Ok, Who is the One Top Rated Guy You DON"T Want?

[The Shadow]

Calvin Ridley

[pbmax]

I don't think I want Davenport or Landry at 14. Though Bill Polian just about wet himself describing Davenport on ESPN an hour ago.

[hoosier]

Baker Mayfield

[Bretsky]

I don't think I want Davenport or Landry at 14. Though Bill Polian just about wet himself describing Davenport on ESPN an hour ago.


AGREE

Like Joe Mailman's scenario

I want the FAB 5

[Bretsky]

2). Marcus Davenport, UTSA---MIKE MAYOCK

There is quite the drop off at this position after Chubb. Davenport is a player who still needs time ti fill out into his frame. His motor also doesn’t allow him to be a player who provides consistent pressure on the quarterback at this point in his career. He has been a stand up pass rusher at UTSA, but he has the Build to become a defensive end in a 4-3 if needed. He is a player who is still fairly far from his potential.

[Teamcheez1]

2). Marcus Davenport, UTSA---MIKE MAYOCK

There is quite the drop off at this position after Chubb. Davenport is a player who still needs time ti fill out into his frame. His motor also doesn’t allow him to be a player who provides consistent pressure on the quarterback at this point in his career. He has been a stand up pass rusher at UTSA, but he has the Build to become a defensive end in a 4-3 if needed. He is a player who is still fairly far from his potential.

Is this Justin Harrell 2.0?

[woodbuck27]

I don't want NO 14 used on either Davenport or Landry. I don't want NO. 14 to be used 'on smaller' and WR Calvin Ridley or CB Joshua Jackson.

It takes a lot of work and reading to arrive at such thinking. Sure it's great to have a higher Draft Pic but really !? Isn't there a sharp drop off in talent (Grade) after the first 10 -12 picks, and not targeting QB Prospect Lamar Jackson even as Draft Trade bait? Maybe Lamar Jackson is the Packers Guy because after Aaron Rodgers the Packers have little as a backup QB!?

It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and even possible grab a Running Back in a RB heavy Draft. The Packers aren't going to be ready this Season nor likely in 2019. An additional Round two late or Round Three Pick might work out well!?

They shed CAP next Season. ( Clay Mathews III and liely Randall Cobb are history).

They have this immediate and Long Term NEED at OL, OLB. At WR and Defensive Back CB for sure and more at Safety. Do they have a decent blocking TE? Where is that Guy to be found?

They need a ST Kick Returner. Davis isn't the answer. How long has it been since a Packer Kick Returner busted one to the House? Light years!

The Packer Roster needs upgrading all over.

[gbgary]

yup...gotta bad feeling about davenport.

[The Shadow]

I truly hope the Pack doesn't draft a 'project'; a workout warrior that needs to be overly coached up. Please : a real football player!

[mraynrand]

It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and even possible grab a Running Back in a RB heavy Draft.

why in the world would they draft a running back with a high draft pick?

[Joemailman]

Vita Vea. Fine player, but he'd just be a rotational player with the strength of the defensive line.

[Zool]

Vita Vea. Fine player, but he'd just be a rotational player with the strength of the defensive line.

Unless they really want to be a multiples D. Clark and Vea in the middle could be a hellova tandem.

[mraynrand]

Unless they really want to be a multiples D. Clark and Vea in the middle could be a hellova tandem.

Putting the other team on their heels by getting a lead with big plays from the offense is one strategy. Another is creating a formidable pass rush. Maybe shorter fields for a Rodgers-led offense is better option than asking him to create big plays all the time.

[Deputy Nutz]

2). Marcus Davenport, UTSA---MIKE MAYOCK

There is quite the drop off at this position after Chubb. Davenport is a player who still needs time ti fill out into his frame. His motor also doesn’t allow him to be a player who provides consistent pressure on the quarterback at this point in his career. He has been a stand up pass rusher at UTSA, but he has the Build to become a defensive end in a 4-3 if needed. He is a player who is still fairly far from his potential.

Don't buy it. Davenport will take time to develop but what I have seen and heard is the guy just wants to get better and better. The guy is sort of a freak athletically

[Deputy Nutz]

I agree I don't think the Packers should use the 14th pick on Davenport or Landry or any pass rusher that is not named Chubb. The Packers have over 20 million invested this season in Perry and Matthews and they are going to eat those contracts. Pass rusher is tremendously weak at the top of this draft. Packers are better off waiting until day two or three to invest in a project or two. The Packers really need to get more athletic in the secondary and at linebacker. There will be several options available at pick 14. Regardless unless some magical fall from one of the top players in this draft class I feel like no matter who the Packers pick everyone will think it is a reach.

So I don't want to see Landry selected with the 14th pick

[Zool]

Putting the other team on their heels by getting a lead with big plays from the offense is one strategy. Another is creating a formidable pass rush. Maybe shorter fields for a Rodgers-led offense is better option than asking him to create big plays all the time.

Agreed. If a GM thinks Vea is the second coming of Vince Wilfork, you take him.

[gbgary]

why in the world would they draft a running back with a high draft pick?

think about the title of the thread. it's what you don't want. that's what he doesn't want.

[mraynrand]

think about the title of the thread. it's what you don't want. that's what he doesn't want.

Maybe, it's always difficult to interpret Woodstock's rambling, but it sure looked like he argued himself into wanting a running back:


I don't want NO 14 used on either Davenport or Landry. I don't want NO. 14 to be used 'on smaller' and WR Calvin Ridley or CB Joshua Jackson.

It takes a lot of work and reading to arrive at such thinking. Sure it's great to have a higher Draft Pic but really !? Isn't there a sharp drop off in talent (Grade) after the first 10 -12 picks, and not targeting QB Prospect Lamar Jackson even as Draft Trade bait? Maybe Lamar Jackson is the Packers Guy because after Aaron Rodgers the Packers have little as a backup QB!?

It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and even possible grab a Running Back in a RB heavy Draft. The Packers aren't going to be ready this Season nor likely in 2019. An additional Round two late or Round Three Pick might work out well!?

:huh:

[gbgary]

Maybe, it's always difficult to interpret Woodstock's rambling, but it sure looked like he argued himself into wanting a running back:



:huh:

ok. lol

[bobblehead]

I don't think I want Davenport or Landry at 14. Though Bill Polian just about wet himself describing Davenport on ESPN an hour ago.

I agree on Davenport. He is a freak athlete, but no one knows if that can translate to the pro game or how long his learning curve might take. Taking a guy like that at 14 isn't really ideal.

I think there are 10 guys in tier one and maybe 15 more in tier 2. If none of the 10 slide you could see a trade down.

[bobblehead]

Vita Vea. Fine player, but he'd just be a rotational player with the strength of the defensive line.

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

[Bretsky]

I don't want Josh Jackson the CB from Iowa

[gbgary]

I agree on Davenport. He is a freak athlete, but no one knows if that can translate to the pro game or how long his learning curve might take. Taking a guy like that at 14 isn't really ideal.

I think there are 10 guys in tier one and maybe 15 more in tier 2. If none of the 10 slide you could see a trade down.

as someone said, we already have 12 picks...we don't need more. i don't want to see any trading down...only up.

[texaspackerbacker]

Don't buy it. Davenport will take time to develop but what I have seen and heard is the guy just wants to get better and better. The guy is sort of a freak athletically

Finally somebody who ain't against my guy, Davenport.

I don't want any WR or D Lineman or QB or RB at 14, so I'll say Saquan Barkley, who I think might just be a bust even for a team that does need an RB.

[woodbuck27]

why in the world would they draft a running back with a high draft pick?

I didn't post advice to draft a RB in Round ONE. I want the Packers to trade down from NO. 14 and draft the BPA and an upgrade to the OL.

Here it is:

" It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and **even (Edit) possibly grab a Running Back ** in a RB heavy Draft. " woodbuck27

** with that extra Pick acquired after trading down.

[Zool]

as someone said, we already have 12 picks...we don't need more. i don't want to see any trading down...only up.

I also like that if the Packers don't like any players at 14, there's automatically a team that does.

[woodbuck27]

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

How many Packers are you thinking .... 'tagging' in 2019?

Are you assuming that Aaron Rodgers Contract Extension is going to get done this Season?

[woodbuck27]

I don't want Josh Jackson the CB from Iowa

I don't want him or another 'small' and WR Calvin Ridley.

We have to keep Aaron Rodgers on his feet.

[gbgary]

I also like that if the Packers don't like any players at 14, there's automatically a team that does.

with all the qb's in the mix i can't imagine there'd be someone at 14 they wouldn't want...but it there's someone that they want more, that they can move up for, they should do it.

[hoosier]

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

Good point. How bout within three months? Remember all the JSO talk in summer 2016 about how the secondary was the strength of the Packer defense.

[mraynrand]

I didn't post advice to draft a RB in Round ONE. I want the Packers to trade down from NO. 14 and draft the BPA and an upgrade to the OL.

Here it is:

" It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and **even (Edit) possibly grab a Running Back ** in a RB heavy Draft. " woodbuck27

** with that extra Pick acquired after trading down.

OK, I suppose they could get another running back late, but even that seems unnecessary. But who knows, they already have 12 picks, so if they get 13 or more, who cares if they take a flyer on a guy late or as a rookie FA.

[mraynrand]

Good point. How bout within three months? Remember all the JSO talk in summer 2016 about how the secondary was the strength of the Packer defense.

True, one play, one concussion and the whole plan went to shit. They bet on the wrong horse (Shields vs. Hayward). I wonder if they'll get anything out of Rollins...

[Smidgeon]

Minkah Fitzpatrick. I got absolutely no legitimate reason to pick him. Call it a hunch since it's a crapshoot anyway.

[bobblehead]

as someone said, we already have 12 picks...we don't need more. i don't want to see any trading down...only up.

That is a very broad generic statement. If we could trade down and then maybe give up a 5th or 6th and wind up with pick 21, and then 2 picks in first half of second round then trading down in round 1 makes sense....especially if you think grade A players are gone and there are plenty of grade B players left.

[bobblehead]

How many Packers are you thinking .... 'tagging' in 2019?

Are you assuming that Aaron Rodgers Contract Extension is going to get done this Season?

Tagging Rodgers is a PR nightmare. If it wasn't you wouldn't extend him. You make him play the remaining 2 years, then tag him 2x and then let him walk when he is what? 39?

[bobblehead]

Good point. How bout within three months? Remember all the JSO talk in summer 2016 about how the secondary was the strength of the Packer defense.

Oh, I remember it...I think I was at the forefront of that thought process. Sam Shields...legit shutdown cb. Randall and Rollins up and coming. Hyde, solid contributor. We can afford to let Hayward's injured ass walk.

[Fritz]

I agree on Davenport. He is a freak athlete, but no one knows if that can translate to the pro game or how long his learning curve might take. Taking a guy like that at 14 isn't really ideal.

I think there are 10 guys in tier one and maybe 15 more in tier 2. If none of the 10 slide you could see a trade down.


Saw a JSO article suggesting there are . . . 13 top tier players. I'm not enamored of what remains at 14. Not thrilled by Davenport or Landry or especially Josh Jackson.

[Deputy Nutz]

Davenport is huge struggle for me. You could draft him and he might never develop into a player that consistently produces, or you pass on him and he cashes in on his potential and he becomes monster. Flipping a coin on that type of potential will make or break a GM.

Josh Jackson, great pick in the twenties, but at 14? If their are 13 guys that are tier 1 prospects does it matter what you take at 14 as long as it fills a need?

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think the Pack should draft either a WR or Interior D-Lineman because Rodgers needs more receiving options and defense needs more up-the-middle pass rush options. WR will be the biggest W-L decision-maker IMO. D-Linemen need to alternate to stay fresh. A good fat-guy will be the biggest W-L decision-maker on defense IMO.

That said, I worry about Ridley and Vea. Going only by scouting reports and what conference they played in, I'm leaning toward the Big Ten's leading WR Moore and SEC's best interior D-Lineman Payne. LB's/Edge rushers scare me. After Chubb is gone does a true difference-maker remain? CB position is deep in the draft, so forget Ward at 14. Plus, we've got some potential CB talent. Ditto with talent on Safety position.

Add Montravius Adams and Payne to Daniels, Clark, Wilkerson, Lowry and we have one of the best and deepest DL's in the NFL.
Add DJ Moore to Adams, Cobb, Graham, Allison, Kenricks and we become deep and extremely dangerous in receivers.

[beveaux1]

It's true that we have 12 picks in the draft. It's also true that we only have 3 picks in the first 3 rounds. Since the draft historically offers diminishing returns with a limited number of Tier 1 players, Tier 2 players, Tier 3 players, etc. If our management team thinks the Tier 1 players are gone by the 14th pick, I would not be against trading down to receive an additional pick in the first 3 rounds. If one of the Tier 1 players is available (probably Fitzpatrick), by all means draft him. If they can move up using a 4th round pick to get a Tier 1 player, go for it. Don't trade a 2nd or 3rd rounder to move up.

[bobblehead]

That is a very broad generic statement. If we could trade down and then maybe give up a 5th or 6th and wind up with pick 21, and then 2 picks in first half of second round then trading down in round 1 makes sense....especially if you think grade A players are gone and there are plenty of grade B players left.

Woody inspired me to quote myself, and Bo Jackson is inspiring me to speak 3rd person:

What bobblehead predicted isn't exactly what played out, but is similar. Picking up a 2019 1st is some good capital. Bobblehead is almost certain they either move up in the 2nd today or move back into the 3rd...or both.

[pbmax]

I don't think I want Davenport or Landry at 14. Though Bill Polian just about wet himself describing Davenport on ESPN an hour ago.

We are in dangerous territory where someone has actually followed my preferred course of action and its now all going to blow up.

[Pugger]

2). Marcus Davenport, UTSA---MIKE MAYOCK

There is quite the drop off at this position after Chubb. Davenport is a player who still needs time ti fill out into his frame. His motor also doesn’t allow him to be a player who provides consistent pressure on the quarterback at this point in his career. He has been a stand up pass rusher at UTSA, but he has the Build to become a defensive end in a 4-3 if needed. He is a player who is still fairly far from his potential.

And to think NO gave us a 2019 1st to move up to take him last night...

[mraynrand]

Davenport is huge struggle for me. You could draft him and he might never develop into a player that consistently produces, or you pass on him and he cashes in on his potential and he becomes monster. Flipping a coin on that type of potential will make or break a GM.

It just might. NO is banking on Brees to stay healthy, but you can easily see a scenario where Davenport is a bust, Brees gets hurt and is gone, a tanking NO doesn't have a #1 pick for a QB and starts wondering about the wisdom of it's GM, even after a great draft in 2017...

This game doesn't sit still