Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Who Do Packers Target with Their Top Pick?

By Category

Who Do Packers Target with Their Top Pick?

The NFL Draft is only three days away and the Green Bay Packers are holding two first-round picks.  That can easily change as round one kicks off on Thursday night but it would be highly surprising if they don't make a pick on day one.

So who might the Packers be targeting?  We'll hear more and more over the next few days and legitimate reports surface along with plenty of smoke screens, as is common every year.

Assuming the Packers stay around the 12th overall pick, here are several players that could be in play.

Ed Oliver

Oliver lasting to 12 or beyond would be surprising at this point.  Anything is possible, but his stock has only seemed to go up since his Combine and Pro Day workouts.  

A player like Oliver could see the Packers move up from 12 in order to ensure they land him.  His film along with his workout numbers certainly seem to warrant a big move and Oliver looks to be a special player at the peak of his NFL career.

Quinnen Williams

Williams is another like Oliver that most mock drafts have long gone by the time the Packers are on the clock at 12.  He comes from a highly-successful program at Alabama and his film shows him wrecking offensive lineman after offensive lineman.

With the Packers defensive line possibly in some flux should they opt not to re-sign Mike Daniels after 2019, Williams would easily fill that potential need.  But like Oliver, the Packers would likely have to move up to get Williams so the question becomes: how highly do they think of him?

Clelin Ferrell

Ferrell's football career started off slowly in college but he became an immediate impact player as soon as he put the pads on.  He played defensive line at Clemson but projects as an edge rusher in the NFL.

He had a particularly good showing in this past BCS Championship game against Alabama.  Ferrell was a team co-defensive player of the game.

Ferrell has been mocked anywhere from the top five down to the late teens.  Depending on if there's a run on quarterbacks early, Ferrell could become a very intriguing option for the Packers if they want a premier defender up front.  

Josh Allen

The hype surrounding Allen has cooled off since the early part of the draft prep process.  He's still a very hot prospect and could very easily be a top-five selection.  It only takes one team to fall in love.

All Allen did in college was take quarterbacks down.  That's a premier need in the NFL so he's surely a first-rounder but while many feel that he's an early pick, Allen is one who could fall further than many think.  

For the Packers, they may have the fortunate problem of deciding if they like Allen or Ferrell more.  

Montez Sweat

Add Sweat to that last sentence.  His athleticism is no longer a question.  He put up freakish numbers at the Combine and ran the fastest 40-yard dash time (4.41) for a defensive line in Combine history.

Sweat ran into some drama at Michigan State before Mississippi State snagged him and he broke out.  The Packers have been one of the more risk-averse teams in terms of players with troubled pasts.  Will the Brian Gutekunst regime be more forgiving?

Sweat would immediately boost the Packers pass rush and, added to free agent signees Preston Smith and Za'Darius Smith, makes that area one of strength versus need.

Much like Ferrell and Allen, the Packers could be starting at a choice between Sweat or Florida State's Brian Burns.

Brian Burns

Burns seems one of the more pro-ready players in this draft.  He's well spoken and carries leadership qualities to complement his play.  He was an All-American right out of the gate as a freshman and excelled on special teams as well.  

Burns is one of a few guys who comes in on day one, plays right away and makes an immediate impact.  If the Packers feel like they need "that guy" on defense, Burns could be an easy choice for them.  He also plays a position in high demand and one very worthy of a pick as high as 12.

Devin White

White is ready to play football 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.  He will come in and light things up right away, wherever he lands.  That said, the jury is still out as to whether he's the best "Devin" in this draft.

Rumors are that White won't get past Tampa Bay at fifth overall.  If the Packers want White, they'll likely have to make a move to get him.  

At a position like inside linebacker, that doesn't seem like the best use of draft capital, considering who else the Packers could get by waiting or even moving back.  

White is the player on this list that would most surprise me to land in Green Bay, based on his position and what it will seemingly take to draft him.

Devin Bush

The "other" Devin, Bush has been mentioned as another inside linebacker likely to be drafted earlier than later.  He flies all over the place when you watch his film.

Sideline to sideline, there aren't many that do it as well as Bush.  He plays downhill and has zero allergies to the football.  He's an above-average blitzer, too.

Some feel that Bush is a better pick towards the end of round one.  If the Packers see that in their crystal ball and move back to take him or somehow move up to grab him with their second first-round pick, they're getting an incredible football player.

If Oliver is off the board and the Packers hold at 12 overall, Bush would be my pick.

Noah Fant

Fant is the most athletic of the two Iowa tight ends dominating the tight end discussion this year.  If the Packers seem truly committed to making the tight end a focal point of Matt LaFleur's offense, Fant could be an obvious choice here.

He has a bigger route tree and will draw defenders away from other top offensive weapons in Davante Adams and Aaron Jones.  While that production wouldn't credit directly to Fant, if he catapults others to becoming a dominating offense in the league, Fant's value is higher.

The question about Fant is whether or not the Packers see their 12th pick as an appropriate spot for him.  And is he the Iowa tight end they like most?

T.J. Hockenson

Recent chatter has Hockenson's name tied to the Packers more than has been up until the past few weeks.  Only Gute and his team know the truth there, but they could do a lot worse than Hock if they're committed to taking a tight end.

The athletic ability doesn't seem as strong as some other options, but Hockenson's size and abilities could translate to a star in the making.  If he fits the profile and the Packers desperately want a tight end, they will likely have to use their 12th pick or move up from 30 to get him.

Hock is one of the players this year that is a matter of preference.  Some prefer Fant, others prefer Hock.  Some prefer Irv Smith, Jr. although I don't see Smith as an early prospect so he's not on this list.

Jonah Williams

An Alabama offensive lineman is automatically going to pique some interest.  Williams has been mentioned among the top in this year's class.  He can come in and play either tackle or guard, which some teams may see as incredibly valuable for their needs.

Williams didn't play particularly well in the BCS championship game, thanks in part to another guy mentioned earlier, Clelin Ferrell.  One game does not a career make or break, but it's a big spotlight moment to critique.

The Packers using an early pick on Williams, even if they move back from 12, is stacking the future versus looking for immediate impact. 

Bryan Bulaga has had injury issues of late and appears headed elsewhere after 2019, but the Packers are likely hoping he gives them another year to more seriously address tackle.

Taking a player that they don't theoretically expect to play in year one that early would be surprising, to say the least.

Jawaan Taylor

Copy/paste Williams' comments for Taylor.  Another solid offensive line prospect, but one they should target more if he starts to slip quite a bit.  

Unless they're absolutely enamored with Taylor, he likely ends up somewhere else based on what the Packers need and who else they'll have the opportunity to select early on.




Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Pulse of the Pack podcast.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 2 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (146) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Nick Perry's picture

Crap...I WANT them all!

But seriously if the Packers ended up with Hockenson, Oliver, Burns, or one of the O-Linemen at 12 I'd be a happy camper. The kicker to this whole thing is #30. The Packers have the opportunity to get pretty damn good in a hell of a hurry if this falls right. I REALLY think Gute is going to mix up offense and defense in the 1st round. A Cherry for both sides of the ball.

RCPackerFan's picture

"The Packers have the opportunity to get pretty damn good in a hell of a hurry if this falls right."

Imagine changing nothing on our offense from last year and just changing the scheme. Having an offense that defenses don't know what they are going to do will already be a huge change and will be such an improvement.

Also, imagine a healthy Aaron Rodgers. Also a healthy Aaron Rodgers and now running an offense that he is excited about. Also a healthy Aaron Rodgers running an offense he is excited about and having an entire offseason where people have been ripping him calling him essentially a terrible teammate, leader and person.
Now look at the numbers he put up in one of his worst years in a while, while playing on a broken leg. 4442 yards passing, 25 TD's, 2 INTs. That's his 'down year'.
We have a fired up Rodgers, running a new offense that he is excited about. Good luck NFL.

So lets forward to Thursday night. What if they added a new TE and/or WR. What if in the first 2 round they added a TE/WR and OL. Rodgers has to be ecstatic.

I'm excited just thinking about it!

In words of Bart Scott. CAN'T WAIT!!!

Tundraboy's picture

I like cherries.

Jonathan Spader's picture

3 Days 10 Hours 3 Minutes until draft time.

zeroluv's picture

I would go Oliver if he is there but I don’t expect him to be there. I think realistically the Packers should go ILB Devin Bush. I don’t care about his “lack of size”, he is fast, strong and can tackle and cover. He will play with a chip on his shoulder his entire career. I think he is better than Devin White. He reminds me of Pro Bowler Zach Thomas if the Dolphins years ago. If Greenbay can’t get any of the “Devins”....then they trade down. Do not draft a TE or WR at 12. It must be a impact player that will start day 1 and ILB is the only position that is worth that too 12 pick. Do not draft a safety at 12 as one can be has on day 2. If any other the top OL fall to 12 and the Devins are gone I would be ok with that as well but outside of down, get picks and the team will be ready when they lose Bulaga, Daniels, Graham, possibly Martinez and Tramon williams next year. Just my two cents.

EdsLaces's picture

Oliver White Burns or Bush for me please...Ferrell meh..

Turophile's picture

For me, It breaks down to something like this ( > means 'is better than').
Ed Oliver > Ferrell > Burns > Wilkins = J.Taylor = Sweat > Dillard > Fant = Hockenson. I don't really want an ILB at #12 and the TE's are low on my preference rating because their positional value is less than Edge, DL, OT.

I still think Burns is very likely to be the Packers pick (I'd choose Ferrell over Burns myself, but I like them both plenty). I think Fant has more upside than Hockenson, who is a more rounded player, but I think Hock is close now to what he will always be.

The industrial sized spanner in the draftworks might be at OT. I'm pretty sure the Packers take one at #12, #30, or #44, I just don't know at which pick they pull the trigger.

Bearmeat's picture

With the exception that I prefer Burns (or Allen if he falls lol) we are very much agreed. I don't want a TE/WR or ILB at 12. Or S for that matter this year.

I want DL/OLB. OT I could settle for - just because of the positional value.

EdsLaces's picture

Why olb? We just got 2. I know you cant have too many good pass rushers, but we did upgrade. We have one good mlb...

dobber's picture

They also just lost 2...

Old School's picture

So we're left with 4.

Tundraboy's picture

". I think Fant has more upside than Hockenson, who is a more rounded player, but I think Hock is close now to what he will always be."

I agree. Unless Hockenson is the second coming of Witten, I'm not sure he could dominate at the next level.The way the game is played right now I could see Fant being a star not so sure I could see that in TJ.

At 12,if it is Ov,then Id still rather see a new OL. Fant at 30 or higher with a trade would be more than ok.

Bearmeat's picture

Because you can never have enough pass rushers, they're hard to find, this draft has a bunch of good ones, and I don't plan on picking before 20 the next 5 years.

Get one while you can.

EdsLaces's picture

Fair enough. I want Allen, but it ain't gonna happen haha.

stockholder's picture

picking before 20 the next 5 years! Bingo! You have faith in A-Rod. I Don't. So I'll go 2 years. In those two years it will be so difficult to get a good DL. We will have to franchise Clark. While Lowrey and Daniels will leave. You won't have that super -bowl front. The fight is on for Wilkins, Oliver and Simmons. The Falcons are desperate. Denver wants out, and they want the most for @10. The bidding War is for 10. Thats the "smoke" for [email protected] (According to cory J. ) Was Daniels ever a game changer. No. He was Solid. You will only get a solid player after 20 for the DL. Hock is not a threat. He's short game. The OLs are not franchise picks. No OT is for the next 10 years in this draft!! The packers must take a DL. Even a gamble for Simmons will pay dividends more then any other player. Except Lock who will go to Denver.

Old School's picture

I actually see it the other way around. I think Fant might well be drafted earlier, and have more early success, but that ten years from now people will look back and it'll be Hockenson who had the better career. He maybe isn't as athletic, but he's still plenty athletic. And he's fundamentally pretty sound.....he runs good patterns, catches, blocks, etc.

But I wouldn't be drafting a TE early if I had Graham and Lewis on the team.

Grandfathered's picture

Agree. Trade down into the later teens to get Fant and let Lewis teach him to block.

Tundraboy's picture

". I think Fant has more upside than Hockenson, who is a more rounded player, but I think Hock is close now to what he will always be."

I agree. Unless Hockenson is the second coming of Witten, I'm not sure he could dominate at the next level.The way the game is played right now I could see Fant being a star not so sure I could see that in TJ.

At 12,if it is Ov,then Id still rather see a new OL. Fant at 30 or higher with a trade would be more than ok.

jannes bjornson's picture

I'm with you on Farrell. He fits the style of 3-4 Pettine plays and can control the edge inthe run game. I don't want to see another Edge guy get burned on a 3rd and 10 run for a first down again in Packerland. He is more stout and can still get after it. Fackerell fits the pass rush guy for now. Still would not mind anothe pass rusher in the second rd.

RCPackerFan's picture

Right now with the people that I think realistically could be available at 12 it will be Oliver, Hockenson, Burns, Sweat, Bush and/or White.

Out of that group I think Oliver would be the top pick.

If he is gone Hockenson might be the best choice. Packers went out into FA and brought in Edge players already. While I think Burns/Sweat would really help them out and would be in a great rotation, I think they will look at other positions first. Also with LaFleur being an offensive mind I think they are going to try and get him some help offensively. Yes we have Graham and Lewis back this year, but they likely will be gone next year. Hockenson is almost a perfect fit for GB's new offense. He is a TE that can block but can also get open down field.
I could definitely see Gutekunst trying to give Rodgers as much help as possible.

So lets say they take Hockenson at 12. What do they do at 30?
What if Gutekunst decided to double dip on offense in the first round. Maybe he looks at RB, or WR or OL?

I could definitely see him trying to add to the offense in this draft. We have been conditioned to believe that we have to add to the defense. All the while our offense has slipped. Maybe its time to add significant talent to the offense!

stockholder's picture

I still think Lock is in play. I'd take Lock over any other offensive player first.

RCPackerFan's picture

Not at 12. I can see if them possibly being interested at 30.

At 12 though, I would be absolutely stunned if they took a QB.

dobber's picture

That pick at #30 makes this kind of speculation possible, though, and it immediately puts Kizer on the trade block for a later-round pick (remember that even Hundley brought a 6th rounder last year). I wouldn't drop #12 on Lock, myself, but it would be a ballsy move that completely changes the face of this draft. If you thought QB1 would have a chip on his shoulder after all the negative pub he got this off-season, imagine what he'll be like if they take a QB early...

RCPackerFan's picture

It would be a ballsy move. No question. I just don't see them doing it.

The whole QB talk is just talk, IMO. Yeah the Packers took Rodgers with the 24th pick when Favre was 35 and Rodgers is 35 and the Packers have 2 first round picks which does lead to speculation. But the difference with that is that Favre had talked about retiring for years whereas Rodgers has talked about wanting to play into his 40's.

Packers are in a win now and future mode. They don't go out and spend the money on the FA's they spent on, and resign Rodgers to the deal they signed him to draft a QB with the highest pick they had in years.

blondy45's picture

The chip on Rodger shoulders is already there with just the "talk" of the idea of Lock. The smokescreen is from the fire that is burning under Rodgers behind. The more I keep changing my mind about the #12 pick, the more I do not want either Iowa TE @12. There has to be a player or players @12 that are worth the pick or several who could be had with a trade down a "little" later. With the lack of LB quality in this draft, I hope to get in order @ 12, Oliver, D. White, D. Bush, J. Taylor, or M. Sweat.... If none are there at 12, the following players in order B. Burns, Fant, Hockenson, A. Dillard, or R. Gary, are still on the board, trade down no lower than #17 pick & add a 3rd rounder. Reassess for the up coming picks at 30 & 44. The first pick definitely has an influence on the remaining picks.

stockholder's picture

Denver Loves Lock. They need Greedy Williams too. But to much has been made about his tackling ability. Denver trades out to take Lock with Atlanta. They then will take Lock @14.

RCPackerFan's picture

I could see that happening.

fthisJack's picture

if Lock is available at 12, i think the discussion for the Packers will be to trade down 4 or 5 slots with a team that wants him bad and pick up at least an extra 3rd. if Bush, Burns, Hock, Ferrell, an OL are still there at 12 they could do the deal and probably still get a guy they like.

RCPackerFan's picture

I have heard rumors that the Giants like Daniel Jones. Perhaps they don't take him with the 6th pick and try trading up with the 17th pick to take him?
Essentially what may happen if they traded with the Giants is they would swap 2nd round picks and Packers would get their 3rd round pick and probably a couple of later round picks.

Other teams maybe interested in Lock too.

teams to keep an eye on for QB's after GB picks. Giants, Redskins, Dolphins.

leche's picture

The hell would you waste a high draft pick on a backup QB for?

albert999's picture

Same reason they did for Rodgers

leche's picture

Not really? Favre was already in the middle of the "Am I coming back? Am I retiring? What am I going to do" situation when we drafted Rodgers to be his replacement... Rodgers just signed a new deal with 4 years left. We need to treat that as a final destination, expecting not to have Rodgers beyond that and needing a replacement by then... BUT that also means we know we have 4 years to go for it and spending high draft capital on that replacement now is a waste of resources we could put toward going for it.

Our best chance at winning is having the best possible team we can with a health Rodgers. Go for that. All other alternatives just make it harder for us to win + make us more mediocre rather than bad in the event Rodgers goes down

blondy45's picture

Remember, Rodgers was considered by many to be the #1 pick that year. Lock is definitely NOT, this year. No way the Pack takes Lock at 12 or 30.

4thand10's picture

ummm...again Rodgers was drafted in the first when Favre was 35.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Depending who was available I would not be upset. However, if Oliver was available I might struggle with that decision.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

If Gute and LF went offense for both picks in round 1 I believe it would be Fant at around 15 or 16 and an OL at 30.

The Pack have been trying to find another Jared Cook at TE ever since he left with Bennett and Graham. Cook opened the middle of the field like no one else has and had a huge route tree. The Packers offense flourished with the Pack getting to the NFC Championship game.

Cook ran a 4.49 forty-yard dash at his combine. Fant athletic as hell ran a 4.5 forty-yard dash at his with an incredible 40" leaping vertical. Fant at Iowa opened up the slants and underneath stuff for Hock. If Fant there is no need for another WR high in draft because of his speed, explosiveness, and size. Line him up in-line or outside creating huge mismatches for Rodgers to exploit.

Fant matches up to Rodgers skill set better than Hock by getting up the field and blowing the top off. Hock at 4.7+ in forty yards matches up better with a Brady type seeking the short to intermediate passes. Hock as a blocking TE may help disguise a pass play but will not create a significant physical mismatch for most safeties or LB's with his speed.

RCPackerFan's picture

I can see them considering Fant.

The problem right now is we really don't know exactly what kind of offense LaFleur is going to run. We don't know if he wants a more stretch the field TE or one that can dominate in the run game and be an effective receiver.

Last year was the only year he ran an offense. And his major weapon at TE got hurt so we really never got to see what his offense would look like with that type of a TE.

Also we have no clue where they have these players rated. The general consensus amongst "draft gurus" is that Hockenson is the higher rated player.

I can see them considering either TE to be honest. I just don't know which one they would go with if both were on the board and they chose one.

dobber's picture

I've warmed up to Irv Smith quite a bit in this draft. Not the physically imposing monster that many TEs have been in recent years, but does just about everything. Better blocker than you'd think. A lot of Delanie Walker in him...hard to say if he'll be there at #44, but I think that'd be a good place for him.

RCPackerFan's picture

If he was available at 44, I would be good with him.

I have seen some think he would be a good fit at 30. I guess for me it would depend on who is available.

I can see the Delanie Walker comparison.

Old School's picture

So we'd draft a backup TE at #12, then another backup offensive player at #30?

mrtundra's picture

I watched the NFL Network's one round mock draft last night. In it, Steve Mariucci picked OT Jawaan Taylor at 12 and Ole Miss WR AJ Brown at #30 for the Packer's picks. Both TEs from Iowa were off the board in the top ten and Irv Smith Jr. went to NE at 32. Ed Oliver went early, as well. Brian Burns, Dalton Risner, Cody Ford and Deebo Samuel were not picked in their one round draft. The only Safety that went off the board was Abram.

RCPackerFan's picture

I saw that as well.

I am really thinking the closer we get to the draft that we may see a double dip in the first round on offense.

Getting Rodgers more help I think could be what they do.

I love Aaron Jones. But you need more then one RB. I don't know how LaFleur will feel about Williams. Perhaps they will look at adding Josh Jacobs at 30.
I really like EQ and MVS. I think Moore will contribute more this year as well. But they may look at WR and say, they need more top end talent. Maybe at 30 they look at AJ Brown, Marquise Brown, N'Keal Henry.

There are 2 considered to be 1st round talented TE's. Each could go almost anywhere in the first round. They could easily take either TE in hopes that they will add a lot to the offense and be the future of the position.

They did go out and get Turner in the offseason. Also Cole Madison did come back. Maybe they feel really good about the OG position. But maybe they want to get Bulaga's replacement. Also a guy that could back up both OT's this year. Back up both OT's this year to take over RT next year?

I can see them going with 2 offensive players Thursday night.

dobber's picture

Incredible flexibility in having that second pick, even at #30. Allows them to speculate on greatness with one of those two picks if they want and still get a solid high-end talent. Allows them to address both sides (or just one) of the ball with high end players. Creates trade-up scenarios that would be too pricey without it, and trade-downs that can bolster day-2 draft capital in a really positive way. I think Thursday's going to be one of the more interesting Packers drafts we've seen in years.

RCPackerFan's picture

Having that 2nd 1st round pick really creates a ton of flexibility.

Also I would not be surprised if they traded down with that pick. Maybe a team is looking to trade up to find their future QB? Maybe Daniel Jones or Lock are available. What if a team like Jaguars, Giants or Bucs want to find a future QB. Packers essentially would pick up an extra 3rd-4th round pick with that deal.

Having the extra 4th rounder also helps. They might look to trade up. Maybe they move up 3-4 spots and use one of their 4th rounders.

I agree that Thursday is going to be really interesting. After last years excitement the one thing that we know with Gutekunst is that we don't know what to expect. He could trade down, trade up. We just don't know.

dobber's picture

Yeah, but if we wait until 30 only to see the Packers trade out of round 1, that always sucks...especially on Eastern time when you have to go to work on Friday.

RCPackerFan's picture

Much like 2 years ago when we had the 29th pick and traded down with the Browns and got the first pick of the 2nd round.

At least this year we will have a 1st round pick already.

scoonie_penn's picture

Allen, Burns and Sweat are the only true stand-up Edge players that deserve 1st RD consideration. Oliver would be a steal if he dropped. Ferrell is strictly a 4-3 DE and a good one, but he's not a stand up end. He lacks the athletic ability to play standing up. GB will probably have their pick of OT at 12 but I'm not sure any are worthy of that pick. Jonah williams is probably the closest but I think he's going to have to slide to OG. I guess he might fit at RT but it's borderline to me. Ii'd go Oliver, Allen, Burns, Sweat, williams, at 12. I still think GB might trade down if Miami or WASH get desperate for take a QB. I see both of them competing for the same QB so picks 11 and 12 are definitely in play.

dobber's picture

I think Ferrell could play a role much like Peppers did, keeping in mind that Peppers even in his 30s was a freakish athlete. But for #12, I agree in that speculating on that kind of player is a little rich.

jannes bjornson's picture

Ferrell played out of a three and two point stance. His pass rush was primarily out of the 2 pt stance. He is projected to either defense and Pettine mixes his fronts up as does Belichick. Dom has left the building.
You want your best five pass rushers attacking on 3rd and long. He has the evidence file to prove his worth.

Handsback's picture

If Jonah Williams is the pick, would he really sit for a year? Both OG positions at Green Bay are undermanned. They brought in FA talent for one but can't shake the need to get better play at LG as well. Then you have two experienced players fighting over Bulaga's spot if he moves on. Green Bay has put up with a patch work offensive line for too long. Having solid players in place helps all playmakers get better. Plus JoWill can play center if need be.

So I'm probably leaning that direction since Oliver won't be there.

MarkinMadison's picture

For every five pre-draft speculation articles I'd like to see one in-depth film-breakdown of players actually taken by the Packers.

It is pretty damn clear that the strength of this draft is in the front seven. So much so that if a few teams roll the dice on a QB then GB will have an array of options at #12. Go there. Go to the strength or trade back and pick up an extra pick in the top 50.

You never know who will really pan out but I don't think there is anyone worthy of a top 10 pick in this draft at OL, WR, DB, RB (almost a given) or QB (not that GB cares this year). The Packers don't need to reach for any of these positions. So don't spend the #12 on one of these positions and then sit and cry for the next 10 years that the guy isn't a pro bowl caliber player like we did with AJ Hawk. Go big or trade back.

albert999's picture


jannes bjornson's picture

There is no WR I would choose in the first. Some of the TEs from the third round could be the next Kelce? McCarthy was not a traditional WCO guy with his TEs. Forget about Finley and Cook. LeFleur will want a flexible Y-set tightend who can block, motion, shft and catch the route tree from the hash to the outside voids. It should be fun.

dobber's picture

12 players on your list, and none are QBs (at least two will go before the Packers pick), so there will be a couple of these guys available when the #12 pick hits the clock. I see a tremendous number of ways to go on this draft that make sense for this team.

I find myself uninterested in a TE at 12. I think it's overpaying for the position in a deep TE draft. If Hock and/or Fant go high, all the better for the Packers. I also find myself uninterested in an ILB: they've drafted prospects with many of the same characteristics (Jones and Burks), and unlike CB, you can't keep pouring resources into a position that subs off the field so much. They need to see what they have there, and can easily augment with another speedy ILB/hybrid later in the draft if they want.

Big fan of Allen and Oliver. I think both play immediately, make an impact, and protect against losing Daniels this offseason. Either of those players or an edge player like Sweat (I think it's a bit early for Burns or Ferrell) gives the Packers tremendous flexibility in how they deploy the Smiths, Fackrell, and the pick with regard to OLB/ILB (think Matthews), and as a situational DE (which Z. Smith did some with the Ravens).

Personally, I would go OL (Taylor is my preference) and I would insert that player into either Bulaga's or Lane Taylor's (not seeming like a great fit for the kind of offense LaF wants to run) spot (LG), and make a cut for cap room. It could be Nico Siragusa becomes that LG (now that he's 1.5 years removed from his knee injuries) and Taylor becomes your RT. With 4 of the 5 presumptive starters in the last two years of their contracts, it's a move for both immediate improvement and the future stability of the OL.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

So, possibly J. Taylor replaces Bulaga, who gets traded for a 4th (5th at worst). Taylor backs up Bakh. Turner backs up Taylor. Guards are Turner and Lane Taylor, with McCray, Patrick and Siragusa fighting to backup OG (plus any OGs drafted late day two or day three).

So, GB saves $6.75M in cap space and gains a fourth round draft pick, with the downside of having a rookie RT in 2019.

Bulaga should net a 4th round comp pick, but GB doesn't get that until the 2021 draft, and maybe that prospect starts playing in 2022. GB is in win now mode. This is a hybrid, since our chances decline slightly in 2019 with J. Taylor at RT instead of Bulaga (unless we buy a player with the cap savings - say Tre Boston, Zach Brown, RB, how 'bout Suh!), but our chances possibly improve in 2020 and 2021.

I thought about this but I reached no conclusion, so I can't give a thumbs up or down!

stockholder's picture

Don't slam the door on the Defense. Taking Offense is 2nd prize. Just Later alligator!! You bet Oliver will be off the board. You bet Atlanta wants Wilkins. The problem is who will trade up. And Rob the Packers of Need.////// The packers could trade down if Oliver,Wilkins and Bush are gone. And they probably should then. But once you get robbed, you feel violated. It's said you never have enough edge rushers. Look how bad New Orleans wanted davenport last year. If sweat was their choice, Burns will be better.

dobber's picture

I agree in the sense that I think both TEs will be on the board yet at #12, and the Packers will need to resist that temptation if they are.

I don't know about being robbed...the draft is a very fluid thing, and if you have a GM who gets locked in on a single player and isn't flexible enough to roll with it and have different paths through the draft, then that GM likely isn't going to last very long, anyway.

I think edge will be a value pick, and that a couple tempting players will be there. I know you aren't a fan of the OL candidates, but I really like Juwaan Taylor at that spot if he's available. The dearth of OL talent at the top of this draft makes me think someone reaches for him, though. Mike McGlinchey last year...San Fran reaches and makes him an early pick.

stockholder's picture

I have trouble with taking a RT @12. Taylor is powerful. Something we don't have. Dillard won't be. After Spriggs; I just see guys that won't start. I would have to take Lock first. I just feel A-Rod is going to get hurt again. But truly I would support a Trade down before any offense. Then Target Simmons! He'll be worth the wait. And we get extra picks to make the wait work.

dobber's picture

If Simmons is there at #30, and assuming his medicals are showing good progress, I'm on that in a heartbeat. I think he's going to be great.

Demon's picture

Too many red flags with Simmons dobber. The ACL, the assault on a woman in 2016. No earlier than round 3.

dobber's picture

Hey, if he's there for the Packers in round 3? I'd love that, too! :)

Familiar with the flags. Simmons at 30 is a play on a potentially great player. They have to be satisfied that the injury and peripherals check out.

fthisJack's picture

i think 12 is too rich for any OL that may be there. i like OL with a day 2 pick like Risner, McGovern, Lindstrom. these are guys that can develop into long term starters.

there are a million scenarios that could play out but i am almost positive that Gute will go defense with that 12th pick. too many good players to pass on there. the only position on offense that would make sense to me would be TE and that's just too high.

i'm hoping Oliver is there. like last year, i was praying James would fall to them and he did but Gute went a different way. i don't think he gets by Buffalo if he makes it that far. i'm thinking more and more its going to be an edge rusher at 12....Sweat, Burns, Ferrell.

jww061356's picture

I say we take Hockenson @ 12 unless Ed Oliver or Devin White is there. I think Allen and Bosa will be gone. Trade up from 30 to get in front of the Steelers and take Devin Bush unless White falls. If he does, the take him (assuming Oliver is gone) and trade up from 30 for Hockenson.

EddieLeeIvory's picture

I'll bet anyone here that Oliver is long gone by 12.

Looking back at recent history, #30 picks rarely help. Rarely are they a difference-maker. More true for the #44 pick.

I would not be opposed to trading up from 12 to go up & get one of the studs like Josh Allen or QW. Or Bosa if somehow SF doesn't take Bosa at 2.

Imagine adding an impact Pro Bowl quality guy in the mold of a Von Miller or Aaron Donald. This defense could become dangerous.

Dzehren's picture

May come down to Christian Wilkins or Burns. That scenario would be a spectacular crop to pick from. Add OL @ 30 & come out with 2 premium position picks.
Follow the 2017 Saints draft.

4zone's picture

I think White and Allen are long shots to be available at 12 and I don't see us trading up unless one of them fall to like #10 where cost is minimal.

I think I kind of hope we trade down with Carolina, give them our #12 and a 6th rounder for their 1st and 3rd round picks. Then I'd like to see us trade up using that 3rd rounder and our #30 to trade with SEA at #21. That would be an awesome 1st round coup for us and land us any combination of solid starting talent.

4zone's picture

Raiders could also be a potential 1st round trade partner since they have so many holes to fill. Lets see if Mayock is a free wheeler.

albert999's picture

Very Interesting

AgrippaLII's picture

The one thing that has become abundantly clear to me...after perusing countless mock drafts that the Packers are going to get the opportunity to get a really good prospect at #12! Take the best player available!

Swisch's picture

Agreed, but not WR or QB or RB at #12, and probably not OL that early.
To me, OL is top priority, but not necessarily top pick.

LambeauPlain's picture

There will be some very good players in the 2nd half of the first round.

I can see a trade down a few spots, get another 2nd rounder and package those two second rounders to get back into the first round at #19-#21.

3 first rounders, all with likely starter potential, all on FIVE YEAR contracts would position the Pack for a lucrative future as Aaron finished his HOF career.

And speaking of Aaron, I hope Gutey has a long term policy to draft an O lineman every year in rounds 1-3....every year!

ShooterMcGee's picture

I get the feeling that Sweat will drop like a rock a la Hurst last year. He just changed his decision to attend the draft. The heart condition issue dropped Hurst from the top 10 to the 5th round. I would use 1 of our 4th rounders on Sweat, nothing higher.

If no other top 10 player falls to us unexpectedly as Derwin James did last year, I'm all for trading back within the top 20 if the value is there. Hoping a QB needy team gives us a 3rd rounder for the chance to draft Lock, Haskins, or Jones. Then we could draft an Iowa TE or O-lineman in the teens, just not at 12. 3rd round we can take a flyer on Jachai Polite who didnt test well but has great tape. I read an interview of TE Zach Gentry from Michigan who said the best player he faced was Polite.

4zone's picture

I would not trade back up into the 1st round unless we first trade down from #12. Doing so will cost us a our #30 and 3rd Rnd pick minimum.
Trading down keeps us with 4 picks in the first 75 and raises our #30 into the low 20s.

jannes bjornson's picture

I like the move for Polite if he gets his weight back to 245#. May have to move up into the bottom second because other GMs will be thinking as you are. He still has the best bend of the Edge people and will just turn 21 this week.

BoCallahan's picture

“ allergies to the football.” I will have to remember that one!

Spock's picture

"Who Do Packers Target with Their Top Pick?"
A: No one. The Packers shouldn't "Target" anyone. Pick the BPA on their board. I believe that BPA is often misrepresented as if the GM's board has every player listed top to bottom and you must take the top one. I doubt that's the case. As others have said it's more likely the BPA is a "Tiers" approach where some amount of players are grouped together with a Tier grade. When your team picks you look at the players at that tier grade and decide if any of the player(s) there fit your team's needs at that draft spot or if any one player is too special to pass on even if they don't fit your current scheme (i.e. Players Not Plays philosophy). If none do (unlikely, but possible) work the phones and pick up extra picks for players that do fit your team needs. This is all speculation of course-but Spock is fond of "Speculation". :)
edit: Obviously, if you can get a HUGE value pick by moving up with your later picks, you do that too.

jasonperone's picture

So in other words, the Packers should create their board and take the best player on it. . which would make that player a potential T-A-R-G-E-T. Got it :)

Spock's picture

Lol, Jason. I admit I was being a bit facetious about the headline :) . My point was that, to me, "Target" implies falling in love with a player which is a bad thing to do in a draft.

jasonperone's picture

Agree, in that context!

Swisch's picture

Especially for #12 and #30, I like descriptions such as pro-ready, high motor, good character... and, simply, football player.
Unless there's that one guy who is considered extra special, it seems the Packers will do great staying at #12 and #30,
In a way, it makes things easier to choose. Stay where you are and pick BPA in an area of need.
So at #12, the Packers will have maybe 2-5 guys we really like to select from.
At a certain point -- perhaps Thursday afternoon -- try not to overthink, try to have fun.
Focus on getting some great guys early in the draft -- and then some solid guys later, with perhaps a couple of quirky surprises sprinkled in who could pay off big.
Relax and enjoy.

Christian Roussel's picture

The only 2 positions that i see the value of going up from 12th overall are premium pass rusher and QB (and not this year for QB, next year's look much more promising). As good as the DL's are, let them fall to you. For Jonah Williams, you have to be sure he can play tackle or else, pass. If 2 Qb's are taken before 12, we'll have a really good prospect available. Man i can't wait!!

Since '61's picture

The Packers have an offensive HC and a HOF QB. It's likely that the top defenders will be taken by #12 so I'm thinking the Packers go with an OL at 12, probably Jawaan Taylor.

Taking defensive picks has failed miserably prior to 2018 and the OL needs to be built up. If the Packers trade back then they would likely take one of the TEs.

Gute will want to support his new HC and keep Rodgers upright. Plenty of surprises coming in this draft. Thanks, Since '61

albert999's picture

I think Taylor is also the pick for sure

Demon's picture

Id be ok with an OL with a #12 pick. Just whomever they pick at 12 or 30 one of then need to be a starter and the other a significant contributor in game 1.

We can no longer be drafting for 4 years down the road.

CheesyTex's picture

'61: Think you are right on.

Also think that this would give Gute leverage to renegotiate with Bulaga and free up some $ to fill another hole -- maybe safety, Tre Boston?

SpurgeonsCigar's picture

Way , way too high for the Oline at 12 . Cole Madison can play guard and maybe tackle. Take one of the big three defensive players like Sweat, Burns or Bush (my fav). If they are gone take the TE. Lots of talent will be there at 30.

Old School's picture

We need starters at safety and ILB.

Devin White could fall to #12. If not, then we could take Devin Bush....we could probably even trade down and still get him. Or we could get Mack Wilson in the second round.

The first safety will probably still be available when we pick at #30. Opinions on who that is vary, but I like Jonathan Abram because of the video I've been able to find on the net, he's the best combination of cover and tackle out of the top safeties. I like Taylor Rapp, too, and I think we could trade down to get him while picking up another pick.

As regards backups/rotational/situational guys, it'd be nice to have an alternative to Spriggs at OT. We could certainly use another RB to help carry the load and keep our other RBs healthy for the entire season.

We do not have a backup QB who has ever won a game in the NFL. Considering that QB is the most important position on the field, getting somebody here is paramount, IMO, especially when you factor in the age and injury history of our starter. I've kind of been a Drew Lock fan all along, but I don't think he'll be around at #30 and I'm starting to doubt he'll be there at #12 (and I wouldn't spend #12 on him.)

Beyond Lock, we might see Daniel Jones at #30. After that, we're looking at guys who are 2nd and 3rd round values and are really more 'projects' than potential NFL starters. I can't get excited about these guys like Finley and Grier.

I see a lot of people are drooling over the prospect of Oliver. I think he's a very good player and unlikely to be there at #12, but I also think that we have our defensive line for the season. Daniels, Clark, Lowry, Adams, and Lancaster will be the 5 on the active 46. I don't think that's a bad group. We also have a couple of prospects that we can put on the gameday inactive and/or practice squad.

Similarly, we have Graham-Lewis-Tonyan at TE and I don't see a high pick at that position.

We could always use a CB who can cover and tackle, but I don't think we'll see that in the first two rounds.

Given that we spent quite a bit of money in free agency at edge, and that we return Fackrell and Gilbert, I don't see a high draft choice at edge. I know that will disappoint people but we have to put an entire team on the field, not just a bunch of edge rushers.

So, if we do not take a QB with one of our earlier picks, I think we'll see ILB, S, and OT at the top of our draft. That would mean one of the Devins, then our choice of safeties, and then a starting ready OT in the second.

albert999's picture

I think Allen is the best edge guy but he’ll be gone for sure by 12

leche's picture

Absolutely against taking a QB at all for the next couple of years... Punt that down the road and focus on building the best team we can possibly have with Rodgers being healthy... Focus more on keeping him upright and obviously hope for a little luck (or less bad luck)... Spending useful assets on a contingency plan or preparing for the future while we should be focusing on winning now seems foolish

Old School's picture

So we shouldn't use the draft to prepare for the future? Or to put together the strongest possible team, including a backup QB that you can win with?

So these teams like the Rams, and Titans, who've made moves to strengthen the backup spot....they should have spent that pick on an edge rusher? The Patriots shouldn't spend $3 million on a backup QB and instead use that money to get another weapon for Brady?

The Ravens should have tried putting a stronger team around Flacco instead of drafting Lamar Jackson?

Sorry, I have to disagree. The QB position is the most important position on the field, and we don't have one that we can win with behind Rodgers. Of the 32 teams in the league, I'd opine that we have the WORST situation at backup. AND we have a 36 year old starter with an injury history. IMO, not addressing this is bad management.

leche's picture

Well I'd argue that a strong backup QB doesn't generally lead to success (Eagles 2 years ago being an obvious exception). Spending capital that can be used to make the team as good as possible at its absolute best on a contingency plan for the one guy for whom all success hinges doesn't seem like it's likely to generate more success.

If the Packers have real ambitions to win another Super Bowl with Rodgers, focusing on his replacement sooner rather than later hurts that goal. If the plan isn't to try to win another one with Rodgers, I'd question why we just paid him so much, but that's kind of irrelevant at this point.

Old School's picture

The Broncos won a title with P. Manning.....but they needed Osweiler for much of the season. We can't afford to go 1-5 if Rodgers misses 6 games, for example.

Look at the backups for Chicago and Minnesota. Minnesota got to the Championship game with a backup just a year ago. The Bears backup started two games and won one of them on the road against a division rival (Loins). He also put 27 on the board the next week against the Giants in a loss. That's a backup who can play.

I think it is illogical to assume that a 36 year old QB with a history that includes two broken collarbones, a serious leg injury that hampered him all last season, and multiple concussions isn't going to miss any time this year, next year, or the year after.

Additionally, it cannot be guaranteed that we'll actually have a shot at a starting caliber QB next year, or the year after, or the year after.

NFLNetwork has opined the Packers should be looking at Rodgers successor. The JSOnline had an article today on that same subject. One of the reasons we've been so competitive in the division over the last 25 years is because we've been able to put a pretty good QB on the field for most of the games. We have a chance in this draft to extend that for another 10 years.

By virtue of our record, we pick #12, #44, and #76. The pick at #30 is a bonus that our GM created for us, and IMO, it should be used for the long term benefit of the team.

leche's picture

Yeah I just disagree with that being the strategy to getting us to another Super Bowl with Rodgers still around. Teams very rarely succeed on the back of their backups. If Rodgers misses 6 games in any season that season is likely lost anyway. The best chance we have at success is to prevent that from happening the best we can, and build a team ready to win when it doesn't.

But if winning the division is good enough for you, then it makes sense that the long term play is your preference

blondy45's picture

I totally agree with you Old School. I also am hoping for ILB, S, and OT in that order.

jannes bjornson's picture

OS. I like your overall plan but I think D Line talent/EDGE trumps the ILB on the grade chart. If Daniels goes down again I would rather have Wilkens or Lawrence in his spot than Lancaster, a good effort player. Gutekunst would have to get value in a trade for Kizer before he cuts him loose for a mid-tier QB like Stidhem or Grier. Some recent mocks have Grier in the first round now as the fab four favorites have been scrutinized as the one-year wonders some are. I have the D Line/Edge and Safety in the first with OT second round. Big holes plugged and reinforced. Third rd. TE, or EDGE fill for depth rounds four to six : TE, RB, DE, CB, WR/PR and draft Ingold at FB with the #226.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Of Thornhill, CGJ, Adderly, Thompson, Savage, Abram and Rapp, the two I like least are Abram and Rapp. Abram can't cover and has no ball skills. Late day three. Rapp is a box safety only. Maybe round 4. Since both figure to go higher, I realize that I am really passing on both.

Sigh, sooner or later I will be able to agree with you wholeheartedly, Old School.

JLab3's picture

We need a safety an offensive lineman and a linebacker with our first three. Devin Bush is off the charts quality and if we get lucky and he's sitting at twelve, he's the pick. Grabbing Chris Lindstrom at 30 would make a great first round.

Dzehren's picture

BPA Defensive front 7 pick # 12
OL pick # 30
BPA of Safety, Edge or TE pick # 44

albert999's picture

i totally agree although i like Jawann Taylor and if he’s there at 12 it would be hard to pass seeing i don’t think he’ll be there at 30

Slim11's picture

Not sure about TE at #44 unless, by some unnatural act, Fant or Hockenson fall there. Sternberger might be an attractive option but not at #44. His JC numbers before his only season at Texas A&M were nothing to brag about. During his only season at TXA&M, he had a so-so QB throwing the ball to him. With Rodgers, he might improve quite a bit. Who knows?

I like taking a S at #44, maybe #30 depending upon who it is. I’m still partial to Adderley at #44. Some mocks now have him lasting into the third round.

Christian Roussel's picture

I don't agree with the OL conversation for 12 and 30. With Billy Turner, and if Nico Siragusa is healthy and Cole Madison is committed to play football for us, don't spend a first round pick on a guard. Absolutely agree on a OT but no guard.

Christian Roussel's picture

While i agree that an OT is an OL but 1st round pick for us has to be a tackle

Old School's picture

So you'd spend a first round pick on a backup OT, but not a backup QB?

dobber's picture

I think that any 1st round OT will play right away, either at RT or at LG waiting for Bulaga to get hurt/retire.

Old School's picture

If he's going to start at RG, why did we sign a guy in FA to do that? And why do we need to spend a first round pick on a guard?

Dobber, I totally think we need insurance for an injury to Bulaga or Bakhtiari, and I think we need to draft a guy early. But I also think we need insurance for an injury to Rodgers, and I think we need to draft that guy early too

Dzehren's picture

The 2020 QB draft class is much better. Better off waiting till 2020 .

Christian Roussel's picture


blondy45's picture

Agreed, do not rock the boat this year. Competition for Kiser & Boyle, YES later round pick.

Old School's picture

I'm not sure what that is based on. I read people writing that, but we're probably going to see 4 QBs go in the first round this year. So next year we're going to see six or seven guys who are better than the guys this year?

I'm dubious.

jannes bjornson's picture

I would not use a one pick on any of these QBs.

Christian Roussel's picture

Bulaga's got one year left, while Rodgers has a few. As for a backup, the guy that can fall is probably Lock who has the same kind of accuracy and decision making issues that Kizer has. I just think it's not worth it.

Old School's picture

Bulaga has one year left on his contract, while Rodgers has a few. Bulaga is quite a bit younger. Both have injury issues. Rodgers plays a more important position, and so his backup is more important.

I don't know where the "accuracy" issue stuff comes from. Lock has a very, very good arm. All youngsters have decision making issues. Most grow out of it, with maturity and reps and coaching.

Christian Roussel's picture

Old School i agree with you that with Rodgers injury history, it's crucial that they have a quality backup. I think they should have got a veteran FA.
I'm not telling you that Lock won't be a QB in this league but people with much more knowledge than i have are questioning his accuracy. See Tony Pauline scouting report on Lock at Draft analyst, and nfl draft and combine profile.

jannes bjornson's picture

Locks numbers come in a bit below Cutler's from their respective draft profiles. He has a live arm. Locks footwork is worse than Cutler's were but we don't know about his personality since we fans cannot interview the kid or get dirt from the frat boys. I would consider Lock in the second but right now Gutekunst hung his hat on Kizer with the DaMarious trade. There are winning QBs in the mid-rounds that have started three years to look at like the guy from N Dakota State. etc

dobber's picture

List of Packers pre-draft visits for those who don't check JSOnline regularly...

Rossonero's picture

thanks dobber!

EddieLeeIvory's picture

Josh Allen please

albert999's picture

yeah buddy

albert999's picture

Is anybody in on K’Neal Harry like I am?
I think this guy has huge upside and is a stud athlete

stockholder's picture

I'm in 2nd Round. Extra pick or trade up.

albert999's picture

i think he can play WR or TE

IceBowl's picture

What extra pick?

stockholder's picture

Packers might trade down yet.

albert999's picture

I think they should stay where they are and pick to win now!

dobber's picture

I don't think trade-downs necessarily preclude a 'win-now' approach to picks.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Harry didn't run a 3-cone, 20 or 60 yard shuttle at the combine or at his pro day for a reason. I wouldn't touch him in the first round, and not at #44 in the 2nd. I don't hate him and I think he can play in the NFL. He reminds me of James Jones. Day two.

IceBowl's picture

I believe that if Gute saw a better back up QB option during free agency, he would have acted, or he is comfortable with the free agants still available.

Some people talk as if he does not have a plan. Maybe he drafts one in Rnd 1, maybe Rnd 3, maybe Rnd 7. We do not know. (won't be Rnd 1, doesn't fit into the future with ARod's contract)

But I am certain he has a plan. That's his job.

D Ernie's picture

If I'm Gutt and Hokenson and the top d players are gone at 12, I'm selecting the best O lineman available and fixing the dam o line. Hey there may be another decent one late in the draft to in case Beluga and others fall on their face this year.
Besides, there will be decent CB and Safeties and WR at 30. I say fix one thing right now with 12.

Rossonero's picture

Realistically, these are the only guys who will be available at #12:

1. Brian Burns - with the Smiths on board, he may not be a starter, but should get plenty of snaps

2. Devin Bush - we have not historically valued ILBs and at only 5'11", I'd be surprised if we took him.

3. TJ Hockenson - he SHOULD be available, but I've seen him going even before 12, which might be crazy, but if another team in front of us thinks he's the next Gronk, he'll be gone.

4. Noah Fant -- should be available. Natural fit to replace Jimmy Graham and would be great to learn from him. I think he'll go 19-30 though.

5. Jawaan Taylor - Bucs, Giants, Jags, Bills, Broncos and Lions all have O-line needs. They could very easily take Taylor if they think he's good enough.

6. Jonah Williams - same as above for Taylor.

7. Clelin Ferrell - the wild card. I'd LOVE if it he falls to 12. I think the media is overlooking him for whatever reason. I like him more than Brian Burns.

There's an outside chance that Ed Oliver falls to 12, but I'd be very surprised. He's a special talent. I remember last fall when he was the consensus #1 overall pick in a lot of mocks.

The only tricky thing is if we take Taylor or Williams, are they immediately a starter at LG or RG? I say this because we need STARTERS, not guys taking a red shirt year.

Bulaga is entrenched as the starter at RT, so in theory, Taylor or Williams will only play RT when Bulaga gets hurt (which he will). But with Billy Turner on board, he's probably the starter at RG and then it's Lane Taylor vs. either Williams or Jawaan Taylor.

jannes bjornson's picture

Good analysis. If the SEC guys are brought in as RTs, Taylor would stay on the right side as that is the natural feel for his footwork. Williams can play all the spots and some scouts like him best at Center. Turner can play the LG as he did in Denver and is a much more mobile guy than Taylor. Given the probabilty of top edge and DTs off the board, protecting the franchise seems to be the prudent thing to do.

Dzehren's picture

If GB takes an OT at 12, Bulaga would be released with an 8M cap savings.
Lane Taylor will have some competition this year as his spot needs an upgrade as well.

leche's picture

Highly doubt they'd release Bulaga. He's got one year left on his contract and we've had issues with our OL health/depth the last few years. Allowing him to walk in the offseason to be replaced by the newly drafted OT seems far more likely

dobber's picture

"we've had issues with our OL health/depth the last few years."

Bulaga IS the issue with OL health...

leche's picture

Right but cutting him doesn't help that cause either

dobber's picture

Does keeping him if you can't count on him to play? If people aren't interested in drafting a play-ready OL and want to keep Bulaga, what are we asking for? Many around here would rather have his cap savings to put toward an extension on someone or to fill a post-draft hole through FA...and that was before the start of the league year.

zeroluv's picture

Keeping Bulaga to teach the rookies is a must....when he is healthy he is a stud. Even for 7 games...he is a difference maker. Keep him this year and let him go tin FA next year.

albert999's picture

OT Kaleb McGary at 30 or 44

jsb937's picture

Devin Bush is too small. Trade up for Devin White or Montez Sweat.

albert999's picture

Trade up for Allen

blondy45's picture

Anyone remember Sam Mills? Was he too small? Instincts, not height, is more important. I like Devin Bush!

dobber's picture

Or, a little closer to home, Mike Douglass.

zeroluv's picture

Devin Bush will have a better career than Devin White. Make my words. Devin Bush is faster and plays with a chip on his shoulder. He should be the Packets first round pick.

Alberta Packer's picture

None of the above trending picks for the first round. I think that Packers will select Andre Dillard (best pass blocker) /Juwaan Taylor (if available) to consolidate O-line. Then best overall OLB at #30 - Chase Winovich - then best Safety - Juan Thornhill at #44.

jannes bjornson's picture

How's the skiing? That works but you have to hope Thornhill is there at #44. I like him at # 30 and Winovich should be around at #44. Who knows?

sam1's picture

QB will be one of first two picks,just have a feeling!

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Take Hockenson at #12 and move up to #21 and take Fant. Now Hockenson helps out not only at TE but helps outside run game. Take Fant at #21 and now you have hybrid WR / TE
where now slot WR is not that crucial.

Your getting 4 player's for the price of 2.

If I'm the coach of GB this is what I would do.

Green Bay automatically becomes offensive nightmare to all opposing teams!!

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"