Packers and Colts are Ideal Trade Partners in Round One

The Colts could be a team looking to move back to accumulate additional draft picks, while under Brian Gutekunst, the Packers have been very aggressive in the first round, making the two ideal trade partners. 

This 2021 Green Bay Packers' roster looks awfully similar to the 2020 one.  The only signing that they've made this offseason that wasn't a player who was on last year's team was Joe Fortunato, a long-snapper. 
 
With limited cap space and a roster that was talented enough to have won the Super Bowl last year -- they just didn't, and both things can be true -- Brian Gutekunst felt that the best course of action was to run it back this year for one more Super Bowl push in 2021. 
 
While there are some notable names on the free-agent market still available, it would appear quite likely that if there is going to be an outside infusion of talent added to this team, it's going to have to come through the draft. 
 
With needs at offensive tackle, cornerback, and receiver, to name a few, this is, fortunately, a very deep draft class at each of those positions. However, as we've seen from Gutey in each of his first three drafts at the helm, if there is a player that he wants in Round 1, he is going to get him.
 
In 2018, after trading back initially with New Orleans, he moved up from pick 27 to pick 18 to select Jaire Alexander. The following year, Gutey went from pick 30 to pick 21 to take Darnell Savage. And of course, we all remember 2020, where the Packers moved up to pick 26 from pick 30 to take Jordan Love.
 
So if Gutekunst plans to bring that same aggressiveness to this year's draft, how far up will he go? And who is an ideal trade partner? 
 
Well, similarly to the 2019 draft when Green Bay gave up two fourth-rounders along with pick 30 to move up to pick 21, a team in that range in this year's draft who could be looking to move down and accumulate picks is the Indianapolis Colts. 
 
From the Colts' perspective, they gave away several picks in the Carson Wentz trade and only have six picks in total, with just three of them coming in the first four rounds. As Will Carroll points out, they have needs at offensive tackle, edge, as well as defensive back, and landing two fourth-round picks -- which Green Bay does have two of -- or a third-round pick would allow them to fill those needs with talent that can contribute to this playoff-caliber roster right away. 
 
For the Packers, as I've already mentioned, this roster is fairly similar to the one from 2020, so in order to bring in some new talent, the draft -- especially early-round picks -- is going to be the best and most likely way to do so. Not to mention that Gutey isn't shy about going after his guy, and doing so three years in a row is certainly a trend that cannot be ignored. 
 
This is a move that makes a lot of sense for both teams. That isn't to say that it'll happen or that there aren't other trade partners out there, but on the surface, this seems to be perhaps the most likely. 
 
Now, there of course has to be a player that the Packers would deem worthy of trading up for. Who that might be is the million-dollar question. A few that come to mind for me include Caleb Farley, Greg Newsome, Christian Barmore, and Teven Jenkins. 
 
When it comes to the draft, there are a number of variables that come into play that could throw this idea right out the window. But without knowing how things will play out, this is a move that at this time would be mutually beneficial for both teams. So when the Colts are on the clock at pick 21, keep your eyes open for Gutey and the Packers. 

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

Born and raised in Green Bay, WI and I still call it home. After my family, watching the Packers, sharing my opinions on the team through my writing and interacting with other fans is my greatest passion. You can find me on Twitter at @Paul_Bretl. 
 

NFL Categories: 
4 points

Comments (127)

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

April 16, 2021 at 07:23 am

woosh! Please, NO!

1. The Packers are FAR from being one or two players away.

2. There are great talents to be had in R3 and R4. With as many team needs (Paul, you yourself had to stop at 3 positions of OT, WR and CB) knowing the DL position alone requires 2 additions at both DT and NT. S and ILB are arguably as urgent a need as those other 5 poitions given the D scheme change and the lack of quality play behind Barnes & Martin, neither of whome rate highly nor could stay healthy.

CB is not as urgent a need as many make it out to be, with King back for another year, and Jackson , a player who really came on last year, benefiting from a scheme change to zone, where he excels.

In my eyes, after studying drafts for nearly 3 decades well into the UDFA pile of gems, this doesn’t appear to be a good year for the Packers to move up.

I’ll add here that there are options, and then there are not. Great to have more picks to take a great player who has dropped, maybe pushing your original choice to fill a position to a later round.

Some, you cannot just get another in the later round. Unique talents who fit the Packers needs are there to be had if Gutekunst plays this right. Too much exists between pick 92 and 173. A chance at TWO of those 80 players, vs. ZERO? No thanks.

+ REPLY
11 points
14
3
BJP's picture

April 16, 2021 at 06:56 am

Agree and disagree. I would move up for a shut-down corner. Otherwise I’d even consider moving back to accumulate depth at several positions.

+ REPLY
8 points
8
0
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:36 am

Agree. If we move up it needs to be for a premium player at a key position of need. Otherwise, we need our picks, in fact trading down might in some circumstances be more attractive to give us more flexibility later.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:39 am

Shut down corners are to be had after R1-2, and they are worthless without a pass rush, as we saw in NFCC.

+ REPLY
-1 points
4
5
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:25 am

I disagree. Our pass rush was fine once Pettine was forced to depart from his passive game plan. Brady had a horrible second half as a result.

I believe you are mistaking the cause. While generally it’s players not plays, like most generalizations, it’s not always true. In this case it was pretty clearly plays not players. Go back and rewatch if you doubt. Look at the difference.

We have Garvin and Tipa, both have speed but needed the weight room (badly). We retained P Smith. We aren’t going to play another OLB a lot. We need more astute DL personnel usage to emphasize Clark and handle the run and we need less passivity.

We obviously need DL recruits, just on numbers, but this year, if we take an OLB it will be for the situational speed rush/coverage role Fackrell performed, if Garvin or Tipa aren’t it, then such prospects are mid round or later types.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:55 am

Whoah, Nellie!!!

If I'm not mistaken, Z, Preston, Gary and Clark had a combined total of 3 QB hits and ZERO sacks in the NFCC. Gutekunst has failed to address gaping holes at NT and DT. Clark just can't be utilized 70+ snaps per game EVERY YEAR into his 2nd contract. There is ZERO backup for him now, and the jury is still out on Kinglsley Keke.

We don't need recruits in numbers, we need freaking good players added there. Lancaster and Lowry are recruits in numbers.

I do agree zipping Pettine out is an instant improvement, but, the talent at DL is Kenny Clark, and nothing else really. To be fair, I do have very high hopes for Keke becoming a real player, and we may realize that this season. However, 1 or two real players on your DL is unsustainable, and not part of a plan to win. It is, however, a reason why GB keeps losing at the end. Couldn't stop the run v. Rams. Couldn't stop the pass v. Bucs. Deficiencies up front were the reason for both catastrophes, and that was plain to see for all. That must end.

Resources need to be poured in there, and trading away TWO draft picks to move up for one player might hinder that. It is a balancing act, for sure.

I can name at least a half dozen players widely considered to be in slots between 92 and 173 who can improve the GB defense. POOF! They're gone if we trade up 10 positions in R1 for a marginally better player at another position.

AND, what does that do then to the rest of your draft? Makes for far fewer options, and your need-to-hit rate just went through the roof.

+ REPLY
8 points
8
0
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:14 am

I agree DL is probably most important if we want to win now. Trading away two to get one pick might also be just what they need. As you state above we need help on the DL. Do you really think you are going to find that DL in the 4th round? Normally, it takes DL longer to get acclimated to the NFL, so I suspect it would be more important to select that position earlier and probably round 1 or trade up in round 2 to get a more NFL ready player, IE: Barmore. We don't need a project, we need someone who come in and play this year.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PatrickGB's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:29 am

I would love a stud at d-line. But this draft class is supposed to be thin at that position.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 12:42 pm

It’s thin in what we ideally need, a player who is run ready now and penetrative. There are runstuffers later and penetrative types only ( this season at least) early. That’s why it’s a trap to seek help at DL early.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 17, 2021 at 11:54 am

3rd or 4th round.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:55 am

The reality of this particular situation is you can't have it all. Getting a "NFL ready player" at as many positions of need as the Packers have on this defense is a tall order. I used DL as an example, but the needs abound on that side of the ball. Not just at CB, not just at S, not just at DL. Look how Gronkowski and others worked the middle of the field on us in the NFCC. Putting that much pressure on 5th Round pick Kamal Martin and UDFA Chris Barnes made the task of holding a TE like Gronk in check an even taller order. As mentioned, Savage is very likely shifting to SLOT exclusively. An injury at S could sink GB, just like ILB. Summers is no match for anyone, sadly. Those are two big components to successfully running Barry's Defense, S and ILB.

Another key component is speed rusher. That has not been discussed. Figure, Z and Gary offer unique capabilities to play up front exclusively, lessening the total number of additions that may be required at DL. Making that a committed switch would possibly add EDGE as a priority.

We have needs all over the place on that side of the ball, while also having to address OT and WR. THAT is why I prefer to not trade up in R1.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:47 am

Jackson's playing time decreased as the season went along and he only had 2 tkls in the last 5 games. I hope he does benefit from a new scheme, but I wouldn't bet on him or King .

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:39 am

King is a backstop resigning. I was optimistic on Hollman last year, but his disappearance mirrored that of Jackson. I know they like Ento, but he’s barely been healthy or even played in preseason.

The other depth is a massive question: were they ST types or dies the team see real potential in any of them? Relying on any of these to improve us even situationally is a leap of faith. That’s why we need to bring in real competition. If Jackson or others click and beat out a pick, we still win, but if not, we got better anyway.

I could extend that into the secondary. We know Redmond and Sullivan, but Scott and Black are unproven. With Greene gone, counting Savage and Amos at Safety and Alexander, that’s 4 starters, one of whom we should look to upgrade ( Sullivan), one utility back up db ( Redmond) plus King.

Let’s assume King is healthy ( when he is OK as a starter). That means we have 5 starters optimistically and one utility guy before injuries. Yes, others may break through, but we probably need at least twice that in camp and some of those will need to play significant snaps. That’s without addressing the fact that we should be looking to improve on King and Sullivan if we can.

UDFAs and holdovers will form part of those numbers, but I can’t rationally see how we don’t need 2 or 3 genuine prospects as CB/DB from the draft able to be relevant this year.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:58 am

I totally agree, 100%. King is a 1 year insurance policy. Jackson has not delivered with an ounce of consistency. I just don't want to waste 2 other positions of need for a marginal improvement between 21 and 29. For all we know, too, there may be little to no improvement over other players who might be available if we stay put at 29.

My main point was King being here another year, and Jackson possibly becoming a different player for GB in a zone D make the immediacy of need far less than if we simply had neither.

I like Sullivan and Ento a lot as well, and Hollman could prove he belongs. Let's consider too, that Savage is very likely to be taking over the SLOT full time, which adds Safety high onto the list of priorities.

Sadly, on this D, you can pretty much close your eyes and throw a dart to find a real position of need to address now. And I mean right now. THAT is why I prefer to not trade up.

Just to be clear, I do think we need to add at the very least 1 rock solid CB in this draft. Hopefully, we can add two.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
CheesyTex's picture

April 16, 2021 at 02:54 pm

greengold: "I just don't want to waste 2 other positions of need for a marginal improvement between 21 and 29. For all we know, too, there may be little to no improvement over other players who might be available if we stay put at 29."

Excellent point. In a vacuum, I would think the statistical probability of improvement from 29 to 21 would be very small and it's even "iffy" for the GMs. IMO it's definitely not worth the cost of moving up this year where the draft looks deeper than usual in rounds 2-4.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:14 pm

ibid on Scott

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PF4L's picture

April 17, 2021 at 11:33 am

Agree with greengold....I think King was signed as an insurance policy, temporary band aid.

What i find ironic about King....is that his play in the NFCCG, caused the Packers to reward him with a one year deal, because they obviously felt it was too risky to let him go.

That and the back ups behind him didn't instill a lot of confidence for the team.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

April 17, 2021 at 03:18 pm

I have a very, very different take on that. Pettine was fired or allowed to walk for good reason, and part of that reason is exactly why King is back. Kevin King is a good player. What happened in NFCC was so completely out of left field that I believe there is way more to that story, and it all points to the guy that is out, not the one who was given a 1 year deal. The Packers wanted Kevin back for good reason. If LaFleur and Gutekunst thought that was on King, he'd have been gone in a flash.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
PF4L's picture

April 17, 2021 at 03:41 pm

Gone in a flash?
With no one on deck, no plan B?
If the Packers thought King was the future with Green Bay, it would have been more than a 1 year deal. Lets keep it real.

You may think King is a good player, but PFF doesn't agree, along with thousands of other people.
PFF had King graded as the 92nd cornerback in the league last season. One game wasn't out of left field.

But listen...no matter what you think of Kevin King. One thing was proven, in a big game on a big stage, he proved himself to be a liability (period)

BTW....Pettine was offered an extension before last season, that he turned down.
There may or may not be a back story to that.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

April 18, 2021 at 07:45 am

Yeesh. Let’s keep King and Jackson out of the conversation. Just because I made comments supporting both players doesn’t mean I somehow missed their shortcomings. Of course I think they should be replaced, and if we get something more out of them in Barry’s scheme, great. That is a possibility.

LeRoy Butler said he thought it was a good idea to keep King on the one year deal. I happen to agree. Meaningless to pound the topic.

Back to the draft.

A majority of fans know we need a CB, a true starter opposite Alexander that the Packers can count on. My whole point was I that I prefer they not trade up.

An interesting exercise to explain my perspective is to take a good look at the Final 53 Man Roster for 2020 that we ran out there.

Do that, then ask yourself: how many picks do you want to make?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PF4L's picture

April 18, 2021 at 09:29 am

It's all good my man...we're just talkin.

Leroy Butler was right...most likely for the reasons i posted in my 2 first sentences.

It's not meaningless to point out one of the reasons we lost another NFCCG.

Nor is it meaningless to question why Gute didn't see a talent problem (liability issue) on that side of the field....that's what he does, that's his specialty as a NFL talent evaluator.

He's not exempt from blame. He is in charge of the roster.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:16 pm

Benefit the Pack moving him to a new team, not scheme.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:02 am

"The Packers are FAR from being one or two players away"

I'd ask you when you would think a team is one or two players away? Back to back 13-3 seasons with an MVP QB, the top scoring offense, a defense that was breaching the top 10, sure seems like a team that is one or two players away. It certainly isn't when you are an 8-8 team. I would look at this draft as being quality over quantity. If you find the right valued trading partner, I would use the extra picks to trade, not necessarily in the first round either.

If there was ever a year your scouting department is at its highest value it is this year. So, I suspect there will be opportunities in this draft we haven't ever seen due to lack of combine and in person meetings. There will be gems to mine especially in the 2nd and 3rd round of this draft. Other than the top 15 or so, the mock drafts are all over the board on players selected 16-100. Hopefully, Gutey and Co. can find gold.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
blondy45's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:13 am

Good points murf. I am on record to want the Pack to keep as many picks as posable this year. With the Pack picking at 29, there will be one very good player who should contribute sooner than later. If we trade up and get a better starter quality player now, we lose the chances of filling in our multiple needs on this team this year and more importantly the next coming years.

That 29th pick could also be highly regarded by teams that would like a fifth year option on a player. The Pack likes this option as well. So common sense tells me we need to keep that 29th choice. I would be happy if we found a trading partner that was in great need and would offer a hard to pass up trade. I in my opinion think that will be hard to find this year with all the cap issues, COVID issues, unknown training camp available time, and and every team needing to fill their rosters with draft talent.

After hopefully not trading our first pick, I believe Gute will do his job. I predict he will try to move around and get his targeted players. The Pack's strength and advantage is not in their draft position, but in the number of draft choices we have. With so many holes to fortify, we need more bites at the apple. Do not lessen our strength in the draft by trading up for one greater player. The Packers are far from being one or two players away. This is a truly accurate factual statement IMO.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 04:04 pm

Thanks....I'm not really saying as many picks as possible, but as many picks in the 2nd and 3rd round as possible. Quality vs quantity. Use 1st and later rounds for trade bait to get more in the meat of the draft. I think we can find starters and contributors in those two rounds. I don't see much contribution from 4th round and later for 2021. Unless, you get really lucky, they would be more developmental for future years.

That said, I wouldn't trade down in the first if someone like Barmore or Newsome dropped to us.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
blondy45's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:31 pm

I agree with you murf, especially your 2nd paragraph. My point is I hope we do not move up in the first round. We do need Quality, I agree, 6th-7th round picks are a crap shoot for sure. As it stands now we have 3 of 10 of those type of picks this year. Seven possible picks could really help our team now, and in the future. Thanks for your feedback.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:55 am

murph, I would say the Packers felt they were one or two players away last year. The Love pick notwithstanding, as they were looking to the future of the franchise, adding both Dillon and Deguara, especially Deguara, points to them thinking they were set. A HB/FB/TE is one of those luxury picks teams make early when they are set for a run.

Many of us might have felt the same, hoping Lowry/Lancaster would improve, King would improve, Savage would improve, Sullivan would improve. Keke would improve. Hollman would improve. All appeared to come up short to varying degrees.

I totally agree our scouting department is at a point where they must deliver their best. I hope they find gold too, and lots of it in this draft.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 04:06 pm

I agree, but I also feel that's even more so this year. They have a very good team and one or two big contributors could make the difference. It is difficult to know it they are going to draft for now or the future again like last year. My gut tells me this year it will be for now and make a run for it.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Since'61's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:51 am

I agree with greengold here. Given the diverse and numerous needs the Packers currently have I would let this draft come to me. Maybe even trade down as others have mentioned based on our board and the overall outlook when we get on the clock at spot 29.

With 10 picks or possibly more with a trade down we can fill out our roster at CB, DL, WR, OL & ILB and maybe another spot or 2.

As a matter of managing draft capital the first 4 rounds are better risks than the later rounds. We’re more likely to get players who can contribute during their rookie season with more picks in the first 4 rounds than we would if we trade
some of them away. You never know with Gute.
Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:54 am

What drugs are you taking? Josh Jackson hasn't taken a step in his entire career! He was basically benched for all of last year. He's terrible! Always has been! How can he take a step if he's never on the field and wasn't even active game dsys?! Besides Alexander they have nothing but big questions at CB!

King is on a one year deal because he's a known commodity. They didn't give him a multi year deal dif they? CB I'd a HUGE need! So is OT.

21 is a bigger move than I would make, but if the right player is there at z premium position, you do it. They could just as easily move down and get an extra pick in the top 100. But they don't have enough spots for a 10 man draft class.

Bot those positions are premium positions and are more important than WR, S and ILB.

They have some needs, but they were goid enough to be in and win the SB last year.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 12:45 pm

Well, have to consider the 4 game stretch where King was out.

Josh Jackson held Tom Brady to a 66.7 completion %, 4 of 6 targets in week 6, surrendering just 17 yds total. He did give up 1 TD. The following week, DeShon Watson completed a bunch, 5 of 6, but that was in garbage time while they played catch up in a 35-20 Packer win. Week 8 he gave up 2 plays on 2 targets for 10.5 yds each. At SF, he gave up 6 of 10 on some big gainers in garbage time, again, while SF was playing catch up to no avail.

The 1 TD he gave up to Brady was his only one of the season. In a system that plays to his strengths in zone coverage, Josh Jackson has potential to be a better player.

I'm not hanging my hat on that, but, let's call it what it is. He showed improvement instead of being benched all year as you claim.

"Easily move down and get an extra pick in the top 100?" Not always easy, and we would want to be trading with teams at the top of those rounds. A trade with JAX could net pick 33 and 130. A trade with ATL could net pick 35 and 148... A trade with NYJ could net picks 34, 146 and 154. MIA could offer pick 50 pick 81 and pick 156. Trade down options are limited and difficult to pull off. I don't want to wait 50 picks before we make our first selection...

Squeezing an extra Top 100 player out of those scenarios in a trade down from 29 would prove a challenge.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
blondy45's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:40 pm

My high hope for a trade down would be with Jax. The Jags get #29 & #173 (660.6). The Pack gets #33 & #106 (662). This according to the NFL trade value chart 2021. I believe that Jax. would have to throw in a 5th round pick #170 in addition to #33 & #130 for a total of (643) to Green Bay's 640 points worth for the #29 pick. I do not think this will happen, but for only moving down 3 spots, getting the first pick day 3, & most importantly not having to give up multiple mid round picks. We can all dream but eventually we all wake up to reality. This probably will not happen. I like to dream though.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:28 pm

I like it a lot, blondy! Yeah, I know. Would think MIA would make a good trade partner, but they have ZERO R4s. Kind of limits the field... I'm not really wanting to move down a ton, but this scenario could prove beneficial, for reals.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:47 pm

Josh Jackson held Brady?! Now I know your on something! Jackson held no QB down , however he did hold onto alot of WR who were running circles around him! Jesus the guy wasn't even on the active game day roster the vast majority of games!! There's a reason for that... He Sucks!

If you trade down from 29 to the top 10 of rd 2 you pick up a late 2nd or 3rd. Now your at 4 top 100 AND you have 2 4th and 5th rd picks you can use to move up in rd 2 and 3 to get the most out of those picks and still have a pick in each round. Sou you could conceivably have a mid 30s a late 40s in rd 2 and have 3rd round pick at the beginning and middle of the 3rd.

8 draft picks and an undfa or 2 who invariably make the roster and/or PS. 10 Draft picks is too many, 8 is plenty!

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
PF4L's picture

April 18, 2021 at 09:34 am

"They have some needs, but they were goid enough to be in and win the SB last year."

Another one?...lol

If you say they were goid enough, than i guess they were goid enough.

Stay in school kids!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:09 pm

I agree that GB should probably not trade up. Including your additional comments below, we otherwise do not seem to share a thought in common.

King sucks. Jackson did not improve and probably is worse than King. Jackson only played twice in the last 9 games GB played, being inactive altogether 7 times and playing just 3 snaps in the two games he managed to be one of the top 48 players. Jackson's 21% missed tackle percentage and 113 passer rating allowed stat is not reassuring. GB needs two CBs, not one.

Moving Savage to the slot is a massive waste.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:55 pm

"Moving Savage to the slot is a massive waste."

Exactly...

Lets not fix what isn't broke.....for a change

Lets fix what is broke....for once.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:39 pm

Savage can be the slot and bag another safety in this draft. When you had the stiffs out there on the perimeter, Savage ended up wasting his time covering their backsides. Is that freeing up a Playmaker?

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
PF4L's picture

April 17, 2021 at 12:05 am

Just bag another safety?

A starting safety, in the draft?

Don't we have a long enough list of draft needs instead of creating a new one?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:37 pm

The guy took a spot away from another player. He should have been moved last july. Gutedkunst is starting to act like Ted and hang with one of his selections to try to save face--move on.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

April 17, 2021 at 09:06 am

“Moving Savage to the slot is a massive waste.” Well said. To move him in certain packages or situations is one thing, but moving him on a regular basis is a very suspect move.

I’m not sure where this “plan” originated and how much credence to give it, but if it has substance, it’s not one I support.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 17, 2021 at 11:58 am

Le Roy Butler made the pitch. Savage as the "star" guy.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:41 pm

When the critique moved to the realm of King and Jackson the wiring short-circuited. Jackson stayed on the Inactive for the last five games--that is Improvement?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

April 17, 2021 at 09:08 am

No, it’s the manifestation of irrelevance. That much can’t be argued. The only quest is why.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Leland's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:16 am

Subtract the QBs and GB has the pick of one of the top 25 players in the draft. I would think with the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 5th and 5th (6) picks in the next top 149 they should be able to get some really good football players.
More bites at the apple.

+ REPLY
16 points
16
0
dobber's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:26 am

I think your point pretty important: this is a team that is simultaneously taking a shot and turning over the roster. In a year when it sounds like teams are more interested in moving back, moving up might be cheaper than in other years. What the Packers and BG do will tell us a lot about how they're approaching their roster-building plans because--I tell ya--the signals have been mixed for the last two years.

+ REPLY
8 points
8
0
Since'61's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:42 am

Dobber your being polite to say that the signals have been mixed, I would put them somewhere between confusing and WTF?
Stay well. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Nate-1980's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:39 pm

Spot on 61 !! :)

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:46 pm

Yes they have. However, if Dillon and Deguara play more consistently to the glimmers that we witnessed, this offense could add a powerful element to the finesse of Rogers, Adams, and Jones.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:23 pm

2021: 5 expected.
2020: 4 taken.
2019: 3 taken.
2018: 5 taken though Lamar Jackson went 32nd.
2017: 3 taken.
2016: 3 taken.
2015: 2 taken.
2014: 3 taken, but Bridgewater went 32nd.

One or two players can make a difference, I suppose.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:23 am

"Now, there of course has to be a player that the Packers would deem worthy of trading up for."

This is the key statement, I think. Moving 8 spots is a pretty costly endeavor for a team like the Packers who, I would argue, need to treat their early picks like gold. The opportunity has to equal or outweigh the cost, and you can't know that 'til the draft is well underway.

+ REPLY
8 points
9
1
Leatherhead's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:56 am

Dobber, I have to comment about the mixed signals stuff.. I think it's a been a pretty clear and cohesive message.

1. Sign Aaron Rodgers to an (unnecessary) extension . This signaled "We're going to try to win with Rodgers. We're not starting over with Lamar Jackson, for example".

2. Signed Billy Turner as a FA. Signed Wagner as a FA. Drafted Jenkins. There's a big priority on keeping him healthy, especially after we lost 2017 and damn near lost 2018 due to injuries. If the Packers are going to have any chance, Rodgers has to stay healthy.

3. Moved from a receiving corps that led the league in offense to a receiving corps that led the league in offense. High dollar guys like Jordy, and Cobb, were released and replaced by UDFAs and Day 3 picks.

4, Involved the RB more in the passing game. Jones was our 2nd leading receiver last year. On the league's best offense.

So I think we'll continue to do that. We'll protect Rodgers. For 17 full games. And we've lost 4 guys from last year : Lane Taylor, Ricky Wagner, Corey Linsley, and for the time being, David Bakhtiari. That's 4/5 of a starting line.

I think it's unnecessary to trade up for a plug and play tackle, and in fact, we could probably trade down a little and get a real good one.

It's costly to move up in the first round, but not nearly as costly to move up in the third. The same cost of moving from 29 to 20 would move us up at #95 to about #70.

So, to skip over 9 teams....half of which, or more, are going to take players you aren't interested in to begin with??

.

+ REPLY
8 points
9
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:32 pm

ALL of this is true, Leatherhead, and I love what you're saying here. Would not mind the Packers using their extra picks later to bounce into R3 for another pick there. THAT is the kind of trade up that makes sense to me.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:29 am

If anything, a trade down with the right partner from 62 for an extra R4 COULD work, if it’s just 6ish spots.

There is ZERO chance I want to trade out of 29.

+ REPLY
-3 points
2
5
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:39 am

There is, or should never be, a hard and fast dismissal of trading in either direction. If we can get an extra pick and a player we rank equally, it would be nuts not to.

The draft is highly unpredictable. Teams need to know their criteria for trading as much as to have confidence in their board, and then let the draft come to them and play it accordingly.

+ REPLY
7 points
8
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:56 am

I agree with what you say here. My point, which I didn’t explain, is there are talents too rich to not get swings at in the proposed loss of both R4s, and I don’t feel any player 10 positions up warrants that potential loss.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:55 am

On that we agree. There are only perhaps three positions that merit a trade up on theory in my opinion, CB, DL and maybe OT.

In practice I believe that there aren’t any DL that will help with the run enough in this draft to merit a trade up. I also do not think the case for an OT in the first is watertight. If one of the premier CBs drops, that’s possibly a source of major snaps at worst, perhaps a starter this year. Our D just got significantly better, and that is the salient factor.

That outcome, a plausible significant upgrade this year, is the only reason that we should surrender picks to trade up early.

Personally, I’d prefer to trade down if there isn’t a stand out player standing out at 29 that we would anticipate contributing meaningfully this year. More options and competition are the best ways to winnow out roster upgrades and, to your point, this year is unusually full of interesting mid/late round potential that fits, most notably at WR.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:47 am

Coldworld, I'm so glad you brought this up. My draft geek is a serious problem. I may need a 12 step program, or a 20 step...

You're right on OT.

I NEVER pound draft machines. EVER. What I do is gather as many 7 round mocks as I can, along with Big Boards going back 500 players. I research our areas of need and try to establish a set of priorities. Then I research those players available to us, as many as I am able, as far back as 350 or so. Then I look at means amongst the mock drafts, especially those from sources I consider most reliable, even though they ALL are wrong. Then I work through each round, seeing where our adds might be made.

As you work through, sure, there are players with their warts of one kind or another. I put priorities on different factors such as reliability, injury history and other metrics/stats. etc...

Then, I start producing my Packers team mocks. Every year, I get an early start, knowing fully I will be WAY OFF. It takes time to be comprehensive with the research. Knowing 40 times for players R1 through R5-7 and into UDFA... stats, all that stuff. The types of systems they come from... are they press or zone specialists, etc. But, that's what I do and have been doing for decades. As I progress, I get closer and closer to what I consider to be solid choices through all 7 rounds, with options should there be trades, or if other teams jump us in any particular round.

This is some fun stuff. I've built mocks with OT as our first pick, S, ILB, DL, CB, WR, RB, EDGE... All as first picks. What happens then? What if an EDGE is our first pick? Or a RB? Exercises like that take you into different places some may not have considered. It is pretty fun. That's my jam. Normally, I go up to a handful of practices in the Spring/Summer to see what they are doing. A real passion of mine.

These aren't Christmas wish lists either. Not shopping lists of favorites. They are mocks considering what other teams ahead of us will do... 31 others each round. You're going to lose out on some favorite players. Just have to decide who you might be willing to not take in order to make a different selection, and how that limits or helps team improvement. I also consider, is the depth OK this year at a position? Is it a Five Alarm FIRE??? That kind of stuff all factors in.

As fans, it is all we have to go on. Consider the sources too. Some draft outlets pump players. I read as much as I can to get as close to the real skinny as possible. Injuries, character issues, and lack of pure hustle take players completely off my lists.

This year, I've decided to not talk about specific players or even positions within reason to not add to the hype machine. Why add to that, needlessly adding to a player's rise up boards when we might really need him? Only took me 20 years to figure that one out!

Honestly, I've run some stuff where we don't make a single Defensive add until after 92, or, maybe 1 of the top 4 selections a D player, and you'd be surprised at the possibilities. They could EASILY tap OT R1, and the Packers just might. They could also tap RB, depending on who might fall... NONE of those possibilities would necessarily be wrong, and could well be very right. I've read this draft is considered by many team personnel staffs to be an OFFENSE heavy draft. Might get some REAL difference makers on O early.

Who knows? I don't. We'll see in a couple weeks...

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 12:56 pm

We will indeed. I look at what I believe will make us better, normally now and the future, but this year now in terms of the first couple of days. Then I go and look at how players fit that framework. There are a number I’d normally get excited about that I wouldn’t touch this year because they are not likely to help where it matters now.

Thus I look at who can and narrow the focus ... I stop there, I don’t order. That’s why I’m against certain types of early picks based on who is available despite wishing a player that fitted was. I don’t have the dedication to go to your level!

I guess the principe is know one’s objective and identify potential picks that do or don’t help that. That’s why I am not keen on a first round receiver or DL, both of which we need, but I don't see one worth the investment looking at players in light of my very much this year focus. Marginal upgrade now, then sub package/role players upgrade then depth/potential.

I’m usually wrong about who gets picked before us and it goes down hill from there of course. That’s what makes it fun. This year a ton of gems in the later rounds that can contribute as role players or have high upside. Going to be fun. Personally, I love day 3 anyway, and UDFA.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:53 pm

Coldworld, you just spelled out a lot right there, and you're correct on all of it. I want those "IMPACT NOW" players just like you do. What I'm hoping is that this year we get more than ever, which would probably amount to 4 in a dream world...

I do see talent that can contribute right away at a number of spots, but, man, I'm looking through the public glass like all of us are, which is not very clear.

CBS's mock from today has all kinds of fluctuations from less than a week ago. Kadarius Toney is available at 59. Rodale Moore long gone before 29... btw, I put nothing into CBS's mock draft. It is just another of many. Personally, I find it funny, because we always see this stuff happen, every damn year. Without fail.

These mocks are meaningless. None are right. All of them are wrong. That is a fact. Yet, there are players who fly up draft boards. We see that every year as well, and with that, others (good players too) drop like hot rocks. Another fun fact is that there are always stupid teams who continuously do stupid shit. And, God love 'em!!!!!! We have that going for us. As a pure fan, this is really fun stuff to speculate on.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:41 pm

I'm reading the exchange between greengold and Coldworld....and i'm exhausted...lol

That's a lot of work, thought and time to put in deciphering the draft.

I do it different...i wait and see who they picked, then i go about checking them out.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
greengold's picture

April 17, 2021 at 03:35 pm

I like your way, PF4L... For me, it's been pure fun since before the interwebs - yeah, back when you could finally buy the new draft mags. See who was out there.

When JSO started the first Packer Forum, I was on that big time. Living in Arizona at the time, it made me feel like I was home talking about the Packers with fellow fans from around the world. I can still hear that 14.4 dial up modem firing up... I think that was around 1993.

What can I say? Cheers, PF4L!!!

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:25 pm

You talk big but I seriously DO NOT believe you did all that work! Unless your unemployed and mommy and daddy are still supporting their grown up baby!

+ REPLY
-3 points
1
4
Coldworld's picture

April 17, 2021 at 09:14 am

That seems needlessly personally abusive.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PF4L's picture

April 17, 2021 at 11:03 am

I'm with Cold....Some people love getting into the draft and all that it entails. It's fun for a lot of people and it leads to discussion. although it isn't for me, i see where fans get caught up in it.

At the end of the day those fans show passion in the greatest sport in the world....
Bringing Mommy and Daddy's into it is juvenile and low test.

I don't know why parents need to be brought in for personal attacks, but maybe people like 13 and Stroh can tell us one day.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
stockholder's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:45 am

Baaaahhhhhaaaa. Try Arizona. But for a CB? Who won't start! Doesn't work for me. The bust rate is to high for the costs. I say it will cost more then he's worth. And with a second call going to Samuel. I'll need coffee the rest of the day to chill. Small doesn't work. It's go BIG or go Home. I hate Reaching. But that is exactly what Gute does. He has a chance to make this defense great if he doesn't take a CB. If he stays put; he'll get a leader. The edge /LBs are where it's at. Their better then advertised. And when it's time to move on from the Smiths. This Defense won't miss a beat. Stay put!

+ REPLY
0 points
4
4
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:56 am

I think we have the Edge rusher category covered very well with an all pro Zadarious, an improving Gary, and hopefully a bounce back from Preston. I think a solid rookie CB could elevate this defense. However, with that said Gute will probably draft a center 29. LOL

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
stockholder's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:11 am

For How long? Z.Smith is only as good as his sacks. His age will be his downfall.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:58 pm

Move on Zaven Collins and trade P Smith.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Razer's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:41 am

...I hate Reaching. But that is exactly what Gute does...

I agree. Reaching and move-ups because of phantom competition has been in each of his drafts. This year, more than any, is a good draft to spent your mid-round picks on guys who have less tape and demonstrated potential.

If Gutekunst trades picks to move up in round one, I'll know that he doesn't play poker.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:41 am

"If Gutekunst trades picks to move up in round one, I'll know that he doesn't play poker."

That one made me laugh.....it does seem like he is reaching in a couple situations. The Deguara was a bit questionable to me. I do think in the Love situation they had a strong feeling a team was going to move up to get him.

That said, we certainly don't know what the draft room boys know about what other teams interests are.

I'd strongly consider if available to move back to the top of the 2nd round for an extra 4th. I would then try to get as many 2nd and 3rd rounders by trading some of my 4th and beyond draft picks. There should be great value in those two rounds and I truly believe we need that one or two players to get us over the hump this year. It's very unlikely a 4th rounder or later will be much of a contributor this year.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:13 am

I agree with you if he trades up he probably does not play poker. "Probably" was an unnecessary addition to that sentence.

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 07:57 am

See....This is where some of you lose me. It's not just Paul, i like his work, but....

I keep reading...The Packers having a roster with the talent to have won the Super Bowl.
It's an opinion, it's cool, i get it, but.....

On it's face, we don't have the talent to win a Conference Championship, but we have the talent to win the Super Bowl?
To prove something true, doesn't it have to be accomplished?

I mean, one has to come before the other right?

The best argument might be the Seattle NFCCG.
It seemed we had the talent to win that NFCCG.
The problem was...we didn't have the talent, to not screw it up.

Losing the NFCCG against the Bucs, was lost on both sides of the line of scrimmage, with some special assistance from King and Amos.
*********************************************
"Brian Gutekunst felt that the best course of action was to run it back this year for one more Super Bowl push in 2021. "

I'm not sure he had many choices. plus you lost two lineman, one of them a blue chip...creating more need in the draft.

+ REPLY
1 points
6
5
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:04 am

Well said, PF4L!!! GB is FAR from one or two players away.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:57 am

If the Packers were definitively one or two players away, the draft would not be where you would go to find them. Especially picking at #29.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
blondy45's picture

April 16, 2021 at 06:04 pm

Totally agree dobber. Like someone posted earlier, picks above 10th to 15th or so, do not prove to be an immediate upgrade the first year especially QB's. The draft is mainly for the future not the immediate present. Was Tom Brady an immediate upgrade from the draft? Of coarse not. It was a FA add to a team that had years of draft pick talent to surround him. NFL football is more than one or two players making that over the top difference. It remains a team sport, with the best teams having better starters or depth at most positions. Your team is only as good as your weakest links are, coaches included.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
PF4L's picture

April 17, 2021 at 11:24 am

Blue chip players can't be found after pick 29?

I think D K Metcalf (64) might disagree with that

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:59 am

Which is, with the cap contraction, why we need all the picks we can this year and a focus not on upside first but contribution now. This is a different year.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:25 am

I think focusing on getting contributors now is a solid idea.

Who knows, last year it might have been a good idea.

Is upside another word for future? :)

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:00 pm

In all fairness, the world looked different last year. Circumstances should be a major driver of strategy, and unforeseen ones lead to a need to adapt. Those who don’t end up fleshless in museums.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
splitpea1's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:24 am

Especially since we used a first and fourth-rounder on a developmental player last year....If we keep as many picks as we can, we have a chance to restock the roster in a significant way and push out some of the mediocre players and maybe improve our special teams with the lower picks. It gave us some draft flexibility when we re-signed King, Lancaster, and Redmond, but we need to find eventual upgrades for these players.

+ REPLY
3 points
5
2
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:54 am

Well greengold...it has to be said...

If we lost 5 NFCCG's in a row....am i gonna keep reading we have the talent to have won the Super Bowl.

At some point you have to actually get to the Super Bowl to show you have the talent to win it.

At my last count we are 0-4 in our last 4 NFCCG's.

Just to be clear.....for 2020, i think it's quite possible we were one or two players away from the SB. Starting with right cornerback.
We gave up 21 points on sub standard pass coverage.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
CoachDino's picture

April 17, 2021 at 06:38 am

Its not just having the talent, its having the talent healthy. look at SF. Did they go from having a roster that nearly won the super bowl to garbage overnight? No they were ravaged with injuries.

There are many other variables as well that's why other than NE you don't see the same team winning every year. KC almost did but were bit by the injury bug as well. Does that mean TB doesn't have a SB capable Roster but won anyway? No, they like about 4 to 5 teams a year have rosters capable of winning a SB. Then you play the season, and hope at the end your healthy, earned a bye, homefield advantage and had a few of your players be it, starters,depth or rookies develop into larger contributors than projected. Some of these things like Homefield and a Bye can make a big difference.

Then you just have to avoid laying eggs and bad breaks (you are a passing team and its -15F, the field is soaked, your stupid Back-up TE tries to field an onside kick instead of his assignment, your veteran CB bites on a double move with 8 secs left in the half, Your Stud RB fumbles deep in your own territory, your MVP QB misses a few big play opportunities.
There's really so much more that goes into it but in general just having the best roster in Aug doesn't guarantee you a SB win in Jan/Feb.

IMO OT/outside CB and slot Corner looked to be the biggest issues. Yes, KK had his worst game of the year but still, he is a weakness in this age of Passing Focus. Sullivan doesn't stink but he also isn't a good enough player against the top teams.

OT/CB/CB - WR/5 tech that can play run and pass/project ILB/Project WR . Hopefully the board falls in a way that it can be done but that remains to be seen.

Heck that said I might take Gainwell or Creed Humphry in the 3rd if he's the best value. Do you bypass a CB in the second to take an ILB that fell to you? Great stuff to debate, great conversation on the board....

One other point, Drafting 10 players or whatever and signing a 1/2 dozen UDFA doesn't mean you keep them all. You have them compete within your camp and evaluate them, Then Keep, Cut and sign to PS or just cut and let go.

One more point...lol Every team in the league has weaknesses. Some just more than others. Good teams not only have fewer weaknesses but have them at less critical positions.

Can't get by with weaknesses at QB/LT and pass rush. tough to have two good corners but having to bad ones won't work either. ILB/G/G/RB/TE/C are ones you most likely can scheme around somehow. (In General) What was the last Packer team that had a good or better player at each position?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:23 am

They put pressure on us ,but we still gained 413 yds, scored 26 , with our best linemen out. Also, we were the only defense to hold them under a 100 rushing (76) in their 4 post season games. We went through this already.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:01 am

And that....changes what?

What do we get for holding them under 100 yards rushing....a trophy, a t shirt, a cookie?

It's a shame they don't decide games on yards gained, we'd be sitting pretty with the MVP and LeFluer.

Yes, we went through this already, please try to listen closer the 1st time around.

+ REPLY
-2 points
3
5
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:59 pm

Just some respect for the effort. It was a hard fought game that a miss throw by inches to Adams cost us the win. I include (while rubbing index finger and thumb together) the game stats to hopefully make you aware that we were NOT dominated in that game as your comments wrongly and disrespectfully try to point out.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
PF4L's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:57 pm

A missed throw by inches cost us the game? Really?

So you're 100% sure the Packers make a 2 pt conversion and would have won in overtime?

You guys point out a mistake here, or there, that cost us a game.

The other team makes mistakes also. So what's the difference?

The difference is, the other team can over come their mistakes and win the game. Even throwing 3 interceptions.
*************************
You guys act like...if only the Packers didn't make this mistake and that mistake, they would have won. Like they need to play mistake free...to win. That is ...impossible.

Funny how the other team makes mistakes, but they still win don't they? They have the talent to overcome their mistakes and still win.

Headshaker....isn't it?

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:04 pm

Might as well move up for Chase and really blow their minds.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
geronamaker's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:05 am

I took a look at the top 10 rated defensive lineman going into 2020. Only three of the ten were selected later than the first round and of those three all had at least 5 years in the league coming into 2020 which suggests they were not rookie year plug and play starter types but required time to hone their skills at the professional level before reaching top tier status.

Of the seven drafted in the first round, one went at number 24 (Cameron Jordan, who in fact did make an immediate rookie impact in 2011) and the rest were drafted at #15 and higher, including a sprinkling at #1 and 2.

Can a great DL be found at pick 29 or later? Well, sure it can be done however it is uncommon and especially to expect that player to be an immediate difference maker as a rookie is relatively rare. "Can't miss" DL are the most prized draft picks at the top of the first round after "can't miss" QB. And of course some of both go on to "miss" anyway.

If it were that easy to find top shelf DL at the bottom of the first round or later the NFL would be a different league altogether, one more identified by defense than offense.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:29 am

Include CB and T as top picks. Drafting is not a perfect science, ex. Jarret 5th , Hicks 3rd.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
geronamaker's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:21 am

FWIW, only three CB have been selected in the top 5 picks during the prior seventeen years.

Denzel Ward (4th), Jalen Ramsey (5th) and Patrick Peterson (5th).

I realize this isn't your point, which is that a good CB should indeed be available at 29. A good DT there would be something to behold and fervently hoped to find at the bottom of round one or later. To me, DL and ILB are the two most critical defensive needs. Not completely sold on Martin or Barnes at this point although both are more than adequate compared to, say, Blake Martinez during his second contract.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:27 am

You're NOT KIDDING geronamaker!!!

Yeah, this year's crop of DL is highly uncharacteristic of most drafts. The TOP DL on most boards is Barmore, who I've seen listed around the 50 mark on a number of top 100 players listings... what does THAT say?

Without saying too much, that speaks volumes.

Most of the OL/DL players drafted are in need of 2 things: a healthy training table to eat from for a year, and coaching on technique. There are those rare finds who are able to contribute right away, but we saw it with Bakhtiari, Raji, and Bulaga. Bakhtiari coming from R4 should carry some meaning here. Those gems can be found.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
geronamaker's picture

April 16, 2021 at 01:46 pm

You make good points. In keeping with my comment above, Raji was the 9th player selected in his draft. When was the last time the Packers had a pick in the top 10? Most years the best DL talent is long gone by the time the Packers are on the clock.

And Raji lasted only 6 years, one of which he spent on IR. Coupled with the unfortunate Johnny Jolly situation and career ending injuries to Collins and Shields (least as far as Packers were concerned as Shields did come back elsewhere I think) that is tremendous loss of defensive talent in a fairly compressed timeframe which I find difficult to blame on the front office.

That said, we have had much better success drafting and developing OL throughout the Rodgers era, mostly with non-first round selections.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 02:07 pm

Yeah, man. Was thinking about Raji this morning, and what might have been had he not quit playing. Thinking back to those days where I was hoping the Packers could land Ty Warren or Haoli Ngata... holy crap!!!

You're not kidding about the impact of those losses. Shields and Collins were top flight talents at their positions in the NFL when they went down. It took years before we got Alexander. Will see what they do at S this draft, with Savage moving to SLOT.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Oppy's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:24 pm

Raji was ultimately an over rated lineman.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:46 pm

That's BS! He made as many Pro Bowl as Clark and still has a better sack season IIRC. He was a high quality NT, who was wasted playing DE for 2 seasons. He was about to get another 4 yr contract when he walked away!

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Coldworld's picture

April 17, 2021 at 09:22 am

He was indeed good. Raji was a player who did not have, or at some point lost the desire to play football.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PF4L's picture

April 18, 2021 at 06:53 pm

I agree 100% with Cold...Raji lost his way somehow.

It's true that Raji was pushed outside, but that was due to play quality, Ryan Pickett if i'm not mistaken.
When he went outside, it appeared he just didn't care anymore

Raji left millions on the table and basically walked away.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 19, 2021 at 12:59 am

Pro bowl selections are a fan popular vote. How many all pro selections did Raji garner? Anyone who watched Raji play NT, who understands what a NT must do, would know Raji was not a good NT.

Raji got blown off the ball consistently when trying to take on the double.

Raji was miscast as a NT, he wasn't nearly stout enough to play the nose. He would have been a good DT in a 4-3 defense where his agility and lateral quickness for a man his size would have paid dividends.

When it came to playing 0, Raji couldn't hold Pickett's or Clark's jock.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 04:12 pm

I've also seen Barmore listed around 15. It's definitely a crap shoot, especially with DL. It would be nice if they brought a veteran DL in to help and use the draft capital elsewhere this year because as stated the DL might need a year or two of development. Based on his last two games in the Championship it would be hard to pass on him at 29 thou.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:28 pm

That ship has sailed two years ago.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:47 am

...With needs at offensive tackle, cornerback, and receiver, to name a few, this is, fortunately, a very deep draft class at each of those positions...

I agree with Paul on the above assessment of this draft - I just don't see where it supports moving up and reducing you number of overall picks. I think exactly the opposite of the author and think that this draft will be defined by rounds 2-5. If a partner was available, I would trade our 1 for a 2nd and 'high' 4th.

+ REPLY
7 points
7
0
Guam's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:49 am

Beat me to it Razer! Most of the draftniks I have read believe that this is a deep draft with substantial talent in rounds 2-4. Further, due to the lack of in-person scouting, the shortened college football season and no combine, there is more uncertainty about talent evaluation this year than in any year in memory.

This is absolutely the year to trade back and have more bites at the apple, particularly in rounds 2-4. Gute should trade back and accumulate picks rather than move up and gamble on an evaluation of one guy.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Razer's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:50 am

We should form a choir :o)

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 02:14 pm

It's interesting, Guam. There are only about 4 teams that would pay off for the Packers to trade down from 29 with. Even then, if we trade with MIA, we may be looking at our first selection being pick #50, which would compress your success rate in landing top 100 players.

Could see Gutekunst trading down, then back up again with the right players (teams). While complicated, there are few that I would trust to pull off that kind of magic than Brian Gutekunst.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Guam's picture

April 16, 2021 at 04:03 pm

Agreed that there are few teams that might want to swap picks, but I am less concerned about getting a top 100 player simply because player evaluations are all over the board this year. I suspect there may be 150-175 players that are part of someone's "top 100" players. This is the year to trust your scouts and your board and hope some other teams screw up their board. More bites at the apple.......

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:59 pm

I would trade down in rd 1 and work on getting 4 players in the top 75 - 100. Very doable and you still end up with 8 picks and an udfa or 2 that make the team. Unless a player is available at 29 that is head and shoulders above the rest.

Move 29 down 7-10 spots. Use a 4th to move up from 60 to late 40 or 50. Get a 3rd for moving down and use a 5th to move up from bottom 3rd. Still have a pick in every round and more better pick in rds 2 and 3.

That's assuming players you want are to your liking worth moving up for again.

IMO a 10 player draft is too many for a team already at or on the verge of SB contention. Plus almost every year an UDFA contributes

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

April 17, 2021 at 07:59 am

Were on the same page Stroh. We need a couple of key contributors this year and it’s against the odds you find them after the 3rd round.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
LambeauPlain's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:41 am

About the only player I would climb for is Barmore if he is on the board in the early 20's. The best DT in a weak class, he nonetheless looks to be the real deal. After redshirting his freshman year, he has continuously improved his production over the last two years highlighted by the Championship game vs Ohio State where he was the game's MVP. Already powerful and quick for a big man as r/sophomore, he will continue to develop. He will instantly improve the Packer D playing alongside Clark.

Otherwise sit tight at 29 and draft the BAP at OL, CB or LB.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Stroh's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:05 pm

If Barmore is at 29 take him, but he's way to risky to make a big move up for. He's a huge boom or bust pick. Nice that he showed up a couple game a season but what about the other 12 games per season?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PeteK's picture

April 16, 2021 at 08:54 am

I want a CB and T( beware one thing can end the season quickly), and would move up to take Tufele if he falls into the 2nd round, if not would settle for McNeil or Shelvin who I believe would help our D. WR, ILB would come next. It's such a debatable/mysterious process. We could draft a ILB that turns into a disruptive force or a WR that makes this offense impossible to defense. Anything is possible when you have an MVP QB, all pro WR, LT, G, HB,CB, and OLB, and good DT, safeties, and TE. Where are my binoculars because we're so far away, oops don't need them it was right in front of me. LOl

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
madtowndan's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:33 am

The Pack not only needs some immediate help (corner, ILB) but they need to stock the receiver shelf as well. After this season, they''ll only have one starting receiver under contract, under the assumption that they will extend or re-sign Davante Adams (odds are very high they will do that, probably before the start of the season).

So, I'm guessing they go defense in the first round, and then try to cherry pick the best players they can in later rounds. I would hope they take at least two receivers over the course of the draft, and one OL with stud-potential.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
PatrickGB's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:34 am

A lot of what to do in the draft is dependent on what other teams do. We do not draft in a vacuum.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Archie's picture

April 16, 2021 at 09:35 am

There are about 20 players in this draft that have virtually no chance of being on the board at pick 29. After that, there are another 20 players that could go in any order. And I agree, this draft is deep with solid talent into R4. So the risk/cost of trading up is great. That said, if somebody is viewed as a true difference maker, moving up could still be the right thing to do. Moving down from 29 should be tempting for the reasons stated above. So, who would have to available at 29 for me not trade down?

1 - Jamin Davis ILB - could fill lots of roles in this defense.

2 - Teven Jenkins - looks like top OT that could be available at 29

3 - Barmore DT - looks like ascending talent

4 - Newsome CB - would be hard to pass on.

Aside from these four there are also a couple of edge rushers that might be available that would be worth the pick.

The odds of one of these four guys being available at 29 is probably between 25 and 50%. Would I trade up a few spots to get one? Most definitely. Not 8 slots but 3 or 4 slots.

Otherwise I'm moving down from 29. The extra pick(s) can be used to improve draft positions in R2/R3.

Archie begins his 6th decade of being a draftnik. :)

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
stockholder's picture

April 16, 2021 at 10:07 am

Newsome could be a bust, and has had past injuries. He won't start over a healthy King. And if you think the Alexander pick makes Gute a genius. Think again. CB set his board. You build a team with Cbs and Ots. But the ace up the sleeve was the extra first round pick from NO. It gave Gute a chance to miss and still draft a CB next year. But Jackson fell to him. So he got to take Savage with it. He doesn't have a ace this draft. So he'll need to spend money to fix the defense. (Thats if he takes a CB.) But what were seeing is a rebuild. If Newsome is selected.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
LambeauPlain's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:46 am

You list some good players in Barmore, Jenkins, Newsome and Davis. I think 1 or all 4 could drop to 29. Barmore probably is the least likely because DL is so thin this year and teams wanting the big D guys will reach for him in the first round.

But he could drop...I have seen him ranked as high as 15 and as low as 50. What makes him so attractive for the Packers is his upside. As he continues to grow, with Kenny locked up for some years now...those two could be a terror to O coordinators. He is only a redshirt sophomore after all, earning the D MVP in college championship game.

Watch his play tape. Cat quick first step, power and eyes on the prize. Great balance and wrap up tackler.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

April 16, 2021 at 04:15 pm

I really like Jamin Davis, but that might be just the player you could get early in the second round and trade down if a trading partner was available. Get another 4th and trade back up into the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I think there is some real talent in the 20-100 range. Some that might get overlooked. Maybe into the 4th, but probably not where we are picking.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
frankthefork's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:29 am

Two more weeks...ugh. The NFL drags this too far down the line just for the pro days, which is a stage without really playing football; but how one looks working out...come on man! For me it's media fluff. NHL, MLB, NBA and all other pro sports don't waste time for the media to give it's opinions for 2 months.
Running 40 yards straight shows me catch up speed, which is great if you blew your assignment or you have the ball. It's all game tape for me. I only care about how a player plays during game time not workout time. True, that gute overreaches in the draft, based on cone times. But dude-It's man vs man on an 11 man team...workouts are a waste of time to judge NFL worthiness ...oh he can play football because he jumps this, runs that; its crap. Every team let TB12 go to the 6th round...it's not funny. How about Runyan last year; he's a starter today, just move Patrick to center.
IMO-To get to the SB like TB we need a better defensive front to start. Why because both the TB front lines ragdolled both sides of the ball! Our O-line is/was good but TB was better when it counted; sans Bak.
3-4 new guys on the front 7 is key for me. Burks, Jackson , Lowry, Summers, Keke, Ramsey, King and Redmond create no fear; and I hope for replacements soon. Martin and Branes were OK not great like TB has in it's ILB's...so DL, DT, ILB, OLB-edge, 2 Cb's and a S to rest Amos.
Another point is- Packers need someone to finally challenge DA17 for AR12 looks, Ar12 focuses on him 80% of the time. Scrambles and drops to Tonyan, Lazard, Jones and the go for it all MVS, and only happen when DA's doubled or not open. One injury to DA17 and it's no playoffs.
So now it's Build depth at WR, TE, RB, OT and a PS QB. Gute will need several UDFA"s to make the final 53 again. ..blah blah blah..

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 02:42 pm

Frank, there is so much in here that I agree with. Though, I do like what Keke and Ramsey might yet prove. To me, there was so much wrong with Pettine and how he ran the D, that I find it tough to say how devoid of talent we are in some areas. Others, you just know after closely following the game for a lifetime.

I think you're right on Burks, Lowry, Summers... add Lancaster... you either have it or your don't. They have proven that they don't. Redmond is insurance. Doubt he makes this roster. King is insurance, but good and worth keeping this year.

The whole draft is a giant money grab for a lot of media. NOT cheeseheadTV though! Get that Draft Guide. It is loaded with great stuff. No doubt. I was not paid to say that. I mean it. A lot of great info for the cost of a burger at a bar.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:23 pm

Lancaster is fine as a depth NT. Just don’t expect him to play DE.

Summers actually looked better at the backend of last year, he might be taking a step, he was raw but athletic coming in.

Lowry is overpays depth or just miscast. Keeping him worries me for what it suggests about DL usage, but we are still a long way from cut down.

Burks? I have nothing. I think the off season will be crucial for EQ and Jackson. Last year of your rookie contract is usually too late to do anything but burst out preseason ... could be gone before game one or, less likely, dramatically improve our depth if it clicks.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

April 16, 2021 at 11:30 am

The premise of this article is that the Packers need 1 to 2 players from this draft to contribute right away. If we are talking about a player who can make the difference in the 2021 season, I don’t think we’re looking DL, edge, or CB. We don’t have to look any further than Clark, Savage, Jaire, or Gary to see that first year game changing impact is hard to come by (outside of the first 10 picks maybe). A stud DL drafted at 29 will essentially be Lancaster in 2021. If the draft decision is centered on the biggest impact in 2021 foregoing long-term impact, the best choice will be (get ready for it) Rondale Moore at 29. Getting any improvement in special teams could push us over the top and maybe Moore could help our return game improve to middle of the pack (WE’RE #16!). Also, the playbook would be narrowed and simplified to the gadget plays that I secretly think Lafleur would love to add to this offense. Getting 2-3 big plays a game in 2021 out of your first round draft choice would be easiest out of a returner/specialty/slot receiver with speed and skills currently not found on this team.

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
LambeauPlain's picture

April 16, 2021 at 12:02 pm

Rondale Moore would one of the most talented and dedicated players the Packers have ever drafted. Kid is a workout warrior off the field and a nose to grindstone in the classroom. Reading his personal story was amazing. He actually took 28 credits at Purdue one semester so he could end up graduating in 2 1/2 years. He is a chunk play machine from the slot, taking handoffs from the backfield, on jet sweeps, returning kickoffs and punts.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
blondy45's picture

April 16, 2021 at 12:29 pm

Good points Doug. My beef with Moore at #29 is size and durability for your premium pick for a gadget, small receiver, who will only be a part time player on offense. His special team value IS very important. He would be a great player for the Pack, just not at the 29 draft pick. A gadget player although not as good as Moore is touted to be, can be had in later rounds. A thoughtful well liked post though.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
greengold's picture

April 16, 2021 at 02:29 pm

I've already seen Rondale Moore mocked well above the Packers 29 pick, and... OK!!!! I mean, what are we going to do? This is what happens 2 weeks prior to the draft. Every draft. We'll see if it actually becomes reality. As quickly as some players climb, they can fall. Regardless, other quality talents become ready for the taking.

That's the nature of picking towards the end of every draft. There are other gadget players, and I agree we could use one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

April 16, 2021 at 05:29 pm

Don’t forget, it’s not just us, every year the professional pundits have their darlings that cause them to lose perspective. Of course GMs do too.

If you look at player and see a diamond but history tells you that his physique, health or some other factor has consistently rendered similar players ineffective, injury prone or bad value, think long and hard. You are either fooling yourself or a savant. The latter are very rare.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
CoachDino's picture

April 17, 2021 at 05:40 am

It would cost the Packers their 3rd and 4th Rd Picks to move up. This is according to the "Colts" trade value Chart.

Impossible to say it's a good or bad idea until you see who its for:

Barmore Ok- Theres no one close to him a IDL , Newsome - is rich seeing Samuel will likely be there and CB class is loaded, probably be a OT available at 29 close to Tevon J, (Cosmi/Walker/Dillian-maybe) or even trade back and Jackson Carmen/Liam should be available. All 4 could be year 1 starters.
Caleb is interesting as, if everyone else passed why would you not only take him but use draft capital? (once again its going to cost you a 3rd and 4th not two Fourths both at the very end of the rd) The answer is because he has the potential to be the best CB in the entire draft, I get it but risky....

I'd like to see more articles on trading back, maybe someone will over pay. Could probably drop to 32-37 and up a late 3rd early 4th. Still get your OT then grab a CB in the second and a wr/IDL in the third with your extra pick. Who knows so much depends on their view of the OT situation and how the board falls.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PhantomII's picture

April 17, 2021 at 01:34 pm

The only way to get our salary cap straight is to draft the best players we can MOVE UP and get at #1 WR to replace Adams or Edge (OLB) to replace Z/ Preston and get Gary starting ASAP while still on the cheap. So top level Edge will allow Preston to get traded or cut and Gary to start and then new Edge replaces Z in a year or two to free up money for others contracts. Amos does not make big money, but to a smaller degree Safety to replace him. LT is signed for a couple more years and also DL big money so longer time frame OT and DL. We have multiple needs all over the place, but these needs get the cap back under a manageable manner sooner minus trading Rodgers away and getting lucky with Love. Trade Adams and 2021 #1 pick for Chase or 2021 and 2022 #1 and Tonyan for Chase. 2021
#1 and P. Smith for Paye.

+ 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.