL + TE vs finishing the job on defense. I have gone back and forth between the two since the FA signings and I can honestly say that I could be happy with either approach, so whichever yields the greatest value-added based on who is available, go for it. The 3rd strategy is live and well as well i.e., trade up or down. For me, Josh Allen easily would be worth both our #1s. He would be pur Khalil Mack and maybe even more. But I think it would take a 3rd pick to get the job done. That's the stickler.

As I've stated elsewhere, if Gutey traded out of last year's pick with two HOF quality players on the board (Derwin James and the OLB that went to Buf, then the chances are VERY HIGH he will trade out of this year's top pick since it is highly unlikely that the value at pick 12 this year will be as good as last year.

So my #1 scenario is Gutey trades out of both R1 picks and in both cases trades down. As long as he doesn't pass on Ed Oliver or TJ Hock or Jawaan Taylor, I'm OK with that at 12. A trade back of 5 or 10 positions at 30 would probably land us a player at an equivalent value. Could pick up our S or OL. I think the inj DL Simmons will be long gone before pick 30.

Anyways, with 4 days to go, that's what I'm feeling. If Gutey aces this draft, he will be GB's GM for many years to come. If not, he may be gone in a year or two. It is a pivotal draft for the futures of GB as well as Gutey.

SCLI's picture

I highly agree with you in regards to drafting a TE

We will draft a TE but it will be between the 3rd & 4th rds. There will be a decent one available.

We spent on edge rushers for sure. Thats why I believe we look for an IDL or ILB @ #12. Then Best "D" available @ #30. Which could be an EDGE who's dropped down the board a bit.

Yes there will also be a RB in play but that will happen no earlier then the 4th rd. Most likely the 5th.

We have 5 picks in the 4th 5th & 6th rds. Plenty to work with.

As for a QB. I wont be surprised if we draft a project QB in RD 6 or 7. But drafting one early? I just dont see it. If Rodgers goes down. The ship is going to sink! Look for Pack to pick up a back up QB over the summer. Maybe.

EdsLaces's picture

If we draft Ferrell aka Nick Perry jr....I fold.

stockholder's picture

No WR? Their Good from what I hear. TE. Draft Smoke? OL- Depth. RB -Depth. The Packers will go defense Rd 1. @12 Wilkins,@30 Simmons, @44 Risner T if there, if not Thompson S, @75 Scharping OT, @115 C. McGovern OG, @119 @CashMan ILB, @151 Ty Johnson RB/KR,@186 Tracy PK, @196 Drew Tranquill ILB, @228 Bars G

RickInCali's picture

I would have a meltdown if this happened. Wilkins is nice at 20. Not 12. Then double-down with Simmons who won't play this year? Hard pass on this one.

I do see Hooker being available in the 3rd if you prefer waiting, but why not Adderley at 30 and come back to deeper o-line group at 44?

BoCallahan's picture

Cali,
It’s hard to use a 1st rounder on a guy that wouldn’t play for another year. I just hate picking injured players. I have read that he could end up being the best player in the entire draft. I guess that’s the luxury of having two 1st rounders.
What part of Cali are you in?

dobber's picture

I think you hit on it in that those two first-rounders give the Packers the flexibility to do it if they really like Simmons and want him at 30. They'd have to really believe that his medicals are good and his past is behind him. If he checks out, I'd be geeked out to get him at 44, and satisfied with him at 30. I don't think he makes it to either spot if the scuttlebutt we're hearing has any merit.

stockholder's picture

Wilkins is top 12. Many feel his ceiling is 1 to 2 years. Also teammate was suspended. But he is the perfect DT to move around and replace Wilkerson. Nobody disputes his ability. Production ,versatility. He's NO BUST! And when you consider Bush or White. Most moved up because of the combine. You just can't trade down because you think thats his spot. Hooker is a no for me. Thompson was a top 20 by some scouts. . 1 year @S and failing to do the combine, pushed him down. Still feel Simmons is the best DT player in the draft. He won't make @44. Keep that in mind. But Safety is not the BPA @30. Simmons or OTs are. And with most of the them being taken. The last one that can start is Risner. Risner is not in the top 5 for Ots. He will get pushed inside. Why didn't the packers bring him in? Adderley? Fant? They brought Simmons in!

dobber's picture

Maybe they don't have questions about Adderley or Fant that would need to be answered face-to-face. Simmons, remember, has a run-in with the law buried in his background and maybe they wanted a feel for his character...but I agree: he's a stud, and as long as his personals check out and his knee (which might be another thing they wanted to check) is progressing well, I'd love to see him be a Packer.

Old School's picture

I have seen Wilkins anywhere from Top 10 to late first round. I do think he's a real good player and a good guy to have on your team. If the Packers drafted him, at #12 or later, I would be fine with that.

As regards safety, I think the Packers could trade down from #12 and still get the best safety in the draft. We also could draft a very good starting safety at #30, or a backup OT at #30, or a rotational DL at #30.

As regards bringing Simmons in......this is going to be a painful pill for some. As much as people would like to believe that Thompson sucked and Gutekunst is the anti-Thompson, the reality is that Gute worked under Thompson for quite a while. Thompson made him the director of scouting, and then of player personnel. Undoubtedly, Gutekunst has had a lot of input in the last several drafts.

So this is my way of saying that Gutekunst is going to do some things very much like Thompson did, and Thompson did end up drafting guys that he'd brought in for a visit. You can watch the film and stuff, but there's nothing like sitting down eyeball-to-eyeball with a guy....especially if you plan on giving him millions of dollars.

Pay attention to the guys we've brought in. I'd be surprised if we didn't draft some of them.

dobber's picture

"Undoubtedly, Gutekunst has had a lot of input in the last several drafts."

Absolutely. While people were "dancing on TTs grave" when he left, the question people had to be asking was: if the assessment was that TTs drafts were increasingly ineffective, even though TT ultimately was the one pulling the trigger, who was whispering in his ear?

Guam's picture

I think you also have to look at who the Packers lost from 2010 to 2013 to understand some of TT's drafting problems. Schneider went to Seattle in 2010, Dorsey to KC in 2012 and McKenzie to Oakland in 2013 (may have Dorsey and McKenzie years reversed - my memory isn't what it used to be). GB's front office got gutted during that period and Gute and some others had to learn significant new responsibilities quickly. It may have taken them a couple of years to grow into their new positions.

I am not exonerating TT, it was his responsibility to rebuild the organization and partly due to illness he may not have been up to it. However no one replaces that kind of talent loss quickly or easily and I was not surprised when Green Bay's drafting prowess declined.

BamaPackFan's picture

BECAUSE OF qb NEEDS, IT IS POSSIBLE WE COULD GET ONE OF THE 10 BEST PLAYERS IN THIS DRAFT AT 12. Drafting Simmons at 30 would give us 2 of the top 10 players in this draft. We just have to wait a little while for him. If he's as good as people think, including me, it would be genius. 2 top 10 players could make a giant difference in our roster. I fully expect we will hit on some very good players later in the draft too. This offseason is setting up to be transformative. I hope the right player falls to 12. Personally, I love Oliver and Sweat.

jannes bjornson's picture

Wilkens has a "rating" from #9 on some boards to #13. He is a valid pick at #12. Ferrell is rated from #7 on boards to #18 with "scouts" pegging him into one spot. He can play 4-3 DE or #-4 OLB. Both Intelligent Players.
Polite will still be in the top half of round two, regardless of the combine
performance. Lower half of round one into number two for the O linemen.
Still prefer the FS at #30 to get the playmaker, if they feel Amos is the SS.
J.Jones can transition to WLB.

dobber's picture

You talk about Ferrell and his variability...another guy who I'm higher on than many others is Jaylon Ferguson. Some of his test numbers were whacked out, but he was an uber productive college player who reminds me a lot of ZaDarius Smith in terms of body type and style of play. Not a round 1 guy, and probably not a round 2 guy, but if they decide to go OL/TE/S in the early going, a value guy toward the end of day 2?

CheesyTex's picture

Alex Bars at 228 would be great, but it's unlikely he'll be there despite both ACL/MCL. He was (arguably) a Day 1 talent before the injury.

Can't wait to see what the GM's think of Bars (and Simmons, too) -- Cowboys scored a win with Jaylon Smith at #34 even though he had to miss an entire season.

A healthy Bars and a healthy Simmons in Green and Gold (and drafted where you suggest) would be a gift from the football gods.

stockholder's picture

@ Cheesy, Bars: It was a major injury. He is getting picked because of his past. Not present. I read where they think he won't be more then a fill in now. Still I put him on the list @7.

Johnblood27's picture

Hate Thompson, other than that I would take your haul.

I dont agree with you much, but that aint bad.

Could live with top 3, hate Thompson, love the OL help mid draft, like cashman, rest are meh...

if Tranquilizer lasts to 7 nworth a flyer.

wouldnt mind getting a bit better RB somewhere in there instead of Johnson.

holmesmd's picture

Why Thompson & not Adderley?

EddieLeeIvory's picture

Packers need to find a legitimate tackle as Bulaga will get hurt for sure, plus this is the final year of his contract & he's in his 10th year.
And what if Bakhtiari gets hurt?

You guys want Spriggs to have to start?

Remember Marshall Newhouse or Don Barclay at LT in Arizona? Yeah, we don't want that again.

Bart_Starred's picture

Couldn’t agree more EddieLee. We may need a safety, more DL depth and an ILB, but this is by far our biggest area of vulnerability. As good as Bulaga is when healthy, there is no one on the roster currently that I would trust to step in should Bulaga get hurt again, and judging by recent history that is a likely occurrence.

Cubbygold's picture

I'd be all in favor of trading up to get Taylor. If he's a day one starter and has a low probability of being a bust, Id love to get that RT position fixed. If it allows bulaga to walk and his contract money to be spent elsewhere this year, even better. Some free agents at RB and S still out there that I'd like on this team.

Old School's picture

We clearly need some help at OT, but I dispute your ability to see the future regarding Bulaga.

dobber's picture

...sort of undermines your ongoing position with ARod and his injury status. No?

Old School's picture

I don't think so. Bulaga is a RT in the final year of his contract. If we were counting on him to be the starter for the next three or four years, that'd be different, but we're not. We're counting on him for 16 games and then he's probably finished with the Packers.

And although I think RT is an important position, you can win with a pretty marginal guy playing there.....even a guy like Spriggs. But you can't win with a marginal guy at QB.

Both Rodgers and Bulaga were out injured in 2013. From 2014 on, Bulaga has missed 18 starts, Rodgers has missed 9. We've won some games without Bulaga, but not many without Rodgers.

If we're planning on Rodgers being our starter for the next three years or longer, we need a guy behind him because the odds are that he'll miss some games. If we were planning on Bulaga being our starter at RT for the next three years or longer, I'd feel the same way about him.

I'm pretty confident that we'll have a guy on the roster who can fill in for Bulaga this year; we don't have that guy for Rodgers right now.

Archie's picture

Had the Pack not given 12 his bazillion dollar contract, a QB would make more sense. Then they would wait a year to see what they had before deciding to offer the franchise to 12. But since they couldn't wait to get Rodgers inked, it would make ZERO sense to draft a QB #1 now. So I don't see a QB in R1 or 2 for the Pack.

Also, given how the Pack spent in FA, the future is clearly NOW and there is definitely a sense of urgency. Anything less than SB Championship during 12's contract defines failure, mistake, choose your noun. So they are all in on AR and that means winning as much as possible as soon as possible. This is teh perfect time to retool the offense for the new scheme they will be running. That means TE, RB, OL and even WR. Now the problem with that approach is that the strength/depth of this draft strongly favors defense. How Gutey steers his way through will be interesting to watch. Me thinks trade downs and taking 6 players in the first 3 rounds, mostly on offense may be the way to go. They could fill all 4 needs listed above and even take two OL, while still reserving one premium pick for a S.

We shall see soon enough.

jannes bjornson's picture

Protect the right and left flanks. Gutey has reinforced the middle and may set his sightson one of these top-rated centers with fast feet.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Nor Kizer at QB or Jones at Safety!

BoCallahan's picture

David, I’m with you on Metcalf. Let someone else have him.

4thand10's picture

Get Deebo, Alex Barnes

Johnblood27's picture

Deebo is Jmon and Jmon is Deebo.

Absolutely NO NEED.

Back slowly away from the WR....

D Ernie's picture

Word is Gutt has pulled out all his hair and bit his nails off and is asking staff he he can bite on theirs and has ordered wigs from Amazon. Lol

Tundraboy's picture

Yes. Stay away from ANY injury risks for at least the first 4 rounds. This year I want to see us go strictly BPA in the first 2 rounds, because we need more impact players now. No longer have the luxury of time for projects, upside gambles, chasing potential and settling for mediocrity.

Nick Perry's picture

Because of what Gute did in Free Agency this is exactly what Gute will do IMO....He will draft the BPA I believe TB.

He has his board and I think he sticks very close to it. I honestly believe TE, OL, DT, S, and Edge are all addressed in rounds 1-4. The order of those positions is yet to be determined but OL is definitely pretty high on Gutes list, maybe #1 on his list. The Packers are going to make sure they have a group of O-Linemen who both build a wall in front of Rodgers and can open holes in the running game.

I also wouldn't be surprised at a RB no later than the 4th AND a veteran added after the draft when teams start to make post draft cuts. They want to RUN the ball, be a run heavy team. They NEED O-Linemen and more than 2 running backs to do that.

Like someone mentioned above...I have NO IDEA what Gute might do but if pre-draft visits are any indication (like last year) I think the O-Line will be fixed early on either Thursday or Friday.

Tundraboy's picture

I'm pretty confident he will as well NP

shamokin's picture

Sorry guys. We need a strong back-up QB. Remember the first half of game 1 last year? Rogers is no Farve. Draft a very good, durable and accurate QB in the first few rounds. Or, at the least, bring on a good vet to be the back-up.

stockholder's picture

Bet Luck is the top Offensive player on the board Now!

jannes bjornson's picture

get a vet at cut-down time or look at the third to fourth round this draft. The one picks are over-rated.

meatstyk's picture

Let’s not forget guys like tre Boston, suh, zack brown, T.J. yeldon etc. lots of ways to fill the roster with better players than last year

Cubbygold's picture

Completely agree. Boston and yeldon would be great adds, if gute can find a way to afford them

stockholder's picture

Agree. Thats why I left Safety out of my draft. If Thompson is there @44 and Risner or Lindstrom aren't. He will be the pick.

fthisJack's picture

Thompson is not worthy of the 30th pick. lots of better ways to go at 30 than him.....even other S. another overhyped Alabama prospect.

jannes bjornson's picture

Yeldon was texting while on the bench during a game. No way! Not a football guy, not a leader.

RCPackerFan's picture

The possibilities are endless!

With 2 first round picks it really gives us a lot of options.

If there is a specific player they covet, they could trade both their 1st round picks to move up to around 4-5 range according to the common draft charts. Oh and the Raiders have pick 4, which means they will likely be willing to trade regardless of who is on the board. Maybe they covet Nick Bosa, Josh Allen, Quinnen WIlliams. One of the 3 could easily be at 4.

If they didn't want to give up both 1st round picks they could trade their 1st and 2nd round pick to move up to around 6-7 range. Their 3rd and 1st round pick they could move up to around 8-9.

If they decided to keep their 12th pick but wanted to move up from 30, they could trade their 30th and 44th pick to move up to around 16.
Their 30th and their 3rd round pick could get them up to around 20/21.

With seeing what Gutekunst did last year, I wouldn't be surprised by anything.
Based on last year, I think he will be more likely to trade down and pick up extra 2nd/3rd/4th round picks. But that is dependent on if other teams want to move up.
A good scenerio would be if the QB's start falling a bit. Maybe a team like the Redskins or GIants try trading up for one to get ahead of Miami.

Maybe a team like the Patriots covet a guy like Hockenson and want to trade up from 32. According to the draft trade charts their 32nd pick plus their 56 and 64th picks equal the Packers 12th pick.
Would Gutekunst do a deal like he did last year? Trade down to trade back up? They could trade down to 32 and then take one of the 2-2nd round picks to trade back up to around 17. That is the Giants picks and I have heard they are looking to add more mid round picks. Might be a good trade partner.

I just can't wait to see what happens.

Nick Perry's picture

I really like the 2 picks in the first round. Two players with 5 year contracts are huge IMO.

I'm not a big fan of moving up but moving back just a few spots I am in favor of. Washington, New York, or possibly Miami are all spots I'd like to see the Packers POSSIBLY work a trade with, but no further back than the Giants at 17. Also for NOTHING less than a 3rd rounder. Hell hold them up for a 2nd if possible though I know the JJ trade chart says no.

RCPackerFan's picture

I agree with you that I'm not a big fan of moving up. I would honestly rather pick up more 2nd - 4th round picks if I can. So moving down, I'd be ok with.

I don't know if it will happen, but it will be really interesting to see if they would consider trading back like they did last year, and then move up again.

The Patriots could definitely be looking to get their heir to Gronk. Most compare Hockenson to Gronk (style of play). If the Patriots traded their 32, 56 & 64 picks to GB for the 12th pick they would equal the same on the trade chart.
Packers then could trade the 32, 56 and their 5th round pick to move up to the Giants at 17.

Essentially pulling a move like they did last year, but get the value this year.

So if they did a move like this they will have picks 17, 30, 44, 64. 4 picks in the 1st 2 rounds wouldn't be to bad.

Demon's picture

I disageee nick. Im not in favor of trading down at all unless some team offers up something completely insane.

Last year trading down cost the Packers a first team All pro. Alexander looks like he may very well be very good with more development. James is already very good.

In addition to passing on James, the also passed on Tremain Edwards who also played better than Alexander did.

If Gute had those 3 guys graded the same, why was one an All pro? I would much rather have a guy that dominates his position, than a guy who wont hurt the team at a different position.

Wouldnt it be nice to have an impact player somewhere on the field? I dobt care if it OL, DL, LB whatever. Impact guys are hard to get, get them while you can.

RCPackerFan's picture

While James would have been great, Alexander was not just an average player though.
Alexander was constantly on the opposing teams number 1 WR. And more often then not he pretty much locked him down. With no pass rush, he was forced to cover a lot longer then he needed.

When comparing the deal, we have to be fair. Its not just James vs Alexander. Its James vs Alexander + who they draft at 30 this year. We have to factor in the 30th pick this year. They should be able to add a very good player at 30.

Here is the question, if everyone knew that James was going to be an All pro player why did he fall to pick 17?

I do agree, that we have to get impact players. Regardless of position, we need play makers!

Demon's picture

Dont get me wrong I like Alexander too. What concerns me is the hulking size of some of these receivers coming out.

My point is, impact players are generally found higher in the draft. This is probably the best chance we will have in the AR era to land a difference maker. Do we want to trade it away for 2 or 3 guys that we can develop for 1 to 3 years? Hell no!

Just because Ted got fired we shouldnt have to go into a new GM's 5 year building plan.

fthisJack's picture

i loved DJ last year and was not happy with the trade down by Gute. i got over it and now....i love it. if he could pull off another trade like that this year it would be amazing. drop down to the Raiders 24 for their 27 and then jump up and grab a really good player and have 2 more first round picks!. the skies the limit when teams are desperate for THAT guy.

Old School's picture

What is an impact player? I mean, if Rodgers extends a play and fires a strike to Adams but we're called for a penalty that brings it back....who made the impact? The guy who got flagged, of course.

Most football games are not won, they are lost. The team that makes the fewest mistakes usually comes out on top.

Bart_Starred's picture

A great argument for why it’s so important to have quality play along the OL and precisely why we need to ensure we have a quality starter at RT. This is why if Bulaga goes down we need someone in there who could play at a high enough level that he won’t get called for holding in your Rodgers-to-Adams extended-play scenario.

jannes bjornson's picture

Well, SanDiego has a Pass Rush number one and two solid CBs outside. Solid ILB play allowed james the freedom he never would have achieved in
Green Bay. Alexander has the savy and was ALL NFL Rookie team.
They stick to the hierarchy of today's Game: QB, LT, EDGE, CB as the essentials. It was a tough call by Gutekunst but he bagged another One pick @ #30 that he HAS to hit on to make it a zero-sum deal.

fthisJack's picture

are you saying Derwin James wouldn't be productive in GB. get real dude!

Nick Perry's picture

It all depends on Gutes board. IMO he's going to draft a lot more offense than people think. The man just spent what, $186 million in FA and most of that was on defense.

I'd be happy with Oliver, Hockenson, an O-Lineman or Edge at 12 and 30. If he drafted Hockenson at 12, or traded back to 15 for example and still got him I'd be a like a pig in slop. For some reason people like Hockenson at 15 but not 12. Is it the extra pick or the 3 spots. From what I've read it seems it's about WHERE (15 vs 12) more than the pick which just doesn't make a lot of sense to me but hey to each his own.

I value what Stockholder for example says and respect his opinion...But I'll be PISSED if they draft that much defense again and don't address TE again. THIS offense NEEDS a TE. I'll bet next years CHTV draftguide Gute takes one in the first 3 rounds, hopefully 2.

At the end of the day Ijust hope for a great draft, one where we have the top 4 ot 5 picks playing or even starting quite a bit this year and Starting next season and being called SOLID.

fthisJack's picture

nick....i could see Bush at 12....OL at 30 and a safety at 44. that should solidify the center of the Pack D. and there are still some good TE and WR in 3 and 4.

SCLI's picture

Demon: I kind of agree with you on last yrs draft but I think we have to wait and see what that #30 pick does for us before we declare missing out on James & Edwards was a major mistake. It could be or we could parlay #30 into a very nice Prospect. Lets see next week. Where we agree 100% is, we need impact players on "D" &"O".

HankScorpio's picture

Free agency has altered the dynamics of the Packers approach to the draft but I continue to believe that working the trenches early is the way to go. That means OL & TE on offense and DL/Edge/LB on defense.

If trades are in the mix, I hope it is going down, not up. I also believe they have too many borderline NFL players on the back end of the top 53 players. So depth is a bigger issue for me than star power.

dobber's picture

So much to agree with here, but I think the recent FA moves have been a short-term 3-4 year 'shoring-up' of starters to enable a last surge under #12. The other way to interpret it would be that they made these moves to allow themselves to take BPA at virtually every point in this draft. I wouldn't be surprised if it leads BG to make some tradeups to pick what he perceives as can't miss stars early, or diamonds in the rough later. I think he has great ammunition and flexibility for this draft.

Still, the argument by some that "11 or 12 draft picks are just giving you players who won't make the roster" is a weak one. In many cases, a trade down of several spots in the middle rounds to add a 6th still nets the player (or same kind of player) that would've been selected with the original pick. It's creating competition. However that 53 gets fleshed out, it needs to be with the best players (and prospects) they can identify. It helps to raise the talent floor on the roster and I don't worry about a 6 or 7 getting cut.

Tundraboy's picture

Yes! Raise the talent floor

Old School's picture

There has never been a team that has too many good players. You need 53 on the roster and then the practice squad. I agree that the argument that 12 draft picks won't make the roster is a weak argument. If you end up cutting 6 or 7, you put them on the practice squad. Or trade them, like we did with Caleb Schlauderoff? when we traded him to the Jets.

RCPackerFan's picture

For the most part I agree.

For me though I do think we need more playmakers. We need guys that can change games. I think we have a lot of good solid players. We just need some more high end players. That is why IMO, the first 2 rounds are huge. We need guys that can be play making players.

We do need more depth too. But IMO, our biggest need are guys that can change a game.
On offense we have Rodgers, Jones, Adams as playmakers.
On Defense we have Clark, Alexander, Smiths?, Martinez?

We need more guys that can take over a game.

fthisJack's picture

guys that can change the game are always the objective and getting them drops good guys into depth pieces. that is where Gute makes the big bucks....identify these guys and draft them no matter what position....BPA! i think you get in trouble drafting for need.....like our CB situation under TT.

RCPackerFan's picture

Exactly right. Add high end players and it will drop the good players which will get rid of the lower tiered players.

This is why i really like what Gutekunst did in FA. He went out and signed players to their 3 biggest need positions.
Now they can go and draft the best player regardless of position.

If Oliver is their highest graded player they can draft him. If Hockenson is, take him. If Sweat is take him. Go and grab the highest rated player.

Old School's picture

Matthews changed the outcome of the Viking game, Crosby changed the Lions game, Montgomery changed the Rams game, and Jones changed the Patriots game.

Most games are not won, they are lost.

fthisJack's picture

how about this scenario if Oakland is a willing partner. 12 for 24 and 27. at 24 take Jeffery Simmons, 27 OL Risner or Lindstrom, 30 Fant . be like having a number 1 pick next year in Simmons.

SCLI's picture

#24 & #27 is an over payment for #12. Pack would have to sweeten the pot with a 3rd rd pick to make it work.

IceBowl's picture

SCLI,

Why not just do a Ditka?

Packer Fan's picture

I like trading down and the four picks within the first 44 choices. Flood the team with players that may work. Probably only two will work out early and the rest a few years out. I rather have many high picks because not all will be starters.

Old School's picture

I like trading down and getting some more picks during the first two days. There are players throughout the Top 100 that would improve this team.

IceBowl's picture

Why not just do a Ditka?

Packer Fan's picture

I like trading down and the four picks within the first 44 choices. Flood the team with players that may work. Probably only two will work out early and the rest a few years out. I rather have many high picks because not all will be starters.

Packer Fan's picture

I like trading down and the four picks within the first 44 choices. Flood the team with players that may work. Probably only two will work out early and the rest a few years out. I rather have many high picks because not all will be starters.

IceBowl's picture

Why not just do a Ditka?

dfarmer's picture

The best prediction I have seen.... GO PACK...

Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

Would like a “big uglies” draft. Nothing exciting or pretty to write home about. DL, Edge, OTs only. Rush the QB fast enough and it won’t matter who’s at safety. Make big enough holes and it won’t matter who’s at RB. Give AR all day and it won’t matter who’s at TE or WR.

Old School's picture

Doug, if it were possible to beat good QBs with an overwhelming rush, you'd just send 11 on every play. That doesn't happen. You have to be able to cover guys or the QB is just going to get rid of the ball to an open receiver.

That's what we've seen over and over again from 2011 to the present. Only when we get more guys like Alexander who can cover for a few seconds is the pass rush going to have time.

In theory, if they're all healthy , we can put Alexander, King, Jackson, and Amos on the field. These guys can cover. We were 8th in the league in sacks last year without much of a contribution from our two starting OLBs, Matthews and Perry. They've been replaced, and if we can just keep guys covered, I think the pass rush will be fine.

Your comment about Rodgers is interesting, since I'm sure we all remember plays where he had 4-5-6-7-8 seconds and still had to throw it away. Because nobody was open.

albert999's picture

very good points my friend

albert999's picture

very good points my friend

Bear's picture

He didn’t have anyone open long, but if you review the games he had receivers open short. He didn’t want to throw short! That was on him; not his receivers.

albert999's picture

Hopefully La Fleur changes him not throwing short

Old School's picture

I would agree with that. But my point was in reference to Doug's statement about if Rodgers...or any QB....has enough time he's going to hurt the defense.

Does anybody remember Belicheat's defense against Peyton Manning? He'd rush 2 and cover with 9. Because eventually, Manning has to throw the ball, and you've got 5 targets covered by 9 defenders.

He didn't rush 9 and cover with two. Pass defense starts with coverage, not with pressure.

Johnblood27's picture

manning could not hurt you with his feet.

Rodgers can.

The rush 2 thing isnt an option against all QB

Old School's picture

I'd agree with that, but the point is that you beat good QBs with coverage, not with pressure. Pressure works against the second tier QBs....they'll make mistakes. Pressure doesn't work against the top tier QBs unless you have guys covered.

John30856's picture

sometimes that was true, certainly not the majority of the time

albert999's picture

Interesting
Give Washington 12 & 30
Get 15 ,96 and 2020 1st round which will probably be pretty high at least mid round

dobber's picture

Do you perceive 2020 to be a stronger draft in areas of particular need for this team?

albert999's picture

not necessarily but i believe we will lose some OL/TE etc etc to free agency,cap issues and or injury and maybe a QB for sure?

blacke00's picture

Many on this board keep wanting a "BPA" approach to drafting. I'm against this purest approach. I think a "hybrid" approach is much better. Draft the best player available "for your team".
Drafting a QB at 12 or 30 because at that point that's the BPA is crazy! Drafting another CB high (when this has been repeatedly over the past few year is lunacy). You do have players you need to develop. You just can't give up on them.
You should access players by position, rank them and draft accordingly based on their rank at that position and emphasize the position you need (rank that as you need).
The Packers need a Edge rusher, OL, DL, TE/Safety in the that order or very similar order. Forget the BS about WR, RB, CB QB early in the draft (later maybe not early)
Who's those players are going is going to be determined by the other 31 teams in the league whether you like it or not.

dobber's picture

There aren't many positions on this roster that don't have to deal with uncertainty due to young players or problems with contracts/depth. There are only a couple positions, IMO, that can't be rationalized as being a priority on this team as you look at 2019 and 2020.

flackcatcher's picture

Agree. The big problem was the thinness of the roster last year, and the disconnect between Rodgers and the head coach. GUTE did good work last year, but injuries caught up by mid season and well, we all know what happened between Rodgers and Mac. In this league, one or two good drafts can get you in the playoff hunt for years to come. This draft may be more critical for laying the foundation for success for the next decade to come.

Archie's picture

Couldn't disagree more unless you believe your team is only one or two players away from being a Super Bowl team. In general, the draft is for the long term which is not very long in the NFL, say 3 to 4 years out. And since nobody can see need 3-4 years out as injuries, FA etc. can change your team over night, then need should not be a factor when drafting except as noted at the outset. Thus, the only way to draft in most situations is BPA.

Perceptions of BPA can vary widely. Some players could be mid 1st rounders on a few team boards while mid 3rd rounders on most other team boards. Perception of value varies according to scheme as well as to the eye of the beholder. Thompson was one of the few GMs that often drafted defensive players that did NOT fit his scheme. I don't know why that was. He seemed to be quite good at finding offensive players. Gutey's first draft will tell us if he is any good at drafting defense. His first fraft produced a mixed bag. Alexander was an A pick but Jackson and Burks did little in their rookie seasons. Still, we need to wait to wait another year or two before we can say with confidence that Gutey blew both those premium picks. His year 1 offensive picks were mostly WR and considering where he took them, he seemed to get good value there.

It's almost Gutey time!

albert999's picture

Take Tyree Jackson in 3rd round
let kizer go

sam1's picture

Let Kizer go even if you don't take anyone. Roster spot too important to waste!

CheesyTex's picture

At 23 years old and with the physical ability he has, IMO it is too early to give up on him.

Lots of battle scars, but look what 3 years on the bench did for #12.

dobber's picture

If they decide they don't want Kizer, they should be able to get something for him rather than just cutting him loose. He's young with upside on a rookie deal. Hell, they got a pick from Seattle for Hundley, after all.

D Ernie's picture

This is fun for us but not so for gutt and staff. I put myself in his shoes and staff for a minute and say for sure they will prioritise needs. Second you evaluate those top needs against what those in front of you have and who your guessing may be available at 12. Ther then moving back, the only option left is to look at who is there now that its your turn and pick the best player to fit your first or second needs.
Last I'm not a bpa guy. Gutt may be. I say fix things that need fixing or they will fix you. If bpa doesn't solve a problem,?

Titletown tremor's picture

My mock draft ... no trades
Hockenson TE
Dexter lawrence DT
Gardner-johnson S
Trayvon Mullen CB
Mecole hardman Wr/PR
Bobby evans OT
Germaine Pratt KB
Sheldrick Redwine S
Michael Jordan OT
Devine Ozigbo RB

IceBowl's picture

Why not just do a Ditka?

Johnblood27's picture

I need some Red Wine after that!

4thand1's picture

6 DAYS, 20 HOURS 52 MINUTES.

Archie's picture

Getting 9 picks in top 110 - very tempting:

trade back to 15 then trade back to 32

pick up a 1st, 2nd and two 3rds to go with our 3rd, 2nd, and 1st

Rd 1 - 2 picks 30 & 32 (maybe another trade back)
Rd 2 - 44 and 56
Rd 3 - 76, 79, & 96
Rd 4 - 2 picks

Nine premium picks - should result in filling all remaining holes even on a BPA basis.

This scenario obviously gives away Hock but nets a 2 and two 3s.

Could use the two 1s on Simmons and a S, thereby completing the defensive rebuild. Other 7 go to rebuild offense: 2-3 OL, 1-2 TE, 1-2 RB, 1 QB?, 1-2 WR.

Is there a K worth drafting? Time to move on because Crosby decline is probably on schedule.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King
 
 
 

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."