Do You Prefer Your Drafts Hamburger Or Hotdog Style? Let Me Explain.
Join me as I deeply overthink the Packers' long term strategy.
By Kalani Jones
With less than two weeks to go until the NFL Draft, the draft strategy for the Green Bay Packers is becoming simultaneously clearer and murkier. It’s an impressive needle to thread, but give it up for one of the most secretive and unique front offices in the league to pull it off.
It’s becoming a bit clearer because, as a whole, there is no clear cut “priority need”. Stick with me here.
Entering the free agency period, the Packers had three clear cut, obvious needs: interior offensive line, cornerback, and defensive tackle. Well, the Packers have made clear additions to all three of those rooms, with two starters and one who will surely compete to start. Javon Hargrave is a plug and play no matter where the Packers decide to utilize him, and Sean Rhyan will get the chance to build on his performance at center. Benjamin St-Juste, as a bigger corner, might have the inside track to major playing time with incoming DC Johnathan Gannon (if only we could actually ask him, right? Maybe in a big room, surrounded by Packers reporters. They should get on that.)
So, the major fires have all been somewhat put out, although general needs remain at each spot. The Packers should cover their butts by taking a developmental center prospect. There is still a clear need to infuse some youth and upside into the cornerback room. And Green Bay will need to find a true nose tackle to cover up their run defense deficiencies, especially with all signs pointing towards a return to a 3-4 base defense next season.
On the other hand, a couple new positions of need have actually reared their ugly head a bit more. This is where things start to get a little more cloudy. Having a lot of positions on the roster that could use an exciting new prospect means there are tons of possibilities.
The edge discussion is an interesting one. It’s funny how, for pretty much the entire season, we knew that both Rashan Gary and Kingsley Enagbare would be leaving in free agency, but when it actually happens, you can still feel caught off guard by the sudden lack of depth. At least, that’s how it felt to me. Perhaps it was the whirlwind between Micah’s injury and the playoff loss, but as we stand now the Packers will be starting the 2026 season with LVN and a rotating committee at edge rusher. Now, I’m of the opinion that if he had not gotten injured last year, we’d be thinking of LVN in a completely different light than we do now. I think he was in the middle of his long-awaited breakout, but we’ll have to wait until the season begins to find out for sure. While I’m also a big fan of Barryn Sorrell and Brenton Cox Jr., I think either or both could grow into a Kingsley Ennagbarre type role in Green Bay for 2026.
But that still leaves you wanting a bit more juice. The door can and should be open for the Packers to take an edge rusher high in the 2026 draft. To me, it’s a win-win proposition, because no matter what, the cavalry is coming. Once Micah Parsons does return from his ACL tear, you’ve got options. Say the hypothetical rookie performs well in the beginning of the year. Great! You’ve got no qualms about keeping that guy above Sorrell and Cox based on his talent pedigree. If the rookie doesn’t perform well? That’s okay, because you’ve got enough depth to put that rookie into cold storage, and develop properly over the remainder of the season.
The trick is you’ve got to take one early. Selecting an edge rusher and hoping for early production is already a risky enough proposition, but Green Bay has to do it in the second or third round, where history is not on their side.
Then there is wide receiver, where the Packers have cracked the door open on an additional selection with the trade of Dontayvion Wicks to the Eagles. It's an incredible deal for all three parties involved. The Eagles get a bit of insurance for the inevitable AJ Brown trade, the Packers get to clear up their wide receiver room a bit to make room for Matthew Golden (to me, this points to Golden basically taking over Romeo Doubs’ role in the offense), and Wicks get an early one year extension of $12.5 million dollars, plus an increased role in the offense he’ll play in (I think he’s a great fit with Jalen Hurts, though I don’t mean that to be entirely complementary of Hurts). I’ll miss Wicks, and I still think he’s got sky high potential. But it was clear that the Packers weren’t planning to re-sign him, and probably aren’t going to leverage the comp pick formula next offseason, with tons of money in hand to spend. Green Bay also got more in return for him than I was expecting. I probably would have been happy with a fifth round return, but continuing to stockpile 2027 picks means chipping away at losing out on their ‘26 and ‘27 first round picks.
It also means the Packers could choose to add another developmental WR prospect to their room. The team is still, in my opinion, likely to let Jayden Reed leave in free agency as well. So they could choose to select a developmental slot-type at receiver. *Unless Matthew Golden is supposed to be the future slot guy, in which case I could see a more typical big body type of player being inserted into the Packers’ pipeline.
Good teams consider the offensive line to be a need every year, and the Packers are no different. Since 2018, Green Bay has had only a single draft where they did not select an offensive lineman (2021). We already discussed the perceived need to backfill the center position, with not much life being seen out of Jacob Monk in his time with the Packers. Backup depth at guard and tackle should be on the table as well, perhaps another classic Green Bay versatile T/G prospect.
Running back and tight end make sense as additional selections as well, and their similar situations make it easy to lump them together. There’s an established starter at the top who will be able to produce in 2026 (Josh Jacobs / Tucker Kraft), but dwindling depth makes adding to the room a tantalizing idea. Luke Musgrave has never developed into the tight end that Green Bay envisioned when they took him in the second round. You’d also love a blocking specialist to have their name called that weekend for the Packers, considering the OL’s struggles and the ways this opens up the usage of multiple tight end formations. For running back, the unfortunate truth is that Josh Jacobs isn’t getting any younger, and has seen a ton of usage over the last two seasons in Green Bay.
There’s also the ever-likely possibility that the Packers take a developmental QB. It’s something that Brian Gutekunst has spoken about doing before, though they opted against adding one in the 2025 draft. With the backup QB job wide open, adding to the competition is one of the smartest things that Gutekunst could do that weekend.
So all in all, that’s nine positions that could see a rookie selected by the Packers this year. While that kind of breadth could make it hard to really foresee where the team’s true priorities lie, it does give me the opportunity to make a prediction, and allows me to finally explain why I think the draft situation is becoming a bit more clear. This will be a very horizontal draft for the Packers, rather than a vertical one.
A horizontal draft is one that addresses many different needs at least once, rather than a vertical draft that addresses a few positions multiple times. Think of the 2024 draft, where Gutekunst selected three safeties. Or the ‘22/’23 drafts, where finding pass catching talent was a clear priority. Ted Thompson took three running backs in 2017. The Packers are certainly no strangers to operating in this manner.
To me, the only position where I could see the Packers double dipping would be at corner, when you look at the upgrades needed from a quantity and quality perspective. I’d be rather happy with that course of action myself, but I don’t think it’s likely. This is also why I believe you see an effort from Gutekunst to stockpile picks in the ‘27 draft. With the lack of a first round pick, you kinda have to throw as wide of a net as you can, in the hopes of catching a big enough, first round sized fish.
That starts this year. Maybe I am out thinking myself here, but I almost get the sense that the 2026 offseason is being used to set up the 2027 offseason. Address as many positions as possible this year, and you’ve got the flexibility to really get creative with your cap space in 2027, and then get weird with the ten draft picks that the Packers should have in the 2027 draft. That’s plenty of ammunition to move up and down in the draft too, or even to be active in the trade market next season. I’m excited to see what comes out of it, but even more excited to know that we’ll have more clarity very soon.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Co-Owner of the thirteen time world champion Green Bay Packers. Sometimes I write about them. Follow me on Twitter at https://x.com/kjones_in_co and on Substack for film breakdowns!
__________________________
Comments (33)
TKWorldWide
April 13, 2026 at 06:47 am
1. Akeem Olajuwon
2. Sam Bowie
3. Michael Jordan
Why didn’t Jordan go at least second? Bc those teams didn’t NEED a guard. Houston, picking first, at least had Clyde Drexler.
Although it was the NBA, the example above is what I think about during BPA discussions.
For GB, I admit I am HOPING for need and BPA to converge, but rarely does that seem to happen.
And, I realize I’m dumb.
When they NEEDED a safety and picked Ha-Ha, I was elated.
When they traded out of the first and took Jordy, I was like, “A receiver? WTF? They don’t need a receiver!”
I also think it’s goofy to go around saying, “Gutey sucks at drafting, EVERY OTHER GM is way better than him, every year.” That remark is borne of ignorance and frustration. Do we WANT Gutey to draft better? Duh!!
I’m limiting my shopping list this year to this: please, no high RAS projects. How about some guys who can contribute immediately AND improve over time?
Strap in, yall, it’s about to get choppy.
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 08:12 am
Totally get what you’re saying. Rather than things getting “choppy,” I think we are experiencing our own GM developing further before our eyes.
He was learning on the job as most do, and is looking the part of an ascending talent as GM of the Packers to this day.
Guiding the Packers thru the AR transition, then landing Parsons for a song… two late R1s? Huge.
Seems as if he’s transcending further in his role, and with that Parsons trade this Packer kitchen got hot!
He’s seeing what Schneider has done in SEA, and I’m sure he’s measured his performance against his other contemporaries. Look at how PHI is sitting today. Loaded with picks. Loaded with cap. Still loaded with talent.
Gutekunst has some proving he wants to do, and us fans in GB are taking that ride with him.
TKWorldWide
April 13, 2026 at 12:43 pm
“Buckle your seatbelts,
It’s about to get choppy;
And listen to the tale of the time I fought Rocky”
——Lonely Island
dblbogey
April 13, 2026 at 02:18 pm
Gute isn't terrible, but I think we should have made Eliot Wolf our GM.
BuckyBadger
April 13, 2026 at 08:26 am
There has been a story that Bobby Knight called up Houston before this draft and said "you have to draft Jordan", they told him they needed to get a center, Bobby replied, "Then draft Jordan to play center."
GregC
April 13, 2026 at 07:03 am
I don't think the free agent period changed the Packers' needs all that much. Re-signing Sean Ryan certainly eliminated the need to draft a center with an early pick, but was it really that much of a surprise that they re-signed Ryan? Javon Hargrave is an upgrade over Colby Wooden, but they still need a run-stuffing DT. And Benjamin St. Juste is probably just CB depth. Even if he beats out Carrington Valentine for a starting job, he's not likely to be a major upgrade. I still think they should be looking to draft two CBs, including one in the second or third round.
Coldworld
April 13, 2026 at 08:37 am
I largely agree with you. We’ve maybe helped a bit, but mostly we’ve just replaced departures with players that are roughly at least equivalent and hopefully a little better better in Hargrave, Franklin and St. Juste.
We have not substantially changed the needs suggested by last season except perhaps creating one at RB. Perhaps in Moore we have addressed returner credibly, but there are still questions whether LaFleur will take that to heart.
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 07:17 am
Kalani, don’t go to the grocery store (or write headlines) on an empty stomach.
The premise of the 2026 offseason setting up for anything other than going all-in for the Lombard Trophy is nuts, especially with Micah Parsons on board, unlike our last draft.
This Packer team needs low cost, high value returns on investments via FA, trades and in this upcoming draft.
Seems like Gutekunst, who I had already considered to be proactive, has upped his game. Shifting into a new gear is important to improving a roster that carries 2 players making top QB $$$.
Now Gutekunst appears to be cutting chaff with purpose. Makes me wonder about a few other players remaining on this roster. Banks, Musgrave, Nixon & Reed come to mind.
He’s moving players while they have value to restock picks and increase cap space. He actually got an R4 for Gary, plus an R5 & R6 for Wicks. Both seem to be rock solid deals.
I don’t think he’s done.
Guam
April 13, 2026 at 07:37 am
The Packers under Gute/LaFleur have historically not played their rookies very much. They have taken "development" to a new level by slowly introducing rookies to the NFL and not expecting them to provide significant impact in year one. Whether you love that idea or hate it, the Packer management seems to be committed to it. And I don't expect that to change this year, particularly without a first round pick who is usually the most "play ready" player from your draft.
So what does that mean? With a hole at NT, a talent shortfall at CB, real depth concerns on the OL and some cap room available, Gute isn't done in free agency. The hole fillers won't come from the draft, they will come from vets on one or two year deals. I expect a veteran nose tackle (Reader?) and cornerback (Diggs?) to be signed before the season starts. And this year's draftees to begin development for the 2027 season.
dobber
April 13, 2026 at 08:23 am
"The Packers under Gute/LaFleur have historically not played their rookies very much. "
I disagree, and I think this view is colored significantly by how Jordan Love was handled. While last year's class didn't have an immediate starter, Golden played a lot, especially early...they just didn't throw him the ball. Belton played almost half the offensive snaps and helped save the OL's bacon. Brinson and Sorrell had growing roles as the season progressed.
Morgan played limited snaps in '24, but Edgerrin Cooper, Evan Williams, and Javon Bullard were all essentially immediate starters. LVN was a role player in '23 but played almost a third of the defensive snaps. Musgrave was the starter at TE until he got blown up, Reed and Wicks both were regulars in the WR rotation from the start, Brooks played significant snaps, and Valentine ended up starting over half the season (we won't talk about Carlson, here).
We can keep going. We have this notion that the Packers don't play rookies...they do, and they have to in today's NFL with sub groups dominating and with the Packers tending to use steep player rotations. I think the key idea is that--at draft time--you don't know always know WHICH rookies are going to be the ones to step in.
"Gute isn't done in free agency. The hole fillers won't come from the draft, they will come from vets on one or two year deals."
I agree with this. After the draft, the Packers will reassess and bring in a couple vets to flesh out the depth chart. As of right now, there are quite a few good players out there who could raise the floor of the two-deep or even start. Most will disappear fast between the end of the draft and rookie camps.
I also believe that because Gute likely expects he will need to be willing to bid on a few players after the draft, he's going to take a pretty free hand in what he drafts--and he should. The depth chart is hurting, and there's even more churn coming in the roster in '27.
It's my expectation that when the draft is done, there's going to be plenty of "why didn't you do this???" aimed at Gute. I think most of us have unrealistic expectations and understandings for this draft.
Guam
April 13, 2026 at 08:50 am
Fair points Dobber and probably some poor phrasing on my part. I should have said "the Packers historically don't START their rookies very much". They do work their rookies into the playing rotation, but they don't expect them to carry a heavy load. Gary, LVN, Morgan, Golden and others played their rookie year, but none of them consistently started or were expected to be stars for the team.
The point I was trying for (and failed) was that a starting NT and a starting CB likely won't come from this year's draft. They will come from free agent signings with the draftees playing rotational (and developmental) roles behind the starters.
Coldworld
April 13, 2026 at 09:37 am
We play some rookies, but we seldom give them a settled position or early rotation spot and run with them from the outset unless forced, even behind questionable players.
Look at Tom in year one behind Newman and a less than optimal Jenkins. Cooper at ILB, Golden last year, even after Reed went out. I’d argue Morgan and Belton too, but that is muddied by potential miscasting on the part of the coaches.
We go with caution not upside, reliability not impact instinctively. Is that always wrong? No, but it’s not always right either, and when it isn’t it slows the player’s growth down and lowers the team’s potential in the short term as well.
dblbogey
April 13, 2026 at 02:25 pm
They used two incompetent OL (Royce Newman, Lucas Patrick) a few years back, while Rookie Zach Tom sat on the bench with the then competent Yosh Nijman sitting on the bench next to him. They used Amari Rodgers as the return man for 1.5 years, until they finally figured out he was losing games for us. How long did they stick with Anders Carlson?
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 08:28 am
Spot on, Guam.
Gutekunst has a method, often loading veteran talent in FA, then drafting the same position to allow those rookies to model their NFL journey from a top Pro.
Player development appears to be improving. Good.
This is a bit of a funky draft. Some smatterings of splash greatness amongst a generally good-decent class 1-300ish players deep. Gutekunst and his staff need to hit all of this draft right to fill more positions than they have picks.
Generally speaking, there’s talent running deep through R7 to be had, with some great quality prospects to score in UDFA.
I bet Gutekunst has FA deals and prospective trade legwork firmly established for prior/during/after this draft.
golfpacker61
April 13, 2026 at 07:46 am
St Juste is not just CB "depth." In case you hadn't noticed Greg, our CB room is one of the worst in the NFL. St Juste could replace either of our starting CBs, and there is very little behind them too. That happens when you spend nothing but 7th round picks in the draft on CB for 5 years.
I agree with GreenGold on multiple things here. This is not just a setup year for 2027, GB has strengthened the team in some key areas, DT, LB, CB, and STs. I also agree we are not done in Free Agency; I think we will add a NT, another vet CB, and an Edge. Calais Campbell, Jadavion Clowney or A J Epenesa, and even Rasul Douglas would be great additions to this team. Add in a decent draft and GB would have a more balanced team that should be a very tough out in the playoffs.
A top Edge & CB to start the draft, DL & OL depth pieces, an all-around TE to replace Musgrave, another WR(preferably large, fast, & great hands), and then Dbl up on CB & OL. I don't see a RB or QB because we will sign a bridge vet FA RB, and for the 1000th time, we don't need another backup QB. Spend that pick on a wildcard project like Jaden Dugger-LB Louisiana or Van Den Berg-DR-Georgia Tech.
Coldworld
April 13, 2026 at 09:08 am
A no trade draft (consensus) that I’d be very happy with. Having Banks fall undoubtedly set this up well. I just took the player I thought helped us most as the draft came to me. The names change, but there is plenty of opening this draft to achieve quite a lot because there are valid alternatives that match our positions of need as I see them.
52. Caleb Banks DT Florida. (He was just there)
84. Davison Igbinosun CB Ohio State
120. Devin Moore CB Florida
153. Jager Burton OC Kentucky (I see him as C/G)
160. Landon Robinson DT Navy. (Future replacement for LVN with more rush potential as a DE/OLB)
201. Travis Burke. OT Memphis
236. Will Kacmarek. TE Ohio State
255. Rahsul Faison. RB South Carolina
stockholder
April 13, 2026 at 11:29 am
There is a reason Banks keeps falling. -injuries
@52 won't be out of the question. Pass-
Igbinosun is climbing @66 - Pass
Moore try 130s - Doubling down
on a CB here, is a mistake. - Pass
Burton is a reach at Center. -Pass
Truthfully the packers should go after Trey Zuhn.
Landon Robinson 160 is a steal- Pick em
Burke is rated much higher - Pick'em here for sure.
Kacmarek has made Kiper's top ten
Fusion- - FA
GregC
April 13, 2026 at 09:44 am
St. Juste played his way out of Washington then had a nice bounce-back season in a limited role in San Diego. I don't think he was even in the top 200 free agents, and he signed an inexpensive contract with the Packers. I would love to see him become a quality starter for the Packers, but it doesn't seem likely. He only had one good season for the Commanders, in 2023, but then regressed badly in 2024.
PackEyedOptimist
April 13, 2026 at 07:51 am
Kalani, I've had this same debate in my mind this entire pre-draft time.
I've waffled a bit (a third choice to hotdog vs hamburger?).
I've waffled because my mock drafts have often ended up with the BPA being a position I've already selected (especially CB with our first three picks).
Like you, however, and because Gute has often drafted this way, I think he will avoid doubling up UNLESS there is a clear BPA in a redundant position.
As far as "you need to take edge early," I disagree. I don't see ANY rookie edge beating out LVN/Sorrell/Cox during the early season.
I'm actually satisfied with our current roster IF IT STAYS HEALTHY.
So what I want is the guys with the most POTENTIAL to develop. Lots of posters are talking about wanting "immediate value," but I don't see any likelihood of any rookie making a big splash. What we need is depth pieces who have high ceilings. I'm a big fan of high floor players, but I think this might be a year when the "high RAS" is a smarter decision than in the past. (BTW. I said the same thing this time LAST year for the same reason: we had an excellent starting roster; unfortunately, it was blown up by a crippling wave of injuries).
One thing I've been doing in my recent mocks, is focusing on those high-RAS guys with our last three picks (guys like DT Jordan VanDenBurg, ED/LB Jaden Duggar, and G Josh Gesky with their 9.9 RAS AND productive play --not to mention Top-30 visits--have sky-high ceilings). Those high-RAS guys also have the ability to be stellar Special Teams players, and since they probably aren't going to be starters this year, that's a great benefit.
(I like to imagine VanDenBurg and Gesky, a pair of fast 300+ pounders with 30+ on the bench blocking in front of our kick returner)
dobber
April 13, 2026 at 08:30 am
"So what I want is the guys with the most POTENTIAL to develop....What we need is depth pieces who have high ceilings. "
Agreed. The needs are there across the board, but not necessarily in the starting group. Too many people seem to think the draft is a magic bullet for roster construction, and I think that's unrealistic. We can all hope a rookie makes a big splash--I think that's in part how SB runs get goint--but I agree that in most cases it would be as a role/rotational player and likely not as a starter. Most of the needs are in the depth chart and preparing for player attrition after the season. Vic Ketchman (paraphrasing): if you think you're a contender, but you need your rookies to step in and play leading roles, you're not a contender.
I think the high ceilings part is where RAS comes in. Al Davis used to say "speed kills"...and others have said that there are only so many big men who are also great athletes (or something to that extent). The great athletes who are already great players are usually gone early. You have a chance to teach great athletes to be great playerss...it's nearly impossible to do the opposite.
"As far as "you need to take edge early," I disagree. I don't see ANY rookie edge beating out LVN/Sorrell/Cox during the early season."
I think this is where they'll have to dip into FA. It's hard to project DL and edge players, especially once you get past those first few high-end prospects--most of which end up laboring on lousy teams with poor supporting casts. Especially as you get deeper into the draft, those guys need a lot of development either in strength or technique. There are several FA edge players and a couple NTs who slot immediately into significant roles and prevent the Packers from needing to reach or trade up.
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 09:39 am
Totally agree, dobber. Just by the nature of our new DC coming in with plans to switch to an exotic type of 3-4, new “starters” will be drafted and given opportunities to do so.
The void at CB was helped with St-Juste’s signing. Same with Hargrave at 3T (allowing Wyatt additional healing time), and Franklin trade. That leaves another CB spot to challenge for, and a NT rotation that we currently do not have, and LB/Edge potential need positions to be contested.
Seems we could realize a handful of new starters there.
On O it appears additions at LG, OC, TE (Musgrave) are reasonable to consider. Depth pieces at OT, RB and WR call out to varying degrees.
Wyatt, Parsons & Kraft coming off knee surgeries might come into play as well.
golfpacker61
April 13, 2026 at 12:13 pm
"As far as "you need to take edge early," I disagree. I don't see ANY rookie edge beating out LVN/Sorrell/Cox during the early season."
I don't agree PEO. What have any of them really done in the Pros or in College. LVN had the best college stats in a limited role at Iowa. But he has done nothing other than being picked based purely on potential and RAS. If we could draft Jacas or Dennis Sutton, they would start Day 1 in GB. They are both that good and excelled at bigger college programs.
I love your late round picks of VanDenBerg and Duggar, those are perfect picks with upside/potential and come with little risk, but huge potential reward.
Turophile
April 13, 2026 at 08:28 am
Agree with Kalani this will probably be a horizontal draft - BUT - If a double dip nets the best available player somewhere, I think Gute won't think twice about it.
Where I disagree, is the need for an Edge on day 2. Sure it would be nice to get one, but if you saw how poorly GB defended against the run when playing the Ravens last year, its clear we need the best run stopper and space eater we can get and the addition of Hargrave works better when he is not a NT, but alongside one.
I'm for letting Sorrell and Oliver getting a chance behind LVN and Parsons, for snaps this year.......and I don't want to spend a high pick on an edge rusher, just for the few weeks Parsons might be out . They would be unlikely to shine in their first 4 weeks or so as an NFL rookie anyway.
Is it possible our new DT/NT will be Miller, Hunter, Banks or maybe Orange. I'm pretty sure you would argue for a later pick like Capehart, Keenan III or Zxavian Harris, but I want the best you can get there - and I'd trade up a few spots to get one of the first three mentioned, if they get to about pick 45.
I'd even prioritise DT over CB, as there are a number of decent CBs later in the draft like Everette, Igbinosun, Moore, Muhammad, Neal, Lee III, though I WOULD like CB to be the second day 2 pick (assuming there was a DT worth getting with their first pick).
Would I trade up (from 52) to get someone who I don't see as dropping to 52 ? Yes, and not only for a DT. I'd go up to around pick 45 for CB Johnson, for example. It all depends on how the draft falls out.
Equally, would I trade back from 52, down 8-12 spots ? Also yes, if the board and who i am liking in the draft, dictates that.
Apart from DT and CB, I'm looking to address the O line, blocking TE, and after that anything that looks good value. I may well get a backup QB if there is one I like. Same applies to ILB, WR, RB a second O lineman (and yes, pass rusher).
Oh, and I don't want a hamburger or hotdog draft, they are both a comfort food draft. I want a lime pickle, naga chilli draft that makes me open my eyes and say "WOW" !
Coldworld
April 13, 2026 at 09:45 am
Let the draft come to you. The only time we should trade up is if there’s a player we think far better than the next best player available at that position. I’d not rule that out, but before I pull the trigger I want to consider the marginal benefit over the extra pick it’s going to cost me.
In this draft, there are a lot of 5th round types I think could make us better now in terms of depth and role, for example at TE, CB and OL. Honestly, this seems to me to be a draft to trade down in, perhaps more in round 3 than 2, but that depends on how the picks before our first one go. If it drops badly, trade back. There are a lot of enticing options this year. This is a draft when staying calm is going to be key.
Turophile
April 13, 2026 at 06:28 pm
Sometimes staying put is the best decision - no arguments there. But sometimes you are better placed at another point in the draft, be it up or down. My mantra is be flexible.
Sometimes, when most teams are looking to trade down, you get a better bargain trading up. It's all down to the situation and what the details of any trade are.
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 09:54 am
Ha! Turo! Funny you should bring this up. Draft geek that I am…
Packers Trade Possibilities #52
CURRENT:
52
84
120
160
201
236
255
84, 120, 160, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 1 - TEN
66
101
182
192
Result: 66, 84, 101, 120, 160, 182, 192, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 2 - ARI
65
104
141
Result: 65, 84, 104, 120, 141, 160, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 3 - PIT
76
85
159
Result: 76, 84, 85, 120, 159, 160, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 4 - MIA
75
90
149
Result: 75, 84, 90, 120, 149, 160, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 5 - LV
67
102
180
183 … or
Result: 67, 84, 102, 120, 160, 180, 183, 201, 236, 255
67
102
124
Result: 67, 84, 102, 120, 124, 160, 201, 236, 255
TRADE 6 - LAC
55
123
Result: 55, 84, 120, 123, 160, 201, 236, 255
PackEyedOptimist
April 13, 2026 at 10:12 am
That's why I call any mock drafting that includes a trade "drafturbation."
Even if all you do is accept other team's draft offers, the results are usually ludicrous.
I drafturbated yesterday and got this:
97 CB D Igbinosin, 120 CB C Demmings, 126 OT I World, 127 DT Z Durant, 160 TE S Roush, 164 RB K Black, 165 WR DZ Stribling,182 DT D Corleone, 201 ED/LB J Duggar, 245 DT J VanDenBurg, AND three picks in 2027: SF's 2nd and 3rd and Carolina's 5th.
Ludicrous. :-D
Coldworld
April 13, 2026 at 10:57 am
Some of the trades offered on the sims are ludicrous. I don’t know why. I either do no trade drafts or ones I can plausibly see in reverse only—so typically value balanced or slightly disfavoring the offeror. Typically for small moves in position.
greengold
April 13, 2026 at 03:32 pm
I've never used a draft sim. Just looked up the teams with the most picks, and did some chart math with those teams I felt were viable trade partners.
Kind of interesting with the before and after. Just realized I did those before the Wicks trade...
Turophile
April 13, 2026 at 06:31 pm
Mileage will also vary according to which draft value chart you use - Rich Hall, Jimmy Jones, Harvard, etc
golfpacker61
April 13, 2026 at 12:30 pm
"'m for letting Sorrell and Oliver getting a chance behind LVN and Parsons, for snaps this year.......and I don't want to spend a high pick on an edge rusher, just for the few weeks Parsons might be out . They would be unlikely to shine in their first 4 weeks or so as an NFL rookie anyway."
Thinking of the present and the future @ Edge rusher here. Not only would an Edge of the group of Jacas, Dennis-Sutton, or Moore( who should be available @ #52) be probable starters Day 1 in GB this year, but thinking ahead to 2028 when Parsons contract will be a huge burden on the salary cap. One of those 3 could take over for and replace Parsons at that point and GB could trade him for a small fortune of players & picks.
Miller & Hunter probably are gone by #52 and I would not trade up for either. Banks is a great player but the medicals will take him off a lot of boards early. Orange is too much of a 1 trick pony, a NT will only see about 30% of the snaps.
Agree on CBs being available after #84. Would love Igbinosun and Everette, that would be a perfect young pair for GB.
I would not trade up for anyone, no point in wasting picks, which is also why I say no to QB & RB.
gsd3
April 13, 2026 at 03:35 pm
As far as edge goes, I'd like to see how Sorrell and Oliver look after training with Parsons this offseason. If nothing else, sign Clowney after the draft.
dobber
April 14, 2026 at 07:34 am
I think we underestimate the ramp-up period for Parsons. The guy was playing snaps at a higher rate before his injury than he ever did in Dallas. Even if he doesn't start the season on PUP, he's not going to walk out there and play 85% of the defensive snaps right away--he shouldn't be playing 85-90% at all--and we don't know at what level he's going to play when he does.