Who Will Gute Draft at #29?

[Joemailman]

It's prediction time. Not a preference poll.

Never has it seemed like there were so many possibilities of who the Packers might draft in the 1st round. Projections on players are all over the place this year.

Remember that trade up or trade down is an option in the poll. As is Other.

Poll to follow.

[Bretsky]

I predict Newsome; I would also predict he trades up

[call_me_ishmael]

CB or OT with a trade up for sure IMO

[bobblehead]

I said trade up for:

I'm going to say he trades up a tad for Farley.

[jklowan]

Trade down. Levi Onwuzurike

[Fritz]

Trade down. Levi Onwuzurike

His history suggests a trade up.

I'm going to go out onto a limb and say he trades up for Barmore, if he's still sitting there at about 21 or 22.

[jklowan]

His history suggests a trade up.

I'm going to go out onto a limb and say he trades up for Barmore, if he's still sitting there at about 21 or 22.
I'd be good with either player, not so happy with a trade up

[RashanGary]

Liam Eichenberg

[Upnorth]

I put Caleb farley. I'm hoping CB but I think it wont be newsome.

[wist43]

If Farley falls far enough, I'm all for doing what it takes... have to assume his medical has checked out.

That said, I'm thinking trade down.

Move back and the pick might be Terrace Marshall. The trade back up for a T.

2. Terrace Marshall - WR
2. Liam Eichenberg - OT
3. Robert Rochelle - CB
3. Monty Rice - LB

That's as far as I've gotten on the board.

[wist43]

I don't have Oweh, Cosmi, or Moore as 1st round picks.

[Bretsky]

I don't have Oweh, Cosmi, or Moore as 1st round picks.


Cosmi and Moore are going in the top half of round 2. Who is Oweh ?

[Bretsky]

If Farley falls far enough, I'm all for doing what it takes... have to assume his medical has checked out.

That said, I'm thinking trade down.

Move back and the pick might be Terrace Marshall. The trade back up for a T.

2. Terrace Marshall - WR
2. Liam Eichenberg - OT
3. Robert Rochelle - CB
3. Monty Rice - LB

That's as far as I've gotten on the board.




I see the top end WR's but this class does not seem as deep as last years.

Who are the Tee Higgins or Chase Claypools to get in round 2 ?

[wist43]

If Farley falls far enough, I'm all for doing what it takes... have to assume his medical has checked out.

That said, I'm thinking trade down.

Move back and the pick might be Terrace Marshall. The trade back up for a T.

2. Terrace Marshall - WR
2. Liam Eichenberg - OT
3. Robert Rochelle - CB
3. Monty Rice - LB

That's as far as I've gotten on the board.

4. D'Ante Smith - OL, East Carolina (really like this guy)

[wist43]

I see the top end WR's but this class does not seem as deep as last years.

Who are the Tee Higgins or Chase Claypools to get in round 2 ?

Seems to be a gap after picks around 25-35... I think Marshall is in that range. Depends on what flavor you're looking for. I think the Packers would rate them Marshall, Bateman, Toney.

I like all 3 of those guys, but gave them Toney, Bateman, Marshall.

Then it's a big drop off to guys like Eskridge (whom I like), Elijah Moore, Rogers, et al.

The drop off might prompt Gute to go WR with his 1st pick, whether that's in the 1st or 2nd rd.

Depending on if someone like Farley drops or not, I like trading down this year and try to come away with 2 second rounders, 2 or 3 third rounders, 2 or 3 fourth rounders.

[RashanGary]

OT and Corner are the two deeper positions. Good starters in the second round.

WR has slot guys in the 2nd round. Unless it’s tyreek hill, that’s a luxury pick.

[wist43]

If Farley falls far enough, I'm all for doing what it takes... have to assume his medical has checked out.

That said, I'm thinking trade down.

Move back and the pick might be Terrace Marshall. The trade back up for a T.

2. Terrace Marshall - WR
2. Liam Eichenberg - OT
3. Robert Rochelle - CB
3. Monty Rice - LB

That's as far as I've gotten on the board.

Okay, let's substitute Monty Rice for D'ante Smith...

2. Terrace Marshall
2. Liam Eichenberg
3. Robert Rochelle
3. D'Ante Smith

I'd be thrilled with those 4 picks - think Eichenberg would be the weakest of those picks.

[bobblehead]

OT and Corner are the two deeper positions. Good starters in the second round.

WR has slot guys in the 2nd round. Unless it’s tyreek hill, that’s a luxury pick.

I'm torn. I value OL more than most and this Tackle draft is really nice. The problem is that I really believe a talent like Elgton should be playing RT, not G. That would mean we have 2 very good tackles on the team. That would also mean the perceived need really isn't a need. But the draft very well could fall in a way to drop a good RT into our lap at 29. Do you trade up for the "need" at CB or let the draft come to you and take a good OT.

[texaspackerbacker]

I disagree with you on just about all counts there, Bobblehead.

I absolutely do not value O Line very much at all - I've seen the Packers win and do extremely well so many games, so many seasons with O Lines ranging between borderline shitty and marginally good. Conversely, going back to Lombardi's days with Starr at QB, and what was generally acknowledged as a great O Line, I can remember a lot of games like that horrible Thanksgiving when the Packers lost their only game in a 13-1 season, that great O Line getting thoroughly trounced by the Lions great defense. And that was far from the only time. Often, a D would clog things up so even Hornung and Taylor couldn't run much, and Starr would need to bail things out while getting rushed badly. Great O Line or mediocre O Line, you win or lose with quality at skilled positions and/or defense - the O Line just ain't that important.

And I want to keep Elgton Jenkins at Guard where he excelled rather than move him to tackle where he was ok but not all that great.

I don't think we need to trade up to get an outstanding first round Corner. It's looking more and more like Newsome may be available, and if not him, Asante Samuel would be really good too. Just the same, I wouldn't mind trading up for Newsome. Regardless, we will be infinitely better off if we get a Corner in the first round than O Line. If there's a really good OT when we draft in the second round, fine, I wouldn't oppose that, and getting somebody like Walker Little in the 4th would be good too. But I value Corner as well as ILB and D Line way more than O Line, both in this draft and in general.

[Upnorth]

I disagree with you on just about all counts there, Bobblehead.

I absolutely do not value O Line very much at all - I've seen the Packers win and do extremely well so many games, so many seasons with O Lines ranging between borderline shitty and marginally good. Conversely, going back to Lombardi's days with Starr at QB, and what was generally acknowledged as a great O Line, I can remember a lot of games like that horrible Thanksgiving when the Packers lost their only game in a 13-1 season, that great O Line getting thoroughly trounced by the Lions great defense. And that was far from the only time. Often, a D would clog things up so even Hornung and Taylor couldn't run much, and Starr would need to bail things out while getting rushed badly. Great O Line or mediocre O Line, you win or lose with quality at skilled positions and/or defense - the O Line just ain't that important.

And I want to keep Elgton Jenkins at Guard where he excelled rather than move him to tackle where he was ok but not all that great.

I don't think we need to trade up to get an outstanding first round Corner. It's looking more and more like Newsome may be available, and if not him, Asante Samuel would be really good too. Just the same, I wouldn't mind trading up for Newsome. Regardless, we will be infinitely better off if we get a Corner in the first round than O Line. If there's a really good OT when we draft in the second round, fine, I wouldn't oppose that, and getting somebody like Walker Little in the 4th would be good too. But I value Corner as well as ILB and D Line way more than O Line, both in this draft and in general.

In the rodgers non injury years era the only time we have won less than 11 games was 2008 and when we had a bad oline.
Going back to favre '99 average line bad season. 2000 average line average season. 2005/6 bad retooled lines. Bad seasons.
Basing my line stats from dvoa I just noticed when ever we had a not great line we basically miss the playoffs or are a wild card.
You can have your opinion but analysis leads me to believe that the second most important unit on the football field is oline.

If you werent a packers fan in 05 06 I get you might not notice it as that to me is the most glaring example.

[texaspackerbacker]

We've literally never had a "great O Line" all through the Favre and Rodgers years, and we did pretty damn well a lot of years with mediocre to borderline good O Lines.

[Fritz]

Jaysus Tex. Green Bay has had some nice offensive lines through the years. Clifton, Tauscher, Bakhtiari, Bulaga, Linsley, Jenkins - that's just some of the list.

As for drafting at #29, I read yesterday that scouts are saying Barmore from Alabama is a real high-maintenance guy. That's the stuff you don't think as much about. Is he going to turn out to be a Warren Sapp high-maintenance, or a Cletidus Hunt high-maintenance?

It'd make you want to pass. So if he plays really good his first two years, he's only going to get to be more and more of a diva. There won't be much to be humble about. And if he doesn't play well, will his feelings be hurt and he'll lash out?

Ugh. Glad I'm not an NFL GM.

[RashanGary]

Wahle
Rivera
Flanagan
Tauscher
Clifton
Wells
Sitton
Lang
Tretter
Lindsley
Bakh
Bulaga
Jenkins

[RashanGary]

The packers have a rich OL culture. I don’t know if it’s scouting or coaching or what, but it’s a culture here to have good OL. Receivers too.

[texaspackerbacker]

That should tell you something, RG. Literally ALL of those guys seemed better than they were because of the QB they blocked for.

[Bretsky]

The packers have a rich OL culture. I don’t know if it’s scouting or coaching or what, but it’s a culture here to have good OL. Receivers too.


Having great WR's was a TT culture; kudos to him. Gutebag inherited a goldmine with a franchise QB and some other nice pieces. Normally a new GM does not have that.

[Bretsky]

That should tell you something, RG. Literally ALL of those guys seemed better than they were because of the QB they blocked for.


I would say that about the WR's. Adams of course is one of the best. Don't have much to say about the others at WR other than they are fuctional

[Fritz]

That should tell you something, RG. Literally ALL of those guys seemed better than they were because of the QB they blocked for.

Or you could claim that having consistently standout offensive lines has allowed good quarterbacks to look like great quarterbacks.

What you need to do is to support the claim you make instead of just making another claim.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Having great WR's was a TT culture; kudos to him. Gutebag inherited a goldmine with a franchise QB and some other nice pieces. Normally a new GM does not have that.

We had the best offense in football last year.

[Upnorth]

We had at the minimum
Top 2 qb
Top 4 oline
Top 7 rb
Top 7 te
Top 12 wr
Top 5 coach.
Those numbers are at the least imo where you can't even argue it logically.
My personal ranking would be
#1 qb
#3 ol
#3 te (holy tonyon!!!)
#4 rb
# 9 wr.

[run pMc]

We've literally never had a "great O Line" all through the Favre and Rodgers years, and we did pretty damn well a lot of years with mediocre to borderline good O Lines.
The 2003-04 team had a pretty dang good OL. There have been plenty of others since then.

Last year, Rodgers was sacked 20 times over 16 games (1.25/game). For comparison:

Brees: 13 Sk, 9 G (1.444)
Dalton: 24, 14 (1.714)
Burrow: 32SK, 10 (3.2)
Lamar Jackson 29 Sk, 15G (1.933) - and he's mobile
Mahomes: 22Sk, 15G (1.466)
R.Wilson: 47Sk, 16G (2.9375) - he's plenty mobile, with good receivers and a shit OL.
Brady - 21Sk, 16G (1.3125)

OL matters, and GB has a good one. They also must have some pretty sharp coaches, because they've been able to move players up and down the line or play backups without missing much of a beat.

You can ignore DVOA or PFF ratings or all those other things and cling to the theory that the OL is not good, but your theory is incorrect and there's plenty of data to disprove it.
In fact, I'd like to see you provide data proving the OL is not good.

It's ok to change your mind when new facts become available. People did that when proof showed the earth was not flat. ;)

[Fritz]

Ooh. I think Tex just got Patlerized.