Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Cory's Corner: Plenty Of Options For Gutekunst

By Category

Cory's Corner: Plenty Of Options For Gutekunst

Packers general manager Brian Gutekunst has plenty of options — which is all you can ask for. 

In the next couple weeks, he will likely get plenty of phone calls from other GMs asking him if he would be interested in moving down from the No. 12 pick. The Packers are picking the highest they have ever picked since 2009 and that is why Gutekunst has lots to do decide. 

Gutekunst can listen to trades all he wants, because there are plenty of ways this draft could go. He could move down and still get Iowa tight end Noah Fant at 20 while adding two more picks to his arsenal. 

This would likely drive a lot of fans nuts because that is the same value play that Ted Thompson has been known for. And I would agree. With how Gutekunst has quickly remade the roster from trading away Ha Ha Clinton-Dix and Ty Montgomery to releasing Nick Perry. 

This is clearly Gutekunst’s (and to a certain extent, Mark Murphy’s) team now. Both of those guys are trying to build the best roster for right now. That’s the most important part. Neither of those guys need to worry about three or four years out — they need to worry about 2019 because the previous regime never had a deep enough sense of urgency. 

Now is the time for the Packers to be the aggressor. They have a real shot to grab three, possibly four, players from Daniel Jeremiah’s Top 50 prospects. The reason why the Packers haven’t been to the playoffs in the last two years is because they just haven’t had the players. The talent level in Green Bay has needed tweaking since the NFC Championship debacle in 2014. Ever since then, the team has regressed and has relied on Aaron Rodgers too much. 

Now is the time for the Packers to change that. Is that a lot of pressure for Gutekunst? It certainly is. This is only his second NFL draft from the big boy GM chair, but Murphy also knows that he has risked plenty to get this right. The Packers have two first rounders and six picks in the first four rounds. Murphy knows that if this draft is a bust, plenty of people are going to blame him. It was Murphy that overhauled the front office structure to make himself more autonomous and now if all the player and coaching moves don’t work, Murphy is going to have to answer plenty of questions. 

That’s why now is the time more than ever. Granted, Rodgers is 35 and it’s hard to know how long he can play at an optimum level. But, this draft is about getting it right for the sake of the front office. They wanted to do this their way and that’s what they are doing. 

They are in a perfect position right now because they have so many options. They could go offense or defense and trade up or down. This is perfect for Gutekunst because he has the leverage. It isn’t a secret that the Patriots want to move up from 32 but all depends what the cost will be. The next two weeks will be a cat and mouse game between GMs that want to gauge the market. The Packers have a real chance to add cornerstones to a team that has been crumbling. 

It all depends what options Gutekunst decides to take.  

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

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He is also nearing completion of a master's degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter @Coryjennerjohn

  • Like Like
  • 3 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (79) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Isherwood's picture

“He could move down and still get Iowa tight end Noah Fant at 20 while adding two more picks to his arsenal.

This would likely drive a lot of fans nuts because that is the same value play that Ted Thompson has been known for. And I would agree.”

So you would be against adding an insane tight end talent at 20 and getting extra picks out of it because you perceive a trade down as being some sort of inherent play for the future? Because that’s what you wrote.

But then later go on to say Gute has lots of options and could stand pat, trade up, or trade down? “It all depends what options Gutekunst decides to take”?

Brilliant insight. The team who scores the most points will probably win the game.

Coldworld's picture

Fant has yet to play a down in the nfl. Every year there are “insane” talents that never materialize. The assumption of certainties such as this has killed many a GMs career.

If we trade down to 20, and got Fant, that would itself indicate that 19 teams valued 19 other players more highly. Let’s assume some teams pick for need and you are still not taking a top 10 or 15 pick.

And there lies the real nub. If we rate Fant as the first to 12th best player and can pick him up and more picks by trading down, then trading down may make sense IF there isn’t a player we rate more highly that we would end up passing on by doing so.

Whether for Fant or another, a trade down that gets your best man per your evaluation and extra picks is a steal. A trade down that bypasses a higher rated pick to get more picks is, on day one, precisely what we need to move away from.

Bert's picture

Coldworld. Thanks. Nicely stated. Trading down for more picks is a good idea when you don't like the choices you have. If there is a player Gute values highly at #12 available at #12 then I would recommend he pick him at #12.

jannes bjornson's picture

THere are five to six players with higher value grades than Fant. Can be selected in the third with Sternberger, Oliver, Knox or Warring.

johngalt's picture

Probably a nicer way to get your point across

Tundraboy's picture

Civility. Refreshing here of late.

Don Guske's picture

Without a doubt the most important task in this years draft is OL Protect Rogers and he will tear the field apart .

MarkinMadison's picture

A) Aside from RG, I don't think the Packers' OL has been that bad.

B) I don't think this OL class is that great. This class is so weak that one writer at CBS Sports has Dalton Risner as the #2 "Franchise LT" prospect. He's a fine player but calling him a franchise LT prospect is a bit silly.

I think the value is elsewhere. We've seen too many years where the Packers chased marginal picks at their draft position to fit a need. They need to use that #12 pick on BPA, and the same at #30. More likely than not I don't think that will include an OL.

albert999's picture

Last 2 years Green Bay has had the 3rd to last most sacks per game
I think OL is an extreme need

MarkinMadison's picture

But when you look at how PFF and others actually rate out the linemen they are above average. A lot of this is on play selection and QB style. I agree #12 needs to get hit less. That starts with a credible running game. It also depends on WRs getting open. It finishes with him getting rid of the ball before he gets hit. This is an extremely QB friendly league right now. Not much excuse for him getting hit if he looks to get the ball out of his hands.

Freezn's picture

I agree we should take an O lineman at 44 take Hock at 12 and Abrams at 30 we would still get a good lineman at 44 and address two big needs with the best tight end available and the best safety available and still have a big lineman to protect Aron

Pierre's picture

No offensive lineman are going to rate good when their QB too often holds onto the ball way too long. Unfair to any lineman to expect to block for 5-7 seconds a play.

albert999's picture

Rodgers also got hurt last 2 years because of a depleted OL

PeteK's picture

CBS sports must of been smoking the bong, Risner is a RT. I've been sold on Oliver instead of Hock( who is a personal favorite), but if he's not available I would be very happy with Taylor or Williams because the chances are Bulaga is going to get injured and miss some games. A great draft would be Oliver, Risner, Thornhill , Miles Sanders.

Freezn's picture

That is a pretty good draft

jannes bjornson's picture

They have Bhaktiari at an AL PRO talent and he played hurt last year. Lindsley as a technician who is susceptible to Bull rushes . Bulaga's on his last legs. Spriggs has worn out his welcome. The Guards are sieves. He brought in Turner. Madison may help the depth. Gutekunst should bag an OT no later than #44. The #12 should go DE/EDGE if nobody is there go with Dillard or Williams. Ted is gone. You're paying the QB a lot of money to stay clean. Hell, he may go OT in the first and a guy like Risner in the second. #30 should go to fill the black hole at FS, select Thornton.

Tundraboy's picture

"We've seen too many years where the Packers chased marginal picks at their draft position to fit a need. "

Isn't that the truth, please not this year.

CalPacker's picture

I totally agree. My frustration is that so few people share this opinion and the related opinion that moving down makes the most sense in this year's draft. OL should absolutely be our priority (both of our Aarons depend upon a dominant OL) but we also have other pressing needs at LB, S, TE and elsewhere. To me the natural solution is to trade down in Round 1, and trade up from Rounds 4-5 so we get as many bites of the apple that we can in Rounds 2-3. I don't care what Ted Thompson did, and I'm not advocating trading down as a principle that applies every year. But this year, with #12 being problematic for a lot of reasons, and the draft being as good as it is in Rds 2-3, trading into those rounds makes perfect sense to me.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

The Raiders would be the likeliest partner should the Packers make a trade, but there are others.

I like Jeremiah & his rankings a lot. And I respect McShay & Kiper, and always respected Mayocks. Now he is the Raiders GM.

The thing is, they and all GMs think differently on most players. And they all are wrong at least half the time, even on 1st rounders.

I'd like to either trade way up & get one of those premium talented guys who will give us a playmaker, a blue chip guy on D like Bosa, Q William's, or Josh Allen, or I'd like to trade down if Guty can find a desperate partner who is wanting a guy at #12 badly.

We have a lot of holes still on both sides of the ball. We need premium talents though. Difference-maker. They tend to usually be found in the top stratosphere of drafts, but as we have seen lately, it doesn't always work out like that.
See Jaire last year and the Saints with Kamara, Chiefs with Kareem Hunt.

carlos's picture

Packers are picking high in the draft and I see no need to move up. Don’t get rid of valuable picks.

dobber's picture

I agree with you, but given the fact that they seem to be pushing the chips to the middle of the table with regard to cap and roster management, I wouldn't be surprised if they move up to get a player they think will be a star.

SterlingSharpe's picture

Spot on Eddie Lee.

Of all the players in this whole draft, I feel these are the guys who could (or would) help "improve" the team the most, and soonest:

ILB Devin White
ILB Devin Bush
Edge Josh Allen
Edge Bosa (but I don't know exactly how Pettine would fit him in)
Interior Q Williams

I fear that Guty still believes Oren Burks can be a great ILB since he took him in the middle of Rd 3.

Despite adding the versatile Smith Bros., I believe Allen could add an immediate boost off the edge a la Clay Matthews in 2009 or even like the freak Jevon Kearse did 2 decades ago for Tennessee, helping get that D to the top and them to a Super Bowl. Just imagine, if you will, a defense that is consistently ferocious getting to QBs. A defense with a reputation for sacking QBs as much as any team. That would automatically make the DBs look better too.

I trust Pettine 100%. Give the guy some blue chip talent!

EddieLeeIvory's picture

< like that.

I'm just under the belief if the Packers can find just 1 stud, just 1 guy who can be an impact guy, that the team can take a huge leap forward.

I really believe Josh Allen is going to be a perennial Pro Bowl edge rusher in the mold of a Von Miller, Derrick Thomas, Lawrence Taylor. Like a young Clay Matthews with juice. If he slides to 4 & Oakland is willing to deal, we should make the call. That would make me feel a bit better for passing on Khalil Mack from them last year. No guarantee Allen will be as impactful as Mack (it's doubtful), but he has big time talent & he's about 4 years younger at least.

jannes bjornson's picture

Gruden has no incentive to deal. He has three picks in the first round. He will get his EDGE, TE and either a safety or ILB. He gave away Mack and gets Allen on a five-year rookie deal.

CalPacker's picture

The problem with trading up for anybody isn't just that you likely give up #75 in the deal, but you also lose the chance to bundle #75 with a rd 4 pick to move up into Rd 2, where (in my opinion) the real value picks this year are to be found...

Nick Perry's picture

"Granted, Rodgers is 35 and it’s hard to know how long he can play at an optimum level."

IMO he'll be just fine at least the next 2 maybe 3 years....at least..... THIS is one of the main reasons I WANT the Packers to use some of these picks on offense, not just defense. I'm not even opposed to trading down a few spots (very few) and picking up and extra 3rd for example (or whatever it is the trade chart suggests). Moving from 12 to 20 is a bit far for my tastes but depending on Gutes board it just might be fine...ESPECIALLY if Fant was there.

Getting that extra 3rd for example could be used later in the 2nd round to move back into the 2nd after they pick at 44 or even UP from 44. Don't be Ted and stockpile 5th and 6th round picks. Get as many swings at those top 50 or players as possible.

Coldworld's picture

Agreed, the window built for needs to be 3 to 4 years. If Rodgers doesn’t make it that far his current contract was a disaster and we are not positioned for a one year push to be credible. No longer are we teetering on the edge of a SB roster: those years were allowed to pass some time ago.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

I agree Nicky..... #12 should still be great for the next 3 or 4 years so it's time to restock those weapons.
But bear in mind: even his best WRs he has had (Jordy, Adams, Cobb, Jennings, Driver) weren't great right away.
They usually took until year 3 or later to become studs.

And tight ends take just as long or longer.

Rookie RBs can have immediate big time impact (see Saquon, Kamara, Kareem Hunt, Fournette, Zeke, etc).

This is why I was one of the few here (it seems) who was glad we brought back Graham & Marcedes, and why I wanted to add a veteran WR to be Rodgers #3 or 2 WR. Kind of like what the Patriots always and the Saints have done a lot of recently.

MarkinMadison's picture

"even his best WRs he has had (Jordy, Adams, Cobb, Jennings, Driver) weren't great right away."

This is one of the reasons I'm in favor of going after a TE v. going after WR talent. They all take time to develop, and right now at least 2/3 of the young WR drafted last year show real promise. The arrow is pointing up, and by this time next year I think we'll be talking about all of the weapons att the position. The TE position is out of gas and the arrow is pointing down.

Freezn's picture

Yes Hock at 12 would be a big target that can block and also stretch the field some. His blocking could help Lafleurs run game, and we would have another version of a better blocking Jimmy Graham

Nick Perry's picture

I get why some didn't care for the Graham signing in the first place or bringing him back this season but the reality was the Packers didn't have a lot of other options making me okay with it.

Graham didn't have a horrible season statistically other than TD's. Hell it may have been better had he not broke his hand. But I also think McCarthy's offense just isn't a good offense for the TE to thrive in. IMO we see a version on Jimmy Graham this year a lot closer to the version we were HOPING for than the version we got.

MLF offense IS a offense suited to the TE so I think Graham will actually have a pretty decent season. I was also happy they brought back Lewis. The guy is like a O-Linemen in the run game so I'm anxious to watch Jones running to the same side Lewis is on. I think Packers fans will be pleasantly surprised and happy he came back.

I also believe if the Packers did draft Hockenson or Fant, they would actually be contributors before the end of the year... Probably more so than say a Metcalf or AJ Brown.

sam1's picture

My guess is if we land a really good TE in the draft you will see Graham become a trade bait as training camp moves along! A way to get out of the heavy money contract by the Pack. Just my opinion as to what could conspire!

albert999's picture

Really good synopsis
That could happen for sure if they go with a TE

jannes bjornson's picture

They couldn't carry his dead cap money as well as Perry's. Graham had a good year. Fans want the ten TDs he had in Seattle. Well, he was schemed to score with Russell Wilson. McCarthy ran a rudimentary, second tier offense for the TEs route tree. MLF should get back to the basics of the WCO. First half of the season Graham was doubled in the short zone and the Redzone. A few times he was open Rodgers missed the read or was running for his life. I'm in favor of getting a TE in the third round that can pick it up from the vets and start to contribute around the second half of the year. Tonyan is still a question mark. Lazard is the big possession guy if he can change his body and try to develop more burst.

Freezn's picture

I agree totally

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Nick,
You are really speaking my language!

Yes, to Fant all day long!

stockholder's picture

Option #1. Defense! . Taking offense will not produce wins. Stoping your opponent will. While we think Amos replaces Dix. Even Jones. Moving Williams to safety is not ideal. And that is the problem with the defense. The secondary just isn't top notch yet. Picking the best safety is a must. Plan B is what to do at DE? You can't spend money on pass rushers, and leave this DL untouched. Plan C. Is ILB. He cut Morrison and didn't sign Ryan. These three positions Need more. The offense isn't a option. Better offensive players are in next years draft. Gute's options may be BPA. But his Fix must be defense. In Lefluer we Trust now. This is still Arron Rodgers neighborhood. Stockpiling the offense, is not critical thinking. It's wasting a defensive draft for make a wish.

Coach JV's picture

Defense wins championships... that is proven over and over again. I agree that we need a top notch Safety. We also need another CB since we let Breeland walk away. We need another DL too. I think Pettine is creative enough with his schemes that ILB is a more distant need, particularly if we get another good Safety.

The O talent, aside from the 2 TE's will be stronger next year.

carlos's picture

It would be nice to see Pettine put out a great defense without having to be creative like last year. Draft some good players to secure the middle and another good CB is a must. Can’t have too many of them at that position. Obviously some offensive players will come also through the draft. A good running back,TE, and some OL to round out the draft. Then wait and see who’s released from the other teams around the league. I’m looking forward to some great players on the Green Bay Packers this year.

carlos's picture

It’s been an impressive start already.

ShooterMcGee's picture

I also think we can get some offensive talent in round 4 and later. RB, Wr, and TE are positions where we already have the starters just need some depth with potential.

albert999's picture

Taking offense will not produce wins? SERIOUSLY?
If AR isn’t in the game because he’s hurt or is running around like a scared deer you will have wished we would have taken OL because we can’t win like that no matter what defense we have

blondy45's picture

Spot on Stockholder! The NFL is still an offensive passing league with rules designed to score points. The Pack has young weapons at RB & WR, with a good starting 5 OL. An aging but still great QB to be recharged by new schemes and designs by a new offensive system. A TE is needed for sure, but this draft is DEEP at TE. It is Option #1 Defense. If Rodgers & company put up 24 points per game, which they should do, but still lose, that is a problem. We need defense! Safety is a must #1. ILB is needed at the premium pick at 12. This year's draft class for LB's is not good. We need to trade back (a few) not up if we have several options we like at 12. If a stud is there at 12, no brainer we win. Get Thornhill at 30 or 44 Please. My wish is not wasting a defensive draft. That is where the talent is this year. Gary

albert999's picture

I agree the draft is defense loaded ,but we need to protect AR FIRST
and the OL is prone to have injuries and lately because of it so is AR
Go OL AT #30 44 at latest

jannes bjornson's picture

Albert, OT has to be on Gutekunst's radar. He has zero reason to be loyal to Spriggs or Taylor. That chaos from last season cannot happen again.

albert999's picture

Agreed

stockholder's picture

Go OL? 2nd and 3rd Only. Lindstrom and Dieter are my choices at Guard. I also would draft McGovern. Haynes Late.. Dieter can PULL! All 3 can play center. Risner still is second rd. And Scharping is a must pick rd.3-4. The best thing for Gute to do is Trade up with the Patriots. They have two #2s.

albert999's picture

Never heard of Scharping? Good player?

stockholder's picture

OL/TACKLE/GUARD Max Scharping, N. Ill. 6'5⅞", 327 lbs. A Right Tackle prospect who could probably slide in to play Guard, Scharping earned a really good grade from Lance Zierlein (an OL coach's son) in the NFL.com scouting profile. Zierlein praised his "impressive combination of size and functional athletic ability" but reading between the lines suggests a thought that Scharping's array of technical flaws would be relatively easy to fix if he's as coachable as they say. He played LT this year. (Switched) But when he was at the right tackle he didn't give-up anything. Mean streak.He's from WI.

albert999's picture

Just looked him up...Not bad home town Green bay boy. Scharping was an all-state pick his senior year at Green Bay's Southwest High School, but wasn't picked up by his home-state Badgers. That’s kinda sad.

Guam's picture

According to a number of mocksters, this draft has an unusually high number of players with second and third round grades. I would be okay with trading down and not getting the very best player on our board as long as it allows us get a good player in the first round and additional players in the second and third round. We have many needs to fill.

Bert's picture

I kinda disagree Guam. I think there are always "needs to fill". The key is getting more blue chip players on your roster. Let's take advantage of getting a shot at a top tier player while we can. I'm guessing (hoping) this will be the last year for a while where we will drafting in the top 20.

Slim11's picture

I’m okay with trading out of #30 if ... IF(!)... there’s a team wanting back into the first round and willing to pay a premium to do so. To me, that means another second round pick in this draft or VERY early third round in this draft plus a #4 or #5 in this draft.

Trading out of #12 would likely cost the Packers a quality player on offense or defense who can make an almost immediate contribution in 2019. With Rodgers having a diminishing window for another SB, moving from the #12 choice seems a poor choice.

jannes bjornson's picture

The value in the #30 is the five-year option the team holds with that pick.
I repeat myself like a magpie, draft the FS there, Thornton or Abram if they think Amos can cover as a FS.

ReaganRulz's picture

I hope the days of “twitchy” and “juice” players are over. Remember when Teddy and the Band would use these terms when drafting players. Truthfully, we were all rooting for more athletic players because on the field it just seemed that we were always a step behind......but to draft on just measurables is another reason why we have not been able to re-stock the cupboards.

Super excited for the draft coming up and the season. Lots of options and Gutey proved last year that he has the talent to make good decisions in the moment. For me, I hope he goes BPA on D first, BPA on O second, and then BPA in the third and beyond!!

4thand1's picture

12 DAYS 10 HOURS 19 MINUTES.

ShooterMcGee's picture

Last year it was TE Mike Gesicki from Penn State that blew up the combine. He was selected with pick 42 by Miami. By all accounts he had a terrible year, couldn't catch and can't block. Now he might turn out all right but it will take time. No way I take a combine TE in round 1!
I prefer getting some instant starters who will make an impact day 1 with our 1st 3 picks. We need a starting Safety, an ILB, and D-line or O -lineman. Devin Bush #12, Andre Dillard#30, and Juan Thornhill #44 would do quite nicely. So would Ed Oliver, CGJohnson, and Mack Wilson. It sure will be fun to see what Gutey does.

MarkinMadison's picture

I don't think its fair to compare Hock or Fant to Gesicki. They are both much better prospects.

draftpete's picture

I agree with the idea of D first and O next. Can get TE in later rounds 2 - 5.
Would prefer filling ILB first w/Bush only if he grades similar to Oliver, Burns, or Sweat. If similar grades take need or trade down a few. We could possibly get two Safeties and two OL in the next 4 picks and still have TE options like Mack and Warring. Of course trades will alter all of this which is what makes it exciting to watch.

jannes bjornson's picture

He is graded lower than those fellows and below Ferrell, Wilkens , Dillard, Williams. Ford.

Lare's picture

It doesn’t matter what any of us or other GMs think, it’s what Gutekunst and his staff think. This is their jobs, they spend millions of dollars and put on millions of miles watching players and setting up their draft board.

If they think they’re getting a generational talent at 12 they’ll take him. If not, they’ll move down and take multiple players to fill holes on their roster.

This is already a good team. The question now is if it can be a great team, now and in the future.

IceBowl's picture

Lare,

I have to agree on this one, Obviously, as I have said the same in other threads. None of us have anything more than a vague guess about Guty's board or all the variables he has to consider and account for.

His board gave us our extra 1st rounder this year. Exceptional, I will say. Was it first year luck? I don't think so.

So I trust Guty and his board.

But this is the draft nicks time. Fun and excitement for them. A couple will guess right.

jannes bjornson's picture

If if was after generational talent he would have stayed put for Derwin James. He hit on Alexander, but the juries still out on his propensity to miss time with injuries. The #30 will be a key guy to balance to move away from Derwin.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

Have any of u seen Marquise Brown actually play?

His unique skill set is reminiscent of Tarik Hill & his quickness would be exploited immediately by Rodgers & this bright new coach.

IceBowl's picture

EddieLeeIvory,

Chances of a rookie coming in and getting it from day 1 in the NFL is pretty rare. Pack need some guys that are the most ready.

I am hoping our 2nd year WR talent take the next or double next steps. The pack needs their experience, such as it is.

Our T Davis is also pretty quick.

Archie's picture

Too bad he just had lisfranc surgery.

4thand1's picture

12 DAYS 10 HOURS

Samson's picture

"the previous regime never had a deep enough sense of urgency"

Agreed. -- Gute & MLF are definitely looking at season 2019. -- This is a needed change in GB. -- The more I ponder the upcoming draft the more I change my mind about the direction Gute may go. -- There are so many unknowns -- Gute can decide.

IceBowl's picture

"the previous regime never had a deep enough sense of urgency"

This statement is so against the NFL pointedly and in general. Each team has 16 games, that is urgency. The Pack goes so far as to play a less than 100% Rodgers in meaningless game. That shows some urgency.

Their paychecks depend on it, now and into the future (like McCarthy). I have seen players get paid and basically quit, but that is the exception.

Bad coaching, bad play and mistakes are not lack of urgency.

Richard Smith's picture

EddieLeeIvory, The most likely trade candidate is Washington at 15. Miami picks right after GB, and both Washington and Miami need a QB.

Fordham Ram's picture

Been reading in the New York papers how the Jets are desperate to trade out of their pick at #3, they are in need of players. Would they take our 3rd rounder plus the pick we got for Ha Ha at 4 and the 12? maybe throw in a late round draft next year to seal the deal if necessary, we'd get the blue chip defenseman of this years draft for it. The Jets want players, we want great players, we have draft picks to spare, if we move up for that great player I think Gute targets the Jets for the best possible deal.

albert999's picture

Josh Allen

IceBowl's picture

Fordham Ram,

How does the pack not get a "blue chip player" at 12? At least the 12th best in the country!! Why lose picks?

Handsback's picture

Two scouts have said... Gutsy goes for the big Oline guy w/ 1st pick. OK, but not sure Williams will be there. See a top 10 player fall into his lap...just don't know who it will be.

One thing I caution fellow posters....Pettine likes his edge guys big. I know Burns is a sexy pick but his weakness is lack of size and stopping the run. Don't see Pettine liking Burns over a bigger guy.

IceBowl's picture

Handsback

You say ....... "Two scouts have said... ".

Are these scouts Packer scouts?

If not just noise. So are they from the Pack? I bet not, because the biggest, most highly held secrets are NFL boards. (don't know how they keep them secret in our world today)

Handsback's picture

Ice Bowl, very valid point. Some guys used to get info from the GMs. Rick Gooselin used to get his info from the teams for his mock drafts for Dallas Morning News. He's gone but have heard others get that info.
So only can say what I hear and if it comes from multiple sources.

sherrmann1806's picture

My two cents worth is this: Both options appeal to me for the obvious reasons! Does GB trade up to take some truly elite prospects that have a chance to be multiple pro bowl (possibly even Hall of fame) players such as the devin whites and quinten williams of the draft on Defense or jawaan Taylor and Jonah williams on the offensive side of the ball or..
..,,,do the Packers trade back, several times if possible....to get as many additional picks as they can in this loaded draft class??,,,,,,,,,as it gets closer to the draft.........im leaning towards trading back to get as many quality prospects in this draft class as possible!

The idea of possibly acquiring more picks in the 3 through the 5th round is just too good of an idea to pass up!! I realize that the chances of landing eventual probowl caliber prospects is more uncertain (but by no means impossible) yet could pay great dividends for the Packers in the seasons to come if they do this particular draft right!!

Lare's picture

Gutekunst's haul in free agency has set the Packers up for an open draft. They can stand pat at 12 & 30 or they can trade either up or back depending on the options available and still end up with some great players to fill current and future holes.

Draft night should be fun to watch for a change.

Packer Fan's picture

Good article. Personally, I like trading down and get four picks in the top 50 and 7 in the first 4 rounds. Then let Gute pick an OL, ILB, TE, S, EDGE, WR and DL with the first 7 picks. Hopefully 2 or 3 will contribute the first year. Then OL, CB, Edge and RB in the last 3 rounds

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

"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."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"