Packers Mock Draft Monday 8.0

Ross will provide a semi-weekly roundup of national mock drafts relating to the Packers picks.  For the first time he is giving the Draft Networks' Mock Draft Machine a try.  In 2019 the Packers will pick six times in the first four rounds, so those are the rounds that we will focus on.

 

Now that I have combine results I can make a better projection of the players Green Bay is likely to take.  Between Justis Mosqueda's thresholds piece and my understanding of where the Packers set their sights as it relates to athleticism (more on that later this week), I can tell where Green Bay is likely looking.  These guys all qualify, though we're still waiting on a few numbers for Thornhill.  This draft would infuse talent, speed, and skill into a roster looking for some help.  Hill is a difference maker. Saunders is a small school freak of nature that makes re-signing Muhammad Wilkerson an option and not a necessity. Burns is the crown jewel of the class. Truly a potential star.

Roundup

Kyle Crabbs, The Draft Network -- Burns, John Abram, and Michael Deiter - this one starts out great, then I'm not sure how I feel.  Abram is a missile, but probably a box safety and he's been thrown out for targeting more than once.  Also, he was taken with Hockenson still on the board.  That I could do without.  Deiter is an interesting prospect.  He didn't test out particularly well, though the offensive line is a place the Packers have strayed from RAS, as with the Cole Madison pick last year.

Ryan Wilson, CBS Sports -- Rashan Gary and Noah Fant - it is what it is.  This is the bad scenario. Bosa Allen and Burns all go. Green Bay passes on Sweat for Gary. Gary, like Ed Oliver, is a man potentially without a position. That said, he wasn't as productive as Oliver. Fant is an excellent fit and excellent choice. Fant is a truly elite athlete.

Sam Farmer, LA Times -- Clelin Ferrell and Deointe Thompson - burn it with fire.

Peter Schrager, NFL.com -- Devin White and Marquise Brown - throw that one in the fire next to the one before it. The second best ILB in the draft at 12 overall and a 165 pound WR with a lisfranc injury?

Jake Rill, Bleacher Report -- Devin White and N'Keal Harry - shoot it into the sun.

Bucky Brooks, NFL.com --  Polite and Irv Smith Jr - a few days ago I'd have been ecstatic.  Now Polite has tanked his draft stock and it turns out ISJ is pretty short. This one wouldn't upset me necessarily but it's not the way to use value after the Combine.

Packers Draft Prospect Vid of the Week (no highlights)- 

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

Ross Uglem is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @RossUglem 

NFL Categories: 
2 points

Comments (201)

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

March 04, 2019 at 11:46 am

Looks good for the first 4 picks. Not sure on the 4th rounders. For me, more edge rushers and OL would be better.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
leche's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:50 pm

Yeah I don't get the first 4th rounder being used on another RB. RBs are a dime a dozen and we'll be just as likely to find similar enough production later and there's more value to be added in the 4th than this.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Turophile's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:57 pm

A very nice group. I was never on board with Brian Burns when he was under 230lb (despite his gaudy numbers), but at 240+, and with the athleticism he showed in the combine drills, he could be a monster !

I'm ho-hum on McGary (would probably have looked at OT at pick #30, but I concede it's hard to pass on Hockenson and even at #30 many good tackles (Williams, Taylor, Ford, Dillard) could already be gone.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:09 am

I'm not a McGary fan either; he screams "Jason Spriggs 2."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:44 pm

A running back we should target is Tony Pollard from Memphis. He is a rb/wr kick and punt returner with 7 career touchdowns. Seems like a Ty Montgomery type with better return ability.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
dobber's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:45 pm

Let's not lose track of the fact that Ty Montgomery came out of Stanford as an All-American return specialist.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
The TKstinator's picture

March 04, 2019 at 08:10 pm

Guys like that often decline to take a knee in the endzone.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
rutaruloge657's picture

March 06, 2019 at 12:14 am

I have gotten $19,298 in my first month and $22,427 a month ago by means of the use of in reality running at the internet from home. i am a full time undergrad and simply running for three to four hrs every day. all and sundry ought to try this interest now with the useful resource of truely utilize this link….visit this link and go to tabs( home media tech ) for greater element thanks .
GOOD LUCK………..
HERE­­►►►►►► w­w­w­.your50­.­c­o­m

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 11:56 am

Yes, let's spend our high picks on positions where we already have better-than-average starters.

We've been in the Top 10 in sacks for 3 of the last 4 years and yet that's where we want to spend our first round pick?

+ REPLY
-20 points
2
22
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:08 pm

All sacks are not created equally scheme sacks, coverage sacks, and pressure sacks its the reason Kyler Fackrell's sacks aren't that impressive and why he is nothing more than a rotational piece. It's the reason why nobody gives a rip about Vic Beasley's 2016 sack leading campaign because how he obtained most of his sacks.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:18 pm

Then why spend big resources on an edge rusher when you can create sacks with scheme and by improving coverages?

Is that half-a-sack/game that your edge rusher provides that important?

Why wouldn't you use those resources to improve your team in other areas where we aren't ranked in the Top 10 every year? Why wouldn't you get more guys who can cover? Why wouldn't you get guys who can help stop the run (yeah, we're below average at that most of the time).

+ REPLY
-7 points
1
8
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:31 pm

Its about pressure if your edge guys can only get sacks through scheme or your secondary holding up in coverage for 5 plus seconds then they are not creating pressure the QB is just sitting there taking his sweet time and taking a dumb sack. Since you can't create constant pressure what happens when you face en elite o-line or a QB that can get the ball out quickly you get picked apart. Thats why guys that can create pressure either on the edge or up the middle command big bucks and right behind that is cover corner. They go hand in hand. Pressure creates TO or stoppages good coverage creates sacks/strip sacks.

+ REPLY
12 points
13
1
leche's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:49 pm

Yup. Coverage can be used to create sacks, but over the long term, coverage will breakdown more often than it will create a sack. Edge rushers putting pressure on the QB causes chaos and forces the breakdown of more plays and causes more mistakes. Like you said, it's not just about sacks, but if you can cause bad passes or throwaways that's still a productive defensive play. This current Packers team doesn't do that nearly well enough and they need a new, top of the line edge rusher.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:33 pm

Scheme sacks should be an added luxury used to get more sacks not your sole source.

+ REPLY
7 points
8
1
Ross Uglem's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:22 pm

oh wow that's a colossally bad take

+ REPLY
2 points
5
3
Jonathan Spader's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:58 pm

Ross, what is a colossally bad take?

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
TheBigCheeze's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:52 pm

YES....AND YES......take away Fackrell, and GB is Oakland.....replace Matthews and perry....NOW !!!!!!

+ REPLY
-2 points
1
3
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:17 pm

#12 might be no man’s land.. Might not get targeted player. Might not be able to trade down.

The solution might be to trade up.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
The TKstinator's picture

March 06, 2019 at 06:11 am

It might be, or it MIGHT be awesome if some combine studs get overvalued and pushed up too high leaving GB ready to swoop in.

Also, I’m hoping/expecting that some QB’s get overdrafted in front of GB; again pushing the ripest, juiciest plums down toward #12.

There are ALWAYS surprises every year in terms of risers/fallers. What’ll it be this year?

PS: not sure “fallers” is a word, but I can offer this: “I hope all those fallers than GB picks stay healthy and contribute in meaningful ways.”

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:03 pm

Like I said in another comment Burns can always put on weight but Polite can't get taller and seeing him swallowed up on plays was more concerning to me than Burns (at the time) slight frame. Who knows maybe we see a Josh Jackson, Harold Landry situation where guys that were projected to go in the top 25 fall to the second or later Thompson's stock already dropped and Polite might be on his way as well. Packers could double up.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:29 pm

I think there is truth to what you indicate. Very possible depending on Pro Day, etc.

Hard to believe he would fall to #44 but possible. If the Pack liked him moving up a half-dozen picks in round 2 would likely be a huge value. However, I like the idea of the Pack looking long and hard at DL Simmons and his injury. I agree with Stockholder if he is everything I have read he would be a very good selection at #44. That would set the Pack defensive line well for 2020. I still hope the Pack pick up two studs on the front 7 of the defense in the draft regardless of #44.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CAG123's picture

March 05, 2019 at 10:43 am

BIG YES to Simmons man him and Clark would be nasty on the line with someone like Burns on the outside my goodness!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Rak47's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:05 pm

After watching the combine workouts on video I have to say I'm all in on Burns. My fear at this point is he won't be there when the Pack picks at 12 after the combine he just had.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
nostradanus's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:07 pm

Take the best player available at each choice, you don't draft this high and with this much draft capital very often (hopefully).

Fill in the rest with Free Agents

That is all...

+ REPLY
5 points
7
2
dobber's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:38 pm

The only problem is (and everyone knows this): the decent free agents come well before the draft. Signing players and then filling holes through the draft is a much tougher scenario. This is why the personnel management folks make the big bucks, and it will have a lot to do with how well this team rebounds in 2019.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
kevgk's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:00 pm

Your philosophy is correct, I'm just concerned that the FA crop isn't great and the market opens up before the draft. They need to sign players filling holes projected after the draft, and I hope it works out.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:13 pm

They'll put in a bid for Houston now that he's on the street. Will Perry get the heave-ho on Tuesday. Suspense and intrigue on the blogs.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:27 pm

My priorities are offensive line, to protect Rodgers; then edge rusher; tight end; and safety -- though not necessarily in that order in terms of draft picks.
Ross' draft seems to check off the boxes nicely, at least to my untrained eye.
Some questions:
(1) What happened with Polite?
(2) Would it be better if free agency came after the draft?
(3) Generally speaking, is it better to draft BPA in the first two or three rounds, and then need afterwards?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:36 pm

Polite bombed at the combine and ran a 4.8 and had bad team interviews apparently. Looks like he might get the Harold Landry treatment.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:40 pm

It didn't help that Polite didn't humbly suck it up and do damage control...he started blaming team reps for working him over and putting him in a bad spot.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:46 pm

Harold Landry got 4.5 sacks last year, same as Marcus Davenport. If we're expecting Polite to get 4.5 sacks...….why the hell would we spend #12 on him?

+ REPLY
5 points
7
2
stockholder's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:25 pm

^^

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:18 pm

Polite wasn’t very polite was he? I’d say let him be the Rams wasted pick and move on. Who needs a rookie headcase?

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:17 pm

His fastest clocked time last season was 4.73 according to a scout on Walt's payroll. He played between 262 to 245 when he transitioned from Dt to edge rusher. He will turn 21 soon and obviously was not "coached " by his agent. See on his pro day goes.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Dzehren's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:21 pm

Polite may have faked a hamstring injury as well. Also calling Polite a tweeter which is not good. Nightmare.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:30 pm

Totally agree!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:42 pm

Since 2010, 46 DEs/OLBs taken in the first round.

5 are already out of the league because of injuries. Of the remaining 41, only about 10 of them average 0.5 sacks/game in their career.

I don't agree with the view that a sack around the edge is somehow more valuable than a sack from the interior or a coverage sack.

I think edge rushers are overvalued. In fact, it's pretty clear to me. You know who is 17th on that list in terms of sacks? Yeah, that's right. So more than half of the edge rushers taken in the first round aren't even as good as him

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
CAG123's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:28 pm

It's not just about getting sacks it's about pressure a player could only get home on 7 sacks but be very disruptive and be more coveted than Kyler Fackrell. A coverage sack is more of a reflection of the secondary than any particular LB or d-lineman and more times than not the coverage will break down and someone will get free so you can't really rely on those. You have a guy like Gerald McCoy who's 5 sacks and 15 plus QB hits mean more than any of Fackrell's sacks I mean 6 of the 10 came against horrible o-lines. I'm not saying Fackrell sucks I'm just saying GB shouldn't go into this season thinking he's the guy.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
EddieLeeIvory's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:48 pm

Ed Oliver reminds me a lot of Gerald McCoy

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:12 pm

It's not about sacks it's about pressure...……

Is there a better measure of pressure than sacks which you are using? I mean, wouldn't the people with the most hits get the most sacks, generally speaking.?

And yeah, it's a team game. Pressure from the outside, pressure up the middle, try to keep guys covered long enough for the rush to reach home, don't let the QB escape.....etc.

40 passes in a game. Many are quick, timing patterns. Or dump offs. Or screens to a back or a WR. How many actual opportunities to pressure a QB do you really think you get in a game? 20? I'd say less.

And then we'll use your McCoy example. If he had six sacks and 20 hits that's 26 in a season against a total of 640 pass attempts.

So you want to spend a high pick on a guy who impacts only a handful of plays in a game and will probably only get us 6 sacks, if we're lucky.

I'd rather spend that pick on a DL that could get me some sacks and improve our run stopping. I'd rather get a 3 down ILB that can make the middle of our defense stronger. I'd rather have some safeties who can cover and tackle.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
The TKstinator's picture

March 04, 2019 at 08:15 pm

Good argument.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:17 am

Completely agree. I'd much prefer a great DL or ILB than a very good OLB.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
CAG123's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:28 am

I said "Its not JUST about sacks" and McCoy is a DL you've been making this defense for Fackrell as if he's a guy to depend consistently on the outside which he isn't his 10.5 sacks last year mean squat because he needed a designed scheme to get them or terrible o-lines. The Packers need a more reliable source of pressure from the outside a three down LB isn't going to fix the lack of a pass rush a the Rams have Aaron Donald and are looking for a player to create pressure from the outside they need both. The Bears have Mack and are looking for someone to create pressure up the middle or the opposite side they need both. The Broncos have Miller and found him a running mate last year the Browns are doing the same with Garrett. Point is getting to the QB from multiple angles is a good thing.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:24 pm

They need two more at EDGE this off-season maybe three. Fackerell should still be the #3 guy.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
CAG123's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:25 pm

I agree KF has shown the ability to get home when Pettine wants to bring the heat which makes him a great situational piece. I would actually be fine with him and Clay as the 3 and 4 guys.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 12:58 pm

I like the picks, but some of those players being where you have them won’t be there. After the combine, I’ll admit, I’m confused now. I’m usually a film guy and not athletic numbers. But when you have great film guys performing at the combine as well, I’m back to square one. The top ten in this draft is really volatile right now. What’s left at 12 could become quite a steal as much at it could become a reach. I might need a few cocktails to figure this out. Then we have FA coming up, that’ll turn this upside down yet again. I’m 49 years old and have been a Packer fan since I knew what football was, and for some reason, this years offseason has left me the most curious. Perhaps cuz Rodgers window is closing, new coach, Ted Thompson a year removed, and if done just right, we’re sooooooo close. I enjoy reading everyone’s opinions here. They are very inspiring and thought provoking.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
Jonathan Spader's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:01 pm

Some of the players we never expected to be there will ne there as well. I expect 2-3 QBs to be reached for in the top 10. It happens almost every year and better players drop as a result. Every year fans say well that player won't be there. You never know.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
EddieLeeIvory's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:56 pm

As the great Sol Rosenburg once said, "you nevah, nevah, never know".

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:51 pm

Did you just invoke the Jerky Boys?! Lol

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:50 pm

Crazypackfan,
well written!

I wholeheartedly agree with all you state!

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:28 pm

Its a Full Alert. Clown time is over. The repetitive drone of "wait till next year " and we can't afford this and that is out the door. Restock and attack
or forever wonder "what might have been?

+ REPLY
-2 points
2
4
Duneslick's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:22 pm

I would like some of the viewer look at the combine and make a guess based on scouting the combine and draft history who are the top 15. We know QB's Edge and OT go high. We also know if someone kills it at the combine or runs a great 40 they jump up on the draft list. I was 49 16 years ago and a fan since 1962. I am hoping 3 qb's are taken high after that there are a lot of highly rated players and combine stars in the top 15. More than 1 top 10 player has to fall to GB. I also think that both Iowa TE's are gone by 30. Would have liked to draft one of them at 30. We may also get an offer to trade back from Wash or Miami if there is QB they desire at our pick

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Since69's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:05 pm

If they're still high on Polite, they could probably get him at #30...

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:51 pm

Honestly, his combine was so bad they might have a chance on him in round 2.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:14 pm

He might recover on Pro Day. The bigger problem now is that everybody is back in the film room watching this guy without stars in their eyes. They're trying to figure out why they liked him so much in the first place.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:32 pm

Agree! Teams are now probably thinking they might be able to snag him for value in early round 2.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
dobber's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:50 pm

I think we overestimate how much stock GMs are going to put in the combine (the interview and his aftermath are damning, though).

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:23 am

Polite doesn't use a lot of technique, and doesn't have a plan when he rushes. Now he says he doesn't watch film of his own play. The most important thing IMO is whether GB believes he is coachable based on his interviews and discussions with his college coaches.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:13 pm

Ross, I don't understand your dissing of Devin White. He's one of my top seven in this draft. A 4.42 40 and 39.5 vertical at 237 pounds; 7.07 3-cone; Last two years made 133 and 123 tackles; Team Captain and Defensive MVP as well as First Team All-Conference in the S.E.C.; Butkus Award winner (D Bush took 2nd...); etc.
He's ridiculously explosive on blitzes and TFLs; he's one of those players who at times looks like he is faster than everyone else on the field. He's also a student of the game and didn't play LB until college, so he's still learning.

+ REPLY
10 points
10
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:24 pm

I really like White at 12 too. As long as we can get a quality TE within the first 44, I’d be very happy with White. But like my post in here earlier, this Combine kinda threw me for a loop. Question for you. Where in the draft should GB get serious about OL?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:58 pm

Think you always have to look at BPA with each draft selection. Always!

However, my preference with BPA I would not draft an OL until #30 or #44, but even then only if you draft a OT. If at OG I think you could wait until rounds 3 thru 5 depending on whom might be available.

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:11 pm

I agree with KnockTheSnot: Best Player Available. Heck, I would have NO problem with the Packers drafting Kyler Murray at 12, if they believed he was the best player available (and he might be...).
I'd be happy with an OL prospect at any point, if they think he's the best player available. I'm hoping more that we pick up some free agents there anyway.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:36 pm

PEO,
Totally agree!

I said on here over a month ago if Kyler Murray is the BPA I hope they draft him. Not only would I have him behind Rodgers but I think he has real value as a slot receiver and on special teams. He would not simply have to be sitting on the bench waiting for Rodgers to get hurt. He would be an awesome slot receiver with his speed, twitchyness, and abrupt change of direction. It would simply take a coach thinking out of the box like Sean down in NO with Hill.

If this scenario happened I think the Pack has the draft capital to move up in round 1 if they felt they couldn't wait for a pass rusher. Or as many of us are stating pick up Polite at #30 or early in round 2.

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
ShooterMcGee's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:52 pm

Ross is really high on the QB out of NDSU Easton Stick. He has him ranked #40 on his board. You should check his highlights. An explosive runner with quick change of direction. He had the fastest 3 cone drill at combine besting all the wr and rb. I wonder if he can return kicks? He could make everyone forget Taysom Hill. Although Ross has him at 40 he is way down the list on others. Could be a great 7th round pick or UDFA.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:22 am

KnockSnot, are you me? :-D I almost wrote exactly what you said in your response in my original comment about Murray!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Duneslick's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:24 pm

If GB make Murray a slot receiver he plays baseball instead.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
EddieLeeIvory's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:04 pm

I agree. Devin White is a "run the card up to the podium fast" pick!

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:17 pm

A three down player in the middle of our defense who'd be an incredible improvement over whoever is starting next to Martinez?

Yeah. I'm with PackEyedOptimist on this. White would help a lot. A lot more than an edge rusher, IMO.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:32 am

I think White would replace Martinez, not play next to him. GB probably would put both out there together sometimes, true.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:17 pm

A three down player in the middle of our defense who'd be an incredible improvement over whoever is starting next to Martinez?

Yeah. I'm with PackEyedOptimist on this. White would help a lot. A lot more than an edge rusher, IMO.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:11 pm

i have always wondered why our 3-4 defense always discounted middle linebackers while seemingly all others did not. The 49ers with Willis and Bowman, the Bears with Urlacher now Smith. We absolutely need someone who can make plays behind the line of scrimmage not 5 yards down field. Devin White at 12 would be fantastic! Devin Bush at 30 great! Also their RAS scores must be thru the roof. And as Ross has written this is very important to the new regime.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Kevin Ven's picture

March 04, 2019 at 10:47 pm

Urlacher never played in a 3-4. They were a 4-3 defense when he played

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
stockholder's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:23 pm

@12 Oliver! @30 Bush! @ 44 Simmons DT @75 J. Sternberger Te @114 Scharping OT @ 119 Wilson TE Ucla I'm replacing Wilkerson and. Simmons comes in next year for Daniels.

+ REPLY
-4 points
2
6
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:02 pm

Stockholder there is a lot that needs to be flushed out before #12. Everything seems to point to Oliver being gone before #12 but if he is there I would have no qualms about the Packers selecting him. There also is NO WAY Burns will be there at #30. Not after the Combine. This guys arrow is pointing straight up big time. I really like the idea of picking up an injured player who is ranked really high at a lower draft selection such as you point out with Simmons, or the Ohio State DB who is the fastest in the draft who ripped a chest muscle during bench pressing. Go for value like this and end up with a blue chip player down the road.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:34 pm

EDGE rusher is number one on the list followed by OT. If White falls to #12 I would be surprised, but some of the QBs will be over-drafted. Elway says he's not interested in a QB? Jacksonville is after Foles.

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
stockholder's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:41 pm

You guys need to realize this will happen. Especially those people who want Wilkerson resigned, and draft Hoek. These are the top eleven: Bosa/Q. Williams /Allen/Haskins/G.Williams/Ferrel/Murray/Lock/Sweat/White/ Metcalf/. @12 the packers will choose between J.Williams OT and Oliver.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:01 pm

Is edge really our number one need? Depending how the first 11 picks go, edge might actually be a complete reach compared to what might be there at 12. I’m not gonna be prisoner of drafting a need just cuz. 12 might give us a great LB, TE, OL, DT......Depending how it goes, I’m not on board for just any Edge guy at 12.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Dzehren's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:46 pm

If Jonah Williams, Oliver & Burns are all available at 12 -GB will be all smiles.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SCLI's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:30 pm

When it comes to drafting/signing QB's. Elway has proven to be an incompetent evaluator of talent!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:19 pm

Is this the authors mock or wish-list? No way Hockensons there at 30. Burns is less than 50-50 at twelve.

I'd take it in a second, but don't see it happening.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Mojo's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:43 pm

Who's he?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:00 pm

He who is.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:04 pm

I too think Hock was over hyped and will likely be there at #30. Hock I believe dropped at Combine only because Fant was so impressive. Possible exception of being available at #30 is if someone moved up right before the Pack at #29 or #28 to take him before the Pack.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:35 pm

He will not fall past Gruden.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
SCLI's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:34 pm

I be Flabbergasted if Hock was available @ #30! Smith or Fant more likely.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:07 pm

@packeyedoptimust

That's what I say!! Goin High on the Hock!!

I'm hearing a whole lot of if's, maybe's, hesitation etc on all these defensive lineman and LB, but I need to start hearing some negatives about Hockenson, besides oh, we shouldn't take a TE at #12 , but he will be gone by #30.

I need some negatives about his playing ability as to why the Packers should not pick him at #12.

Height ? Weight? Combine? Game Footage? Attitude ? Well, maybe you're right. BUT..

The New England Patriots may want to plan for a future without Rob Gronkowski. For the first time in years, they are looking at a draft class that boasts a well-rounded and deep group of prospects.

Iowa tight end T.J. Hockenson is the headliner. He’s a strong pass-catcher, but what sets him apart is his ability to block. He may not be an elite blocker, but he shows a willingness and ability that is rare in prospects over the last four or five years. It’s something the Patriots could build upon to make him one of the few complete tight ends in the NFL, much like Gronk has been.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:13 pm

I third the Snot-Stock.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 04, 2019 at 08:52 pm

There's a big difference playing in shorts and playing in pads. Hock over Fant !!

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:29 am

Exactly, Doug. No matter how much film I watch of Fant, I'm just not that impressed. I think he's the Jeff Janis of TEs. I don't care how he tests, on the field he looks very straight-line. Hockenson looks way more agile/athletic, which is what I want from a TE. Fant looks/plays like a one-trick deep receiver. I'd prefer a tough, "I'll catch a bad pass with two guys hanging on me and drag them five yards" TE any day.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
Minniman's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:21 pm

Interesting Ross going back and looking at the linked threshold pieces article.

In it there's that table of 2018 candidates meeting metrics at each position.

Of the whole table, only 2 players ended up on the Packers roster - 2 WR's ESB and J'mon Moore

I guess that Gute's taking a different direction to Ted?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:29 pm

Hopefully he’s taking a different direction than Ted Thompson. Very early on I liked Ted, but a few years in, he made some God awful decisions. Hopefully Gute has a better sense of the draft and FA and can offer a balance between the two. He needs to be frugal at some positions and aggressive at others. I’d feel even better if Ted was completely out of the building. Just my opinion. :)

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:06 pm

Once Thompson got to his 60's he started coasting. Plus, think of all the talent scouts he lost. Like 4-5 very experienced top scouts who have gone on and running other NFL teams.

Murphy should have canned Thompson 3 to 4 years earlier!

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:06 pm

Wow! Two dislikes? Lots of Teddy huggers here. ;)
Seriously, defend Ted in his last 5-7 years. I’m ready.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Jonathan Spader's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:50 pm

For TT he picked up the FA Peppers for a reasonable contract. Perry was overpaid along with Bennet. Drafting Clark proved to be fantastic. 2015 was a bad draft class for all GMs especially TT. Jones and Williams have provided a great RB tandem. King had the potential and was a risky investment that so far hasn't panned out but could be great in 2019 if healthy.

Linsley is a top 10 center. Bahktiari is a #1 or 2 LT. BB when healthy is a top 5 RT. All in terms of pass blocking. TT was right to release Sitton and Lang. Davante Adams is a top 10 WR. Mike Daniels has been a force. Hayward and Hyde were both TT picks who have had great careers in the NFL.

Lacy slid in the draft and was a great 2nd round pick who ate himself out of the NFL. All GMs have hits and misses. TT gave GB enough to win the SB in 2010. One of the most explosive offenses the NFL has ever seem in 2014. The Packers were 1 play away from the SB year after year with TT as the GM.

Measure TT's successes along with his flaws. You ask for people to defend him but you haven't attacked TT. You just come across as a whiner. GMs could always be better or worse and hindsight is 20/20.

It's 2019 Gute is the GM MLF is the HC get over it.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
jannes bjornson's picture

March 05, 2019 at 11:55 am

Just reviewing 2014 first round to the second makes a guy feel Ill. He went need with Dix when he could have gone up for Mosely or moved to the second with Lawrence. The lesson: draft the BPA on the board in the first round. Mack, Donald etc in that draft, but stuck like glue to his spot???

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4zone's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:24 pm

Its almost like I don't care what position we draft as long as who we draft is better than the guy we have there already. A lot of our guys are depth guys anyway so it won't hurt to get some starters.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:44 pm

If a team truly thinks there's a potential star available at any point in the draft, then it's hard to pass up that player for someone who just fills a need.
I'm sincerely interested in who fans here at Cheesehead TV think are the potential stars in this draft in the first three or four rounds -- then any dark horses later on?
It seems I'm hearing Hockenson a lot. Who would be worth taking ahead of him? Who are the other stars for Green Bay?

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:35 pm

I’m from Iowa. Not a Hawkeye fan (Badgers) but I’m living in the thick of Iowa land and have seen a lot of their games forever. Hockenson probably won’t be available at 12 and Fant might be gone before 30 (especially after his combine). So if TE is truly what we want in GB, moves might need to be made or Irv Smith might be a settling point. Iowa develops TE, OL, and the occasional DB and DL. Iowa guys are stout and have chips on their shoulders cuz of Ohio State and Michigan. So, naturally, I’m confused what GB should do with 12 and 30

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:55 pm

Glad to get a local perspective.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:09 pm

You could easily take a dozen DL, rushers, and LB's and they have the potential to be stars. There are 4-5 OL that seem to jump out. There are a least a half dozen (more) WR's with several being slot receivers. Probably 3-4 RB's. Seems to be 2 maybe 3 TE's.

Too many names to mention but the above is probably good assessment.

I would not be surprised if Hock is available at #30 or until about #28 or #29.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:24 pm

If the list of potential stars in the draft is that numerous -- and yet none of them stands out way above the others -- maybe the Packers just take a deep breath, relax, and stay with their current picks -- neither trading up nor down (unless another team blows them away with a draft-day deal).
I'm still glad to hear from other fans the names of any players that are extra special -- the way Doug N. really likes Hockenson.
Be bold!!!

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:14 pm

Knock.....I really think one of the two Iowa TE’s will definitely be gone by 30

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 04, 2019 at 08:56 pm

Yay! Get High On The Hock!!

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 04, 2019 at 01:43 pm

We should trade down from #12 to #21 and add a #55 to balance out the trade. That would give us #21, #30, #44 and #55...That's four shots at the best 50 guys before half the teams have two.

Add that to our third round pick and our two fourth round picks, and that 7 picks to Chicago's 1.

+ REPLY
0 points
7
7
stockholder's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:07 pm

With Free Agency, Gute doesn't need to trade down. He didn't need to trade up last year for Burks either.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Mojo's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:13 pm

At this point, I'm in favor of what you propose Old School. If we can get an extra 2nd for moving down a bit then go for it. I'll bet they'd still get one of the players they wanted at 21 anyway.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
lowcsp's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:35 pm

That would be all right with me
#21 Hockenson
#30 Winovich
#44 Chris Lindstrom if Dalton Risner isnt there
#55 Mack Wilson

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
crayzpackfan's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:23 pm

Hockenson will be long gone at 21

+ REPLY
-4 points
1
5
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:39 pm

Mack Wilson could go in the first.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:35 pm

Lindstrom likely a first rounder.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:50 pm

How about Burns or Sweat at #12 and Winovich at #30. Solve safety issue in FA. Tight end in round 2 or 3.

That’s plenty of ammo for Pettine.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
SCLI's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:40 pm

Im not sure Winovich is worth a 1st rd pick. More like 3rd rd. Good player. Long stretch with 1st rd or early 2nd IMHO.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Skip greenBayless's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:09 pm

Agree Old School. Trading down is what I would do as well. IMPrO, it makes the most sense to get more high quality picks at the top. Nothing is a sure thing in the NFL draft. Give me three swings vs. one any day. I believe Gute will trade down 100%.

Dash

+ REPLY
2 points
5
3
albert999's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:54 pm

Dash i think you could be correct about 1st round because of what he’s gonna do in free agency

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:12 pm

Totally good with this depending on who is on the board at the time and who the Pack likes. However, I think with Kyler, Metcalf, a couple other QB's, and Sweat the Pack is going to have a big-time DL or edge rusher staring at them at #12. If that is the case I hope the Pack take him unless they only move back a couple and believe he will still be there.

The Pack absolutely need two studs from this draft for DL and edge rushers. There isn't any debate about this.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Bure9620's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:01 pm

If Ed Oliver, Jonah William's, Gary, Sweat or other blue chippers are off the board then yes I agree in trading down. I have a feeling teams taking QBs push a top 10 player to us though.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:44 pm

Not sure where Gary and Oliver play in GB. Metcalf is interesting, but Rodgers never trusts rookie receivers, so there’s that.

Is Jonah Williams going to be your right tackle? Does Bulaga go to right guard? That could work.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Demon's picture

March 04, 2019 at 08:24 pm

Old school are you Ted Thompson?

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:40 am

I agree Old School. This is a deep draft. Take more swings.

My 40+ years as a draftnik have underscored again and again: more picks > media crush. I've seen hundreds of highly-touted, "can't miss," early round prospects FAIL miserably. Sometimes it's an injury, sometimes they take their foot off the pedal when they make the big $, sometimes their "one little flaw" becomes a HUGE flaw when facing NFL players/teams.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Community Guy's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:14 pm

getting Khalen Saunders there might be a steal.. and not unrealistic. i think these post-Combine mocks are going to be much better than anything we saw prior to the Combine.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

March 04, 2019 at 02:38 pm

Burns, Burns, Burns, and more Burns. Wish I liked him but I don't. If he put on +20 lbs for the combine...why not for last season? How did he put on the extra weight? To me he's an early 2nd round guy who doesn't fit the now requirement that Pettine wants in run stoppers on the edge. I said now, he may have wanted that requirement last year, but didn't get the players to fall to him. If Gutsy gets his way, and they pick up a few FA edge guys, then if Burns falls to 2nd round they may take him if not look at the 3rd and 4th round for selections.
Ferrell would take the place of Wilks and could be number 12 pick or they could take a flyer and grab Simmons at 30. It would be a shock, but he will come back from the knee injury and his talent is top 5. I still like a TE in the 1st round. I don't see a WR in the 1st round, but a TE or Jacobs the RB. McGary has Green Bay written all over him. He's got some talent, quick feet and maybe needs to get stronger but a mean streak that will take him far in the NFL.
I don't see Cobb back, and want to replace him, but in reality they may have already done that with the 3 wideouts they picked last year. If a WR fell to the Packers, I'm sure they would take him, but this team has holes everywhere and need a new influx of players.

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:16 pm

Hear you about Burns but keep in mind he is extremely young at what? 20 years old? His body is just starting to fill out and he is likely going thru a growth spurt. No doubt he has another growth spurt or two yet. From the combine he could not have looked more impressive and fluid. Other than Sweat's size and speed I liked Burns easily the best out of all the other edge rushers including some of the guys rated quite a bit higher. He is much more fluid and athletic than the higher rated guys including Bosa IMO. Burns may be gone by #12 but there is no way he is available at #30.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:42 am

I've preferred Burns to Polite all along. I also like Sweat; I think he'll be a monster in two or three years, just maybe not as a rookie.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:31 pm

Is Hockenson so great that we take him at #12, rather than risk him being gone at #30? Then we pick the best edge rusher available at #30?
Or is Burns (or some other edge rusher) so great we take him at #12, and then risk Hockenson not being there at #30? Are there other tight ends we could take at #30 anywhere close to Hockenson?
You're the GM. What do you do?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:19 pm

Hock is not even close to be worth the #12 selection particularly with the Pack's needs. If you wanted to draft a TE high it without a doubt should be Fant. Much better all around player.

Burns looks like the real deal and someone I cannot recall the Pack having. Matthews would be the only guy that comes to mind but athletically Burns has the edge.

I would prefer Fant but Hock would be acceptable at #30. I think there is a very good chance Hock will be there at 30 after Fant is selected much higher. Irving Jr. looks pretty decent but definitely in round 2.

+ REPLY
2 points
3.5
1.5
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 06:39 pm

Could repeat last year’s move, if Burns gone. Trade down from #12 for a second. Pick Sweat. Use the second to move up from #30 to pick Fant or Hock.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 04, 2019 at 09:02 pm

Hock would be acceptable?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:43 am

Hockenson is #12 on my personal "Packer Big Board." So he JUST makes being "worth" #12.
:)

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:43 pm

If a guy is there you want , trade UP from #30 and get close to mid-twenties. It depends on what Gutekunst gets accomplished in free agency.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
JerseyAl's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:44 pm

I do not want Kaleb McGary. Not at all... Never.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Swisch's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:52 pm

Why such a strong no to McGary?
We need evidence, evidence, and more evidence!!!
Not to mention reasons and opinions, and perhaps even hunches.
P.S. Does this mean Ross is fired?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
stockholder's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:54 pm

*

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
JerseyAl's picture

March 04, 2019 at 09:21 pm

You'll have to get the Draft Guide...

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 06:45 am

I don't need the guide to tell me he looks like the next Jason Spriggs!

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
JerseyAl's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:35 am

Maybe you do because he is nothing like Jason Spriggs as a prospect. I didn't like Spriggs for various reasons, but I don't like McGary for completely different reasons. There is no similarity in their game (other than they fail at their job way too often).

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:13 pm

Without question..Hockenson!

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 10:37 pm

I know McGary is not as athletic as Spriggs, and is a stronger, tougher player, but both are tall and seem incapable of riding a speed rusher outside. I think both are wrong for guard and bad at OT pass blocking.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

March 04, 2019 at 03:51 pm

Tough call at 12 , if White and Hockson are there who do you take? That’s also if Fant and Bush are already taken . Can’t pass on Devin White if he makes it to 12 , the sacks will come up the middle.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:20 pm

Without question White IMO. He is a rare player and would change the defense.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Bure9620's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:01 pm

Round 1 Pick 12: Oliver, Ed, DT, Houston (A)
Round 1 Pick 30: Smith Jr, Irv, TE, Alabama (A-)
Round 2 Pick 12: Dillard, Andre, OT/OT, Washington State (B+)
Round 3 Pick 14 (MIA): Lindstrom, Chris, OG, Boston College (A)
Round 4 Pick 2 (S.F.): Jelks, Jalen, DE, Oregon (A+)
Round 4 Pick 14 (MIA): Mack, Alize, TE, Notre Dame (A+)
Round 5 Pick 4 (DET): Henderson, Darrell, RB, Memphis (A+)
Round 5 Pick 25 (PHI): Meyers, Jakobi, WR, North Carolina State (A+)
Round 6 Pick 12: Cheevers, Hamp, CB, Boston College (A+)
Round 7 Pick 12: Love, Bryce, RB, Stanford (A+

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
leche's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:14 pm

Dillard and Lindstrom both had huge combines and will both by gone by the time we draft at 30. No chance either of those guys is around at 44 or more hilariously 78. Henderson is going to go by the end of Day 2 as well.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Bure9620's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:27 pm

Likely not, it's my wish

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:44 am

Nah, Lindstrom should be there at #30. At the NFL level he probably is a guard only, though he might be able to play OT.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:14 pm

I thought he played Guard for BC.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:22 pm

Irv Jr. is a 2nd rounder. Almost positive he will not go in round 1. Decent chance he is available at #44 for the Pack. Would likely bet on him being available. Did not like his stride and smoothness at Combine compared to Fant and Hock.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:46 pm

He's 6'-2" not 6-4 or 6-5 like the Iowa guys. Going for a Hawkeye in round one will not disappoint.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
JerseyAl's picture

March 04, 2019 at 09:24 pm

Think of Smith as an Evan Engram that can catch the ball. I'm a fan.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 07:03 am

I much prefer Smith to Fant (Hockenson still is best). I was surprised when Smith measured in at 6'2" He looks taller on the field. But Smith looks much more like a TE than Fant. He makes tough catches and has some running skills. Fant's only running skill is "fast." He goes down with the first light touch almost every time.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:15 pm

Smith did not gave a good combine. No one came close to Hock and Fant.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:58 pm

No linebacker, no safety, no kick returner, no thanks.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:22 pm

Why has no one mentioned Tyree Jackson. He’s a 3- or 4-year project. That’s perfect.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:23 pm

I did not find him impressive!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:52 pm

Not supposed to be impressive. Just potential at this point.

They had to tell him to go easy on passes at combine. Receivers couldn’t handle ball speed. Would like to see him watch Rodgers for a few years.

Packers don’t need a QB, so why not.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
albert999's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:22 pm

Giants aren’t going to tag Landon Collins
GO GET HIM GUTE

+ REPLY
-1 points
2
3
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:23 pm

That would sure be a huge positive going into the draft knowing he has shored up the back-end.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:46 am

No to paying big bucks for a box safety. Collins isn't a FS and isn't good in space.

He'd largely be a waste of money.

+ REPLY
2 points
3
1
frank the fork's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:29 pm

52 more days and we shall know

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
albert999's picture

March 04, 2019 at 04:34 pm

Need to release House and go snag Collins

+ REPLY
-3 points
0
3
PeteK's picture

March 04, 2019 at 05:27 pm

I would be ecstatic if Gary is there at 12. I know that he's more of a DE, but he's just too talented to pass up. Also ,everyone is falling in love with Fant because of his combine numbers so now Hock might fall to us at 30..

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
stormin's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:14 pm

Is the #30 pick to soon to grab Adderly ?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:50 pm

Stormin,
It sure seems so based on what appears to be available on rankings. FA will make a huge impact on whether they draft a Safety high or not. Just seems like #30 is too high with Pack's other needs. Possible at #44. Some seem to think he goes early 2nd round and a few right there at the end of the first round.

I'm pretty flexible and just want BPA but I would prefer if possible the 'big uglies' in the first 2-3 selections. Give me top ranked big bodied players that are on the DL, edge, or OL in those early selections.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 07:08 am

I'd like to know his 40 speed first. He looks like a 4.5 guy, but he played against a low level of competition, so it's hard to tell. If he is 4.5 or faster I think he's worth the #30, but I also predict that someone I like BETTER will also be there at 30.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:19 pm

Prefer Abram to the other safties, but he's probably too aggressive for a Packer defense. Wait and see.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packergal's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:42 pm

A local radio show conducted an interview with a former EAGLES Executive who said:

"With 7 selections on average, 4 selections should yield starters that immediately improve the current players on the field; in addition, of the 4 selections, 3 of the 4 should represent MAJOR impact players for the next season-- THAT is the success standard we apply to draft well and win championships"...

Next, he said the FOLES selection represented 1 of the 4 impact players they selected and that's why FOLES was selected late.

Could any of the PACK selections meet this EAGLES standard --either in past drafts or in this upcoming draft?

I thought this might create an interesting discussion to identify which 3 of 7 PACK selections make the MAJOR impact next year.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:23 pm

Its called a winning attitude. This isn't a developmental league. Prospects should have learned the basics in College. Players coming from a school with a Pro style offense and D can transition faster than spread heads and DII guy. They learn their reads.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 07:54 pm

Packergal,
Think if Gute did a great job leading up to the draft and should he just selected 'for need' at OL, Safety, TE, and edge rusher (2) it would likely be an upgrade with possibly 3-4 starters at some point during the season.

However, with two first round selections (and if he doesn't trade picks away) if Gute drafted BPA I see no reason why the Pack couldn't meet this standard and maybe significantly succeed it. Personally, that is my expectations this year! I want Gute to hit a home run this draft.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
leche's picture

March 04, 2019 at 09:12 pm

The needs of this team are honestly just too big... We're not going to improve the team enough from last year by upgrading from Graham to Hockenson/Fant as fast as we are getting more meaningful upgrades in the pass rush and in the secondary. We've also not gotten anywhere close to that with our last few drafts.

Everyone wants their team to hit a home run every draft. It's just finally setting in to all of us how badly TT did building this roster over the last few years

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Dragon5's picture

March 04, 2019 at 11:54 pm

STEALS OF THE DRAFT
--Chase Winovich EDGE
--Hakeem Butler WR
--Amani Hooker S

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 11:20 pm

Depends where they are draafted.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Dragon5's picture

March 05, 2019 at 03:47 pm

PICK#12 THE SHORT LIST
--Montez Sweat EDGE
--Josh Allen EDGE
--Brian Burns EDGE
--Devin White LB
--DeAndre Baker CB

PICK#30 THE SHORT LIST
--Chase Winovich EDGE
--Christian Wilkins DL
--Byron Murphy CB

AVOID (INJURY PRONE)
--Dwayne Haskins QB
--DK Metcalf WR
--Devin Bush LB
--Jeffrey Simmons DT
--Mack Wilson LB

--TE we seek likely already on the roster (Robert Tonyan)...just needs to be coached up / reps.
--I expect Equanimeous St. Brown to push Geronimo Allison for #2 WR by the end of next season.
--J'Mon Moore & MVS likely injury-riddled careers much like Kevin King...sell high if good 2019 year.
--Aaron Rodgers will be back to MVP-caliber form this year.
--buyer beware: Landon Collins, Ezekiel Ansah, Dante Fowler Jr, Derrick Morgan, Antonio Brown, Adam Humphries, Kwon Alexander--all high injury-risk

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
Jonathan Spader's picture

March 05, 2019 at 10:49 am

What are you basing Moore and MVs having "injury ridden careers" off of?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Dragon5's picture

March 05, 2019 at 03:28 pm

They are 7LPs (life paths) who are most susceptible to injuries. It's not that they can't be great players...but their careers typically don't last as long, nor reach that pinnacle of greatness they're projected to achieve.
Others...Clay Matthews, Kevin King, Josh Jones, Bashaud Breeland, Mason Crosby,
How about non-Packers? JJ Watt, Calvin Johnson, Antonio Brown, Todd Gurley, Leonard Fournette, James Conner, Sony Michel, Cooper Kupp, Will Fuller, TY Hilton, Keenan Allen, Marvin Jones

Do you find it interesting how other 7 LPs are free agents?
--Antonio Brown
--Landon Collins
--Ezekiel Ansah
--Dante Fowler Jr
--Derrick Morgan

If I'm Gute, I target 11s & 1s...
Adrian Amos S
Trey Flowers DL
Za-Darius Smith OLB
Bruce Irvin OLB
CJ Mosley ILB

You can learn more from @numerologynow I'm not affiliated with him, just a follower on twitter.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
jannes bjornson's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:27 pm

Enter the Dragon. Hai! very cosmic. Send a note to Gutey.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 06, 2019 at 02:51 am

OMG!

To heck with numerology, what the Packers really need is to hire a person skilled in Phrenology to check over the prospects at the combine and pro days.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 04, 2019 at 11:25 pm

Dragon,
By all accounts Josh Allen will be long gone prior to #12.

Here you go:

#12 = Josh Allen

#30 = Christian Wilkins

Avoid Injury Prone = All depends which round? I actually hope they select Jeffrey Simmons #44 if available as that would be a steal.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 07:15 am

That's funny KnockSnot; I've ended up with some similar personal mocks, where the BPA ends up being a front 7 defensive player at 12, 30, and 44.
That's not what I'd prefer, it just was my BPA each time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:00 pm

I'm seeing quite a few really good defensive linemen in the first two rounds.

We do have Daniels and Lowry entering the last year of their contracts. Neither Adams nor Lancaster has really made the case they're ready to be starters. Wilkinson...if resigned....is an injury question (although he's been really durable in his career except for last year).

Along with Clark, that's 6 guys and that's all we usually keep on the 53. None are practice squad eligible. If we use an early pick on a DL, we'll have to jettison one of the guys we have, most likely Lancaster, unless somebody gets hurt in training camp.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 07:30 am

PackEyedOptimist's current TOP 20 Big Board:
1. Josh Allen OLB
2. Nick Bosa DE
3. Quinnen Williams DT
4. Clelin Ferrel DL
5. Devin White LB
6. Montez Sweat OLB
7. Rasham Gary DL
8 Ed Oliver DL
9. DK Metcalf WR
10. Kyler Murray QB
11. Brian Burns OLB
12.Christian Wilkins DL
13. TJ Hockenson TE
14. Jonah Williams OL
15. Andy Dillard OT
16. Dalton Risner OL
17. Greedy Williams CB
18. Jerry Tillery DL
19. Zach Allen DL
20. Nasir Adderley S

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 05, 2019 at 09:29 am

Well, if Hockenson is #13 then we will have to get him at #12.

Unless, we could make a trade with Miami or Wash because they want a QB. We slide down a few spots behind them pick up edge rusher #12 if that's what everyone wants? Then we take our #30 Pick and trade it along with either whatever Miami or Washington gives us or a little higher pick 3rd or 4th to move up to get Hockenson.

Personally, everybody knows I want the Hock picked to be safest choice in the draft and that right there is good enough for me. We have had too many not so good 1st round picks percentage wise. Well, that's my 2 cents.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Swisch's picture

March 05, 2019 at 10:22 am

Doug, it's good to hear a fan make a decisive and enthusiastic selection.
If the Packers like him nearly as much as you, take him at #12.
Figure out the rest of the draft later.
I'm coming around to the idea that we need difference makers at just about every position.
More than BPA, more than need, it's about finding impact players.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Doug Niemczynski's picture

March 05, 2019 at 11:17 am

TJ Watt was probably one of the safest picks, but due to needs at CB we picked Kevin King. No doubt that he is great when healthy, but hasn't been able to stay on the field. I cannot fault the Packers as the guy has everything even 6'3 height. But, let's take the safe pick and go with Hockenson. I would love to have Hock at 30.

Maybe Gute can pull some magic out of his hat to get a edge rusher, TE and OT.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:10 pm

I'd like to trade down from #12 to #21 and get an extra #55.

Then I'd take a TE, either Hock or Fant. I do think Hock is better, but I wouldn't be unhappy with Fant. I'm not a really big fan of oversized WRs playing TE, but if you're going to run double TE sets, then you need TEs.

At #30, I'd look for the best defensive player I could get, and again at #44. And then with pick #55 I'd try to get the best OT I could find.

The defensive guys around #30 are interesting. Adderley, Burns, Tillery, Lawrence show up in a lot of boards around there. Some have guys like Devin Bush or Christian Wilkins falling to #30. I think it's too early to tell, but we're going to be able to add real good defenders at #30 and #44. One of them should be a safety, and the other one should be an OLB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 05, 2019 at 12:03 pm

So the Top 8, and 12 out of the Top 20, are Front Seven defenders?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackEyedOptimist's picture

March 05, 2019 at 10:22 pm

I know that sounds ridiculous, Old School, but that's my current take on it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Archie's picture

March 05, 2019 at 01:49 pm

Hock v Fant

Iowa coaches chose to play Hock over Fant much of the time.

3rd RB - FA Tevin Coleman ATL

As much as I'd love to see Hock in Green & Gold, it ain't gonna happen. However, Tez Sweat could fall into our lap. I think Burns will fall because he is a skinny guy so maybe Pack trades up from 30 into 20s to get him. If not, maybe do same to get OL they want.

12 needs help at OL and RB. Defense needs a natural passrusher or two. Maybe we get another pass rush guy at 44. I'm think Iowa TEs are only 1st Rd worthy picks and Hock will be gone before 12 and Fant before 30. Even if Hock is there, I don't think Pack would use a #12 pick on a TE. Draft days are great days. Especially so now that TT is out to pasture.

+ REPLY
0 points
1