Poll: Who will the Packers pick at #12?

[CheezWizHed]

I tried to pick the popular mock picks (both from the professionals here and the paid amateurs like Kiper). The goal is to predict who will land with the Packers, not necessarily who you want.

 

Good Luck!

[OnTheBlack]

I tried to pick the popular mock picks (both from the professionals here and the paid amateurs like Kiper). The goal is to predict who will land with the Packers, not necessarily who you want.

 

Good Luck!

 

 

I just REALLY hope it's not Metcalf. I may be wrong on him, but he doesn't seem like he's on the same level as past physical freaks like D Thomas and Magatron from Ga Tech. He's got the size/speed combo, but was the 2nd best on his own team.

 

I'm starting to come around to Hockenson a bit though. I feel like 12 is a bit high to draft an off ball LB'er or a TE, but if he's a threat for Arod and a asset in the running game....hard to not like it....assuming Oliver and the other elite pass rushers are gone.

[brewcrewdue80]

I feel a trade down will occur. Bunch of equal rated talent and QBs for others teams to trade up to 12. I actually feel the TEs will be selected. 1st depending how far they fall. Drop to 16-22 take Fant depending on Hockenson's fall.

[PeaveyFury]

I'm a huge fan of Oliver and hope he's somehow there at 12, or slides to 10 or so where we can move up without breaking the bank.

 

Absent that, however, I support a possible trade down if a QB falls and someone wants to move up a few and we can grab an extra 2nd-day pick.

[nodakfan17]

I voted for Hockenson, which might be a tad optimistic on my part. I think there’s a good chance he’s gone by then, but that pick seems like a good instance of need meeting value. Honestly, Sweat is the only player on your list I’d avoid (due to his heart issue). Otherwise, I’m just excited to add four good players before the Bears add one.

[CheezWizHed]

I voted for Hockenson, which might be a tad optimistic on my part. I think there’s a good chance he’s gone by then, but that pick seems like a good instance of need meeting value. Honestly, Sweat is the only player on your list I’d avoid (due to his heart issue). Otherwise, I’m just excited to add four good players before the Bears add one.

 

Well, beyond the Bear comment, we have the opposite opinion.

 

I think Hock's stock has drastically cooled. I think he is a great fit for the Packers, but I'd rather see him in the 18-20 pick range (i.e. trade down).

 

I picked Sweat as I think he is the most likely person to be selected at #12 (I don't think the heart issue is anything big). Oliver is my first choice, but I don't think he will be there.

[nodakfan17]

I voted for Hockenson, which might be a tad optimistic on my part. I think there’s a good chance he’s gone by then, but that pick seems like a good instance of need meeting value. Honestly, Sweat is the only player on your list I’d avoid (due to his heart issue). Otherwise, I’m just excited to add four good players before the Bears add one.

 

Well, beyond the Bear comment, we have the opposite opinion.

 

I think Hock's stock has drastically cooled. I think he is a great fit for the Packers, but I'd rather see him in the 18-20 pick range (i.e. trade down).

 

I picked Sweat as I think he is the most likely person to be selected at #12 (I don't think the heart issue is anything big). Oliver is my first choice, but I don't think he will be there.

 

I’ve seen Hockenson going at no. 8 to the Lions in a few recent mocks, but I won’t pretend to understand anything else about his game. Same with Sweat - I have nothing against the guy and I have no specific knowledge of his condition, but all else equal, I’d prefer a player without medical red flags.

 

Enjoy draft week!

[bjkrautk]

Voted Williams, since I think T.J. Hackeysack (and Devin White) will be off the board at 12.

Wouldn’t be surprised if they go for an edge rusher, but I’d rather see them get a versatile option for protecting #12 at 12.

[Point Beer Is Best]

I'm a huge fan of Oliver and hope he's somehow there at 12, or slides to 10 or so where we can move up without breaking the bank.

 

Absent that, however, I support a possible trade down if a QB falls and someone wants to move up a few and we can grab an extra 2nd-day pick.

 

 

[sarcasm]I've heard several rumors that he's a total malcontent, and is actually only 4'11" and 187 lbs so there is no way anyone with the first 11 picks should draft him.[/sarcasm]

 

C'mon people, let's get these rumors trending! A line with Daniels/Clark/Oliver would be amazing.

[lcbj68c]

Probably some interior defensive lineman.

[nodakfan17]

Probably some interior defensive lineman.

Ha, yeah. Probably.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Probably some interior defensive lineman.

 

If that lineman is Ed Oliver, heck yes, sign me up. If it is Wilkins, I'm not a big fan.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I'm kinda hoping they go boring with OL. I'm just not feeling the depth they have there.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I'm kinda hoping they go boring with OL. I'm just not feeling the depth they have there.

 

I've seen both Williams and Taylor to the Packers at #12 in quite a few mocks. I personally would rather wait until #30 and grab Risner, but there's a chance he goes in the 20s. I agree, though, that OL depth is a huge need, even with the Turner signing. Risner is a guy I think can start immediately at G, and kick out to RT in 2020.

[nodakfan17]

I'm kinda hoping they go boring with OL. I'm just not feeling the depth they have there.

I wouldn’t be upset if they go OL at #12, but I’d rather see them do it at #30.

[nodakfan17]

I'm kinda hoping they go boring with OL. I'm just not feeling the depth they have there.

 

I've seen both Williams and Taylor to the Packers at #12 in quite a few mocks. I personally would rather wait until #30 and grab Risner, but there's a chance he goes in the 20s. I agree, though, that OL depth is a huge need, even with the Turner signing. Risner is a guy I think can start immediately at G, and kick out to RT in 2020.

Agree on Risner being a good option at 30, but I thought Billy Turner was signed to be the starting RG?

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I'm kinda hoping they go boring with OL. I'm just not feeling the depth they have there.

 

I've seen both Williams and Taylor to the Packers at #12 in quite a few mocks. I personally would rather wait until #30 and grab Risner, but there's a chance he goes in the 20s. I agree, though, that OL depth is a huge need, even with the Turner signing. Risner is a guy I think can start immediately at G, and kick out to RT in 2020.

Agree on Risner being a good option at 30, but I thought Billy Turner was signed to be the starting RG?

 

Lane Taylor was horrible last year. I don't think he is having anything handed to him this year. Risner could very easily end up starting at LG

[brewcrewdue80]

I get concerns on any of the 3 Clemson 1st round projects. You have 3 1st round talents on your line(or at least 1st rd talent) You play 15 games this year with only 2 being against top 20 level opponents, That trio put out 137 tackles, 41 for loss, 18.5 sacks. So 9 tackles a game, 2.6 for loss a game, 1.2 sacks a game. Out of the trio playing vs. majority college only level players. Vs. ND and Ala Lawrence didn't play, Ferrel and Wilkins combined for 1.5TFL vs ND and 1.5 Sacks which is just 1.5sacks 5 total tackles. 8 tackles, .5 sack, and 1.5TFL. I'd just expect more from lining up with that talent. I think at the next level it'll translate in to lackluster production compared to expectations. On the other spectrum, it makes Jonah Williams stand out more with the competition he faced and his results on the year. I can just feel the team will make a trade in the 1st either up from 30 or down from 12 while still getting the player they want and stealing that 2nd player they want.

[patrickgpe]

I voted for Hockenson, but of course this is hard because we don't know who will be around at 12. If Oliver or White is around, they should go defense and hope an Iowa TE is available at 30 or trade up. Fits a need though and the pass rush was addressed in free agency. better not be Metcalf. and i will be (most likely) happy.

[patrickgpe]

I think Hock's stock has drastically cooled. I think he is a great fit for the Packers, but I'd rather see him in the 18-20 pick range (i.e. trade down).

 

I picked Sweat as I think he is the most likely person to be selected at #12 (I don't think the heart issue is anything big). Oliver is my first choice, but I don't think he will be there.

 

I don't know how you could know this. There are so many mock drafts, he has been all over the place, like just about every player besides the top 10(ish). Besides it only takes one team to say yes and it doesn't matter what his draft "stock" is. Also no team is saying anything, so we don't know anybody's draft stock. I've seen mocks with Bush to the packers at 12 and at 30. That shows just one example of the variety of opinion.

[LouisEly]

Probably some interior defensive lineman.

 

If that lineman is Ed Oliver, heck yes, sign me up. If it is Wilkins, I'm not a big fan.

Found out today that PFF had Wilkins rated among the top 3 interior DL in both run stopping grade and pass rushing grade.

 

That, coupled with Daniels being a FA after this year and Clark being a FA after 2020 (he will be a very expensive re-sign), and I'm feeling even more strongly that it's Wilkins.

 

Plus, he probably has the least amount of question marks of any player in the draft, which is probably why he is rising in mocks. People get enamored with the updside around the combine/pro days, but then as the draft gets closer the question marks/risks get bigger and more scrutinized.

[LouisEly]

I get concerns on any of the 3 Clemson 1st round projects. You have 3 1st round talents on your line(or at least 1st rd talent) You play 15 games this year with only 2 being against top 20 level opponents, That trio put out 137 tackles, 41 for loss, 18.5 sacks. So 9 tackles a game, 2.6 for loss a game, 1.2 sacks a game. Out of the trio playing vs. majority college only level players. Vs. ND and Ala Lawrence didn't play, Ferrel and Wilkins combined for 1.5TFL vs ND and 1.5 Sacks which is just 1.5sacks 5 total tackles. 8 tackles, .5 sack, and 1.5TFL. I'd just expect more from lining up with that talent. I think at the next level it'll translate in to lackluster production compared to expectations. On the other spectrum, it makes Jonah Williams stand out more with the competition he faced and his results on the year. I can just feel the team will make a trade in the 1st either up from 30 or down from 12 while still getting the player they want and stealing that 2nd player they want.

Clemson played four teams that finished in the top 20 in the polls - Alabama, Notre Dame, Syracuse, and Texas A&M.

 

In the national championship game, Ferrell and Wilkins had more TFL (2.5) and sacks (0.5) than Quinnen Williams and Raekwon Davis (1.5, 0).

[xisxisxis]

Found out today that PFF had Wilkins rated among the top 3 interior DL in both run stopping grade and pass rushing grade.

 

That, coupled with Daniels being a FA after this year and Clark being a FA after 2020 (he will be a very expensive re-sign), and I'm feeling even more strongly that it's Wilkins.

 

Plus, he probably has the least amount of question marks of any player in the draft, which is probably why he is rising in mocks. People get enamored with the updside around the combine/pro days, but then as the draft gets closer the question marks/risks get bigger and more scrutinized.

The take on ESPN is that the Packers are very hot on Jeffery Simmons and are likely to draft him at #30 or move up if they think someone else will take him. That clears a path to taking Andre Dillard at #12. The thinking being that #12 is huge reach for Simmons. Of course that's mostly Mel Kiper and I'm not sure how on target he is with mock drafts.

[OldHeidelberg]

Going offense at #12 and then taking Simmons at #30 makes a lot sense, I like the idea of trying to hit a HR with that extra first rounder even if we have to wait a year. Not much talk in the mocks of the Packers trading up, Allen or Oliver should be there at #5 and those guys are on a tier above what the Packers will likely have available at 12.

 

I voted Taylor, I think there will be a run on defenders above us and Hockenson will be gone as well.

[CheezWizHed]

I think Hock's stock has drastically cooled. I think he is a great fit for the Packers, but I'd rather see him in the 18-20 pick range (i.e. trade down).

 

I picked Sweat as I think he is the most likely person to be selected at #12 (I don't think the heart issue is anything big). Oliver is my first choice, but I don't think he will be there.

 

I don't know how you could know this. There are so many mock drafts, he has been all over the place, like just about every player besides the top 10(ish). Besides it only takes one team to say yes and it doesn't matter what his draft "stock" is. Also no team is saying anything, so we don't know anybody's draft stock. I've seen mocks with Bush to the packers at 12 and at 30. That shows just one example of the variety of opinion.

 

[sarcasm]I can not reveal my sources.[/sarcasm]

 

The simple answer is that I don't know this. Welcome to an online forum where we share opinions.

 

I'm paying more attention to the trends than the actual picks themselves. Initially Hock and Fant rocketed up the mocks (Hock in top 10 and Fant at #5???). More recently, they seem to be cooling again (e.g. I'm seeing Hock in the teens and Fant at #30 more often recently).

 

Same with Bush. Early on he was around #30 (or even second round). I've not seen a recent one with him under #20. Not claiming any accuracy in that, but its what I watch.

 

Also, traditionally TEs don't go top 15 unless they are really special. Hock is described as "complete" but might be maxed out (i.e. high floor/low ceiling). If he had Fant's speed, he'd probably be top 10. So I'm thinking Hock in the #15-20 range and Fant in the #20-30 range.