With the 9th overall pick of the 2009 NFL Draft....

[Lurker64]

That works if you can find some sucker willing to trade half his draft away to move up in the draft order...Sherman's out of the league, remember.

You don't need to get half of somebody's draft in order to make this a good idea. Last year New England moved down from 7 to 10 and in that deal they traded their 5th round pick for a 3rd round pick, and still got the guy they wanted.

[Joemailman]

Just watched the replay of the BC / Vandy game ... This Raji DT guy is unstoppable and huge.

I would definitely be happy with Raji. At least, assuming that Haynesworth has signed with somebody (not us) at that point. He is immense and dominant. There's a great video on youtube where he tackles the ballcarrier by hitting him with the guy who's trying to block him.

I don't know if Raji is great value at 9, but he's fun to watch.

I've never understood that. People talk about you can't take a guy who's ranked 17th at pick 9, but if you want the guy and don't take him, then you don't get him because you don't pick again until the second round. I'd think, you take who you want when you pick. Silly concept I know.

You want to get an impact player at #9. If TT thinks Raji is one, there is nothing wrong with taking him. However, if TT thinks that Raji is a good player, but not an exceptional one, it would be better to take an exceptional player at another position. It's relatively easy to find good players. Great players are gold.

[Bretsky]

The crop of DE's is really weak. Need to cover the DL in UFA. i'D LEAN TOWARDS rEY AND MOVE bARNETT OUT OF THE MIDDLE. I think a healthy Collins and Bigby are fine.

I think I agree with you here. We need to find a FA DL (Chris Canty maybe?). Rey in the middle. Barnett to OLB. I'd like to see competition at S, but you can draft a good safety in the 2nd or 3rd round. Plus, there are tons of good available FA safeties.

I don't want to see Barnett moved outside. After watching this defensive collapse after losing Barnett and moving Hawk inside, I think people are REALLY underestimating Barnett's value as a MLB. Barnett's skill set might be better for an OLB, but his experience is as a MLB and that's what is most important IMO. I am perfectly fine going into 2009 with Hawk, Barnett, and Chillar as our starters. I am happy with Poppinga and Bishop as their backups. I don't really see a glaring need at LB to be honest.

Plus, anyway, if they're going to draft a LB, Maualuga should probably be third on the LB board. Both Curry and Spikes (if he comes out) would be better picks for the Pack. We'd only be in position to take Maualuga at 9 if we both need a LB and two LBs get taken in the top 8.

At the same time though, even though we don't really need an LB, if Aaron Curry is there at 9 you take him. Curry is likely the best defensive player in the draft.

Agree about Curry; he's a great talent

[Lurker64]

Here's that I mentioned earlier play where Raji tackles the ballcarrier by hitting him with the blocker. The guy just has a fantastic burst at the snap.

[texaspackerbacker]

Raji would not be bad--apparently--assuming he doesn't go the way of Harrell with injuries. Raji could be something like Haynesworth, then again he could have just been playing against inferior competition.

Jordan Gross, the OT, might be worth taking--a guy with the mobility for ZBS and the bulk some are whining for. We probably are better off getting a couple of ZBS types in the 3rd-5th, though.

We really don't need a linebacker, although I agree, those other two did look better than Maulaluga.

I'd still prefer getting a super stud cover corner--Jenkins or Davis--than anything else.

[Lurker64]

Raji would not be bad--apparently--assuming he doesn't go the way of Harrell with injuries. Raji could be something like Haynesworth, then again he could have just been playing against inferior competition.

Thankfully, I'm guessing that since Jagodzinski has been Raji's college coach for the past couple of years, the Packers might not have a hard time getting candid information from his coaches.

He's the sort of guy that, if he plays well at the senior bowl, will go shooting up draft charts since the "inferior competition" tag will start to dissipate.

[DonHutson]

I've never understood that. People talk about you can't take a guy who's ranked 17th at pick 9, but if you want the guy and don't take him, then you don't get him because you don't pick again until the second round. I'd think, you take who you want when you pick. Silly concept I know.

The issue is who is doing the ranking. The only rankings that matter on draft day are the rankings the teams themselves make.

You wouldn't pass on the guy YOU ranked #9 in favor of the guy that YOU ranked #17, or else you wouldn't have ranked them that way in the first place.

[DonHutson]

I'll be interested to watch Oklahoma DT Gerald McCoy in the title game. He's projected to be in the Packer's range if he goes pro (as a redshirt sophomore) this year. I'm wondering if he's really that good, or if he's just benefitting from some buzz because it's not a great year for DT's. I'd like to know that he's physically and emotionally mature enough to make the transition.

The last DT to get drafted that high, that young, was Amobi Okoye by the Texans. By all accounts he was a hard working, high character guy yet it sounds like the transition has been a struggle for him.

[rbaloha1]

If we stay at #9 -- many of the defensive players previously mentioned are worthy except maybe Malauauga.

An impact defensive player should be available if Bradford (Oklahoma), Stafford + Moreno (Georgia) and Sanchez (USC) decide to enter the draft.

But if the player TT covets is taken -- trade down and select Spikes. Much more disciplined than Maluauga with same MO.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

If we stay at #9 -- many of the defensive players previously mentioned are worthy except maybe Malauauga.

An impact defensive player should be available if Bradford (Oklahoma), Stafford + Moreno (Georgia) and Sanchez (USC) decide to enter the draft.

But if the player TT covets is taken -- trade down and select Spikes. Much more disciplined than Maluauga with same MO.

Dont forget Crabtree, he's surely to be a top 10 pick if he declares. Possibly allowing Curry to slide to 9. Without the Combine this is all speculation of course.

[DonHutson]

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Sanchez and Bradford if they come out, in light of the success of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco.

It seemed like the trend recently was that maybe one big time QB would go high, and the rest would fall to the end of the 1st or the 2nd because teams were scrared off by the high salaries and high bust frequency. Will two rookie QB's in the playoffs cause collective NFL amnesia about guys like Couch, Leaf, etc?

Stafford has all the physical tools and should be a lock for top 5, if not #1. Sanchez looked like the best player on the field at the Rose Bowl. If he does slip, someone will get a bargain.

[rbaloha1]

If we stay at #9 -- many of the defensive players previously mentioned are worthy except maybe Malauauga.

An impact defensive player should be available if Bradford (Oklahoma), Stafford + Moreno (Georgia) and Sanchez (USC) decide to enter the draft.

But if the player TT covets is taken -- trade down and select Spikes. Much more disciplined than Maluauga with same MO.

Dont forget Crabtree, he's surely to be a top 10 pick if he declares. Possibly allowing Curry to slide to 9. Without the Combine this is all speculation of course.

Good point. Crabtree ensures even a better defensive player for us. IMO Crabtree requires serious consideration if available at #9.

[packrulz]

Walterfootball has the Packers taking Jenkins at 9, I'd be thrilled. I was disturbed to read that Harris told someone he might not be back next year, I wonder where that is coming from.

9. Green Bay Packers: Malcolm Jenkins, CB, Ohio State
Green Bay has major problems in its secondary. Charles Woodson had to move to safety this season, and it appears as though he's staying there. Woodson turns 33 soon, so his days at corner are pretty much numbered. Meanwhile, Al Harris told the media that he probably won't be back next year. Tramon Williams played well, but the Packers don't really have anything else at corner, unless you want to count Patrick Lee, who couldn't even get on to the field in 2008.

[RashanGary]

Everette Brown is still my guy (whether we run 4-3 or 3-4). He's just a great pass rusher.

[Lurker64]

Walterfootball has the Packers taking Jenkins at 9, I'd be thrilled. I was disturbed to read that Harris told someone he might not be back next year, I wonder where that is coming from.

Possibly he is a realist. It's conceivable that he might break his legs skiing or in a car accident and thus be unable to play next year, and hence "not back."