Four Trade Scenarios for Green Bay at Pick 30

Here are four possible trade partners for Green Bay on night one of the 2020 NFL Draft. 

Brian Gutekunst has shown already in his first two seasons as General Manager that he’s not afraid to make moves on draft night, whether that’s trading up for players or down for additional picks. Here are four potential trade scenarios for the Packers involving the 30th overall pick. 

 

Trade Up: Packers give Picks 30 (Rd 1) and 62 (Rd 2) 242 (Rd 7), receive Raiders Picks 19 (Rd 1) and 159 (Rd 5)

The Raiders currently sit at seven total picks in the draft, with two in the first, none in the second, three in the third, and one in rounds four and five. Should the Packers want to trade up for one of this draft’s most sought after wide receivers, which they’d likely need to get into the top 20 to do, Las Vegas makes for an interesting trade partner. And I know the Packers are giving up an absolute haul here, which doesn’t make it seem very appealing initially, but if the Packers can grab a game changer and immediate starter on offense, they likely won’t mind not having another selection until the third round. 

While the Raiders would be giving up their fifth rounder as part of the trade package leaving them without any picks between the fourth and seventh rounds, they’d grab the second round pick they’re lacking and give themselves another value pick on day two. 

 

Trade Down: Packers give Pick 30 (Rd 1), receive Steelers Picks 49 (Rd 2), 102 (Rd 3), and a 2021 Third Round Pick

The Steelers don’t have a first round pick in this year’s draft. With Big Ben losing most of his 2019 to injury and nearing the end of his career, Pittsburgh might be looking for its quarterback of the future. Giving up three picks is pretty rich for the Steelers, but it’s nice to have a fifth-year option when it comes to signal callers. And while the Steelers would be sitting out on day two of the draft, they’d still have four picks on day three to work with. 

Four picks on day two is an enticing option for the Packers, who would now have picks 49, 62, 94, and 102 to work with. Gutekunst could also thank his past self during the 2021 Draft when he has an extra third rounder to use there, too. 

 

Trade Up: Packers give Picks 30 (Rd 1), 94 (Rd 3), and 208 (Rd 6), receive Saints Picks 24 (Rd 1) and 203 (Rd 6)

The Saints enter the 2020 Draft with only five selections. While it would cost the Packers a pretty penny to move up, the trade might be worth it if a top-tier wide receiver or talented offensive tackle starts sliding down the board. The Packers will still be looking for the future at right tackle behind Rick Wagner, so if one of the top linemen in the class becomes available in the early 20s, it wouldn’t be surprising for Gute to pull the trigger.

The Saints won’t have another pick until 88, so being able to grab an additional third rounder while only sliding back six spots on night one could be an intriguing thought for a team with limited picks in 2020.

 

Trade Down: Packers give Pick 30 (Rd 1), receive Colts Picks 34 (Rd 2), 122 (Rd 4), and 197 (Rd 6)

The Colts are a desirable trade partner for the Packers because Indianapolis already has two second round picks. If the Colts want to start grooming their quarterback of the future behind Philip Rivers, this year wouldn’t be a bad year for them to make a move. Trading up from the early second into the low first would give the Colts that desirable fifth-year option. 

This trade would also set the Packers up nicely for the rest of the draft, giving them two picks in the second round (including the second overall pick on day two), two picks in the fourth, and a whopping four picks in the sixth (that could also be used to trade up later on). 

 

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

Maggie Loney is a writer for Cheesehead TV and podcasts for the Pack-A-Day Podcast and Pack's What She Said. Find her on Twitter at @MaggieJLoney.

NFL Categories: 
13 points

Comments (61)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
bmaafi's picture

April 03, 2020 at 06:11 am

The last trade scenario I believe is the best and most realistic. Packers have a number of holes to cover and there are a lot of players who are all rated in the late first to early 2nd range. I think they can still get a good OT or WR or even LB at 34. There is a little bit of a drop off after around 40 or so.

+ REPLY
2 points
5
3
jannes bjornson's picture

April 04, 2020 at 05:59 am

I like Maggie's call on the move up with the Saints. Positions them well for a WR or an OT. One pick ahead of the Vikes who need a WR, CB, DE and OT. NOLA tendered Hill with a One designation. They may believe Brees may want to play another year and not rush for Love and they bagged Sanders to cover WR.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:03 am

Could also see the Packers trading back to 5 (Chargers) and grabbing another 3rd. Or, trading back with Carolina (6) and getting 2 more picks, likely a 3rd and 6th.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:29 am

Either the last on the list or the ones Bure suggests are the only type that I would consider. The aim is not to surrender too many early picks for one big swing this year. We need to bring in talent to strengthen multiple positions as well as two or three potential early starting candidates, not one and a bunch of late rounders.

I’d take a deal that moved us down a few spots in the board if several players we want remain and there is not a must have that stands out from that group. I would use the extra picks to move around to snag our targets in mid late rounds.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:03 am

This would be nice

Round 2 Pick 8 (HOU): Josh Jones, OT, Houston (A+)
Round 2 Pick 30: Denzel Mims, WR, Baylor (A+)
Round 3 Pick 5 (CAR): Justin Madubuike, DT, Texas A&M (A)
Round 3 Pick 26 (HOU): Cole Kmet, TE, Notre Dame (A+)
Round 3 Pick 32 (K.C.): Jeremy Chinn, FS/SS, S. Illinois (A+)
Round 4 Pick 30: Donovan Peoples-Jones, WR, Michigan (A+)
Round 5 Pick 29: A.J. Green, CB, Oklahoma St. (A+)
Round 5 Pick 31 (K.C.): Khaleke Hudson, OLB, Michigan (A+)
Round 6 Pick 13: Joshua Kelley, RB, UCLA (A+)
Round 6 Pick 29: Lavert Hill, CB, Michigan (A+)
Round 6 Pick 30: Michael Turk, P, Arizona St. (A+)
Round 7 Pick 22: Jalen Elliott, FS, Notre Dame (A+)
Round 7 Pick 28: Nate Stanley, QB, Iowa (A+)

+ REPLY
-8 points
1
9
NickPerry's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:07 am

That would be nice...BUT...

I doubt Josh Jones last till pick #40, Denzel Mims lasts till pick 62, and Cole Kemet lasts till pick #96.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:14 am

Yeah, Pipe Dream. I am not even that high on Mims, but late 2nd would be a steal. Frankly, I like Michael Pittman from USC better. He could very well be available at 62.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
SterlingSharpe's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:18 am

Pipe Dream on those first 2 guys being available anywhere near those spots.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:37 am

Have taken a liking to WR Antonio Gibson from Memphis. Not the WR prospect you want to hang all your hope for improving the WR position on, but the kind of player an imaginative OC could do a lot with.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:58 am

Yes, Gibson is a possible day 3 steal

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:22 am

Intrigued by KJ Hamler, too. There's a lot of Tyreek Hill (without the baggage) in his game. A little concerned about dropping a higher pick on a WR of his size, though.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:54 am

That Packers won't do it.....

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
stockholder's picture

April 09, 2020 at 07:55 am

You might have the right idea , just wrong club. The packers should trade with the raiders to get their 3 #3s. Give me 4 #3s and you can fix everything.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PeteK's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:43 am

NO ILB , drop Kmet give me best available ILB.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Since'61's picture

April 03, 2020 at 10:04 am

I’m pretty sure that we don’t have 13 picks. Thanks, Since’61

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 10:28 am

We can make like the fed and print draft picks like money.

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 11:03 am

Those were trades, you can see the team in parentheses

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Fredrik87's picture

April 06, 2020 at 01:04 pm

The 13 picks are from a projected trade down in his mock.
That said Mims is a First Round pick 4th best WR in the draft and there isn't a prayer he makes it too 62.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:10 pm

Wishful thinking.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Turophile's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:02 am

I don't really like Maggie's trades (though I usually like her stuff here).

For me, a more likely scenario might be a trade DOWN with Miami, who have 14 picks overall.

The Packers give up pick #30 (Miami now have 4 x 1st round picks).

Miami gives up pick #39 and swaps 3rd rounders with the Packers (ie Miami swap their #70 for the Packers #94).

Packers get their trade down and a very high 3rd round pick. Miami now get 4 x 1st rounders and their late 3rd (which was the Packers pick) is now neatly between their second round two pick, and their comp pick in round three. I would also expect Miami (in a different trade) to use one of their consecutive 5th rounders and their 4th to move up higher in round 4, but that's another story.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The most likely TRADE UP I could find (and I don't like trade-ups in round one) was with New England (who have 13 picks).
Packers give up their 1st and 2nd round picks (#30 and #62)
New England give up their #23 and the first of their three 3rd rounders (#87).

For Green Bay, they move up seven spots from #30, lose their 2nd round pick and get an extra 3rd rounder 26 spots earlier than their existing one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Both the trade up and the trade down follow my mantra that a trade MUST make sense for the other side and both of my trades are about equal value (on the J.J. trade value chart).

+ REPLY
3 points
7
4
Cheesey51's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:56 am

I can see Gutey trading up and down. Right now staying put does not offer enough options. The Packers have at least four glaring holes to fill. Whatever it takes to get a top WR,a Safety to play in the box and cover side line to sideline and OT to play in MLF run scheme and a RB to play by committee.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:40 am

One of the things that's been a hallmark of BG on day1/2 of the draft is that he's going to manipulate his board to get players he covets. I think there are enough needs that he needs to let the board come to him this year, which might be hard for him to accept.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Stroh's picture

April 04, 2020 at 12:52 am

That's not manipulating your board to get a player you covet. Its manipulating the draft to get a specific player you covet and a particular point in the draft, to fit in the place you have him commensurate w/ his grade on your boad. There's a big difference.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Stroh's picture

April 04, 2020 at 12:52 am

That's not manipulating your board to get a player you covet. Its manipulating the draft to get a specific player you covet and a particular point in the draft, to fit in the place you have him commensurate w/ his grade on your boad. There's a big difference.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:10 am

Really the best case scenario for the Packers is if Love or Herbert or both fall in the draft. They would either have a chance to draft one of them (I Love Love) or could hold a QB needy team Ransom in the early second round. (Indy, LAC, MIA) or if a team really values Fromm or Eason in the late 1st. The other possibility is Tua falls as teams are scared off by the injury. That is not likely.

+ REPLY
-4 points
0
4
SterlingSharpe's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:20 am

Do not take a QB on day-1 or day-2 when our QB has 2-5, 6 years left.
It will be a total waste.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:28 am

Just like it was a total waste drafting Aaron Rodgers with a 37 year old QB...............

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
PeteK's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:52 am

Only if just like Rogers Tua falls to 30.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:57 am

Favre signed a huge contract extension in 2001 that was labeled as a "lifetime contract" since it added several years past the end of his pvs. contract (which would've come up after 2004 as you indicated).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:55 am

Don't believe the smoke screen this year. Ignoring LB and [email protected] Pack take Hurts @62. Hurts is Roger Stauback. Gute waits and gets his Back -up QB.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Bure9620's picture

April 03, 2020 at 04:52 pm

Jalen Hurts has way better hair than Staubach

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Stroh's picture

April 04, 2020 at 12:49 am

There is a HUGE difference in the situations involved in taking Rodger while Favre was still the QB and drafting a QB while Rodgers is the same age. Favre had been talking retirement for a couple years already, whereas Rodgers is publicly stating he wants, plans and intends to play till he's 40. Rodgers also fell in a way that was unprecedented, A situation similar would have to occur where Tua falls from top 5 to the bottom of rd 1. The 2 situations are completely dissimilar to the point of not even being worth discussing or mentioning!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Turophile's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:38 am

@SterlingSharpe Now that depends.

The Packers have to get the successor to Rodgers at some time. It doesn't have to be this year or next year, which gives them time to find a guy who they think can be 'The One'.

QB is so important that it trumps everything else. You get one a bit early, irrelevant, you spent a high (for the Packers) pick on one, irrelevant. You know that the chance of a round one QB being a success is lower than about any other position, irrelevant.

All that matters is that IF the Packers think they have found their guy, they should get him...........and that applies whether it is this year, next year or further down the road.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:52 am

Agreed. ARod talks about wanting to play into his 40s, but that doesn't mean it will be what's best for the Packers. If an ace prospect drops, you say "thank you" and you pick that player. If recent history is any indicator, that player is likely to get some extended play as #12s time winds down due to injury. I suspect ARod's time in GB is no more than 3 more seasons...probably because the Packers will want to move on from an aging QB with a big price tag before he does.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
taarons420's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:26 am

If a QB with starter potential is there - you take him - every time.
None of this year's rookies will put the team "over the top".
It'd be lucky if they contribute at all.
If you're looking for new contributors to help the upcoming season... focus on last year's draft.
If Gary, Savage, Sternberger, and Keke take jumps, the team will be better. If they don't, it won't.

Rookie QB will sit.
Rookie WR will at best help in the return game and 2 or 3 offensive plays a game.
Rookie OL will sit.
Rookie RB will be 3rd on the depth chart if lucky.
Rookie TE will be lost.
Rookie ILB will be lost and off the field on 3rd down.
Rookie DL will be 4th on depth chart on downs 1 & 2 and completely off the field on 3rd down.
Rookie CB might be able to get legit snaps if they can play the slot.
Rookie S might be able to get 3rd down work if he can play slot or allow Savage to play slot.

Help is not coming in the form of a rookie.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
WMA's picture

April 03, 2020 at 11:03 am

Jonathon Taylor would immediately be #2 RB and by mid season taking snaps from Jones. A top OT might beat out Wagner or soon into the season like Jenkins did. The other positions pretty much agree with.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
PatrickGB's picture

April 03, 2020 at 11:31 am

A DL, OL or RB would be the most likely players to start this season. My vote would be for any and all of those positions. However, if a quality MLB or WR becomes available then that’s ok too. But it’s still BPA in my book because one never knows what will be needed down the road and some positions can be filled with FA.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Turophile's picture

April 03, 2020 at 04:09 pm

Nicely argued, taarons420. worth a like.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
murf7777's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:36 pm

Go back to last years draft and see how many WR rookies contributed nicely, I think you might reconsider your comments.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Handsback's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:22 am

If a QB like Love is sitting there at 30...there may be many offers for the pick. Meaning the Packers may get a windfall for their pick. I could see the Steelers trading up to get RB Taylor.
There has to be a player that falls or a position player that a team needs to get an advantage in trades. The Saints really wanted/needed a DE and traded with Green Bay who may also wanted the same guy. As it turns out....Green Bay got Alexander and Savage as results (directly or indirectly) of the trade down.
So sometimes its who verses needs and who's left on trades.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
stockholder's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:53 am

Packers stay put!! . Take Reagor,Queen,Higgins, or Jones. Trading down means missing on sure starter./// The best action will be Rd. 3 Before the Comp. Picks./// Packers shot at defense is 3rd round. And I would do what I could to get that extra rd. 3 pick.(Trade UP there) Thats the rd. Gute must not trade out. Rd. 3 gets you a TE, IOL, Fotu Dt, Possible LB. If the packers go WR first it sets their draft. Jones Ot drops because of it. Reagor is sterling Sharpe. Higgins will be better then Adams. The biggest Busts / Rewards are on the Defense side..

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
PeteK's picture

April 03, 2020 at 08:59 am

Higgins just doesn't appeal to me because we have many large bodied receivers and need a change of pace. I think there will be great value at WR in the top half of round 2 like Reagor ,who is a better fit.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:20 am

There's absolutely a need for a shiftier WR who can get open and make things happen in space, but I think there's a place for Higgins in that Funchess, Lazard, and Higgins all have the ability to share the outside spot opposite Adams and the big slot role. Funchess--unless he's dynamite--is likely to move on past 2020, and Adams' contract comes up after 2021. They need that next lead-dog outside WR in the pipeline, and I think this is the best opportunity to land one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:31 am

Higgins was compared to Julio Jones by all the scouts. Still rated to be drafted rd 1. I watched him very closely.. Catches everything. If you like Adams you'll like Higgins. It's Field speed were after. Higgins and Reagor have it. Reagor won't Fall. Reagor is a better fit. Why? He'll play the slot ,and that is the bigger need by everyone.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:22 pm

In addition, Reagor is a game changer at PR/KR.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:19 pm

Don't think Reagor will drop into the second.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:32 pm

The re-do on his 40 time on pro day gave him the boost. He compares to AJ Green.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packbrat's picture

April 03, 2020 at 09:50 am

Our defense was the obvious problem in the nfc championship game... sorry to say that needs to be fixed first.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
stockholder's picture

April 03, 2020 at 10:11 am

What players do you want to fix it. Murray and Queen? Trading up for either is to costly. Doubt Pettine trusts his defense to either (starting.) Next; what DL in the second isn't a project? And which one fits the 3-4-4.? Gute keeps overlooking DL and dropped the ball in FA. He will draft defense in 4,5,6.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

April 03, 2020 at 01:05 pm

I think it’s kind of myopic to focus on the last game, but I do agree that we should build the defense.

Old QBs who win Super Bowls have really good defenses. We improved last year, and we need to improve more.

Next year, we could be without Bakhtiari, Linsley, Jones, Clark and King. Five starters. This year is our best shot. If we can keep scores low then I trust the offense to score enough to win with what we have.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:27 pm

Get another dynamic WR, Playmaker, on offense and score More points. Secure a Power runner to move the chains. Sullivan is there as a TE in the fifth.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Packman60's picture

April 03, 2020 at 10:08 am

I think the possibility of Love falling to pick 30 is much higher than people think. The Packers would then be in position to select him or trade down with Indy, T.B., Las Vegas or Carolina being potentially interested in trading up for a developmental QB prospect. They would likely receive much more than the draft pick value trade chart would indicate with teams valuing the 5th year option that 1st rounders offer.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:36 pm

Raiders could take him with either of their existing picks, if he was their target.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

April 03, 2020 at 12:26 pm

If I could get 3 defenders in the first 100 I’d be happy: Baun, Dantzler, and Raekwon Davis. I think if you add them to our defense, we’re better than last year. If we could find a safety/linebacker hybrid like Chinn by trading down I’d go for it.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
HankScorpio's picture

April 09, 2020 at 05:37 am

Don't scratch your head when a team like SF makes those guys look slow. That's a rather unathletic group. Especially Dantzler. But Baun and Davis don't meet the alleged athletic thresholds the Packers maintain. Only Baun is even close.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Janelle Phalen's picture

April 03, 2020 at 01:38 pm

When I have been running mock drafts, I have been using the Indianapolis trade. I don't think trading up makes sense with so many holes to fill.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
stockholder's picture

April 03, 2020 at 02:23 pm

Gute plugged the holes. It's the sensing -a-disturbance-in-the-force !

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Tedlyflyfisher's picture

April 03, 2020 at 05:39 pm

Question: IF we were to trade down and get more picks, would that not make it difficult to sign all the rookies while staying under the cap? As I recall we don’t have a lot of cap room at the present. Thanks in advance for your replies.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 03, 2020 at 07:38 pm

Now we're starting to get warmed up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ShawnO's picture

April 03, 2020 at 11:50 pm

Trade back to the second and then trade up in the third. This is what I got in a simulator.... It could happen.
38.Patrick Queen OLB LSU
62.Jeremy Chinn S Southern Illinois
72.Michael Pittman Jr. WR USC
136.Jack Driscoll OT Auburn

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Stroh's picture

April 04, 2020 at 12:38 am

You only trade up in a draft to get a specific player. In a trade up situation the Packers mostl likely would only move a couple spot (hello Seattle again) in this case to leapfrog over Baltimore who would likely be interested in one of the ILB. Given that is a Packers need as well and Murray and Queen are possible targets for the Packers, it makes alot of sense. Throwing out trade up scenarios is pointless unless you have identified a specific play to move up for. Otherwise trading up is counterproductive, your giving up assets w/o knowing the player that those assets are allocated to. The Packers wouldn't move up w/o knowing exactly the player they want to get. So throwing out a trade up to NO spot is futile w/o knowing exactly the player your getting. And then you only move once that pick is on the clock.

Moving down is different. Its about getting a player at any number of positions (usually) that are rated the same among a group of positions that you value similarly and acquiring more assets later in the draft. In general, having more picks (bites of the apple so to speak) is preferable to having fewer.

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2

Log in to comment 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.