Green Bay Draft: What non-traditional 1st round pick would you accept?

[CheezWizHed]

The Packers have been mocked to every ILB, WR, and OT that are expected to be available at the end of the 1st round. But every here and there I see snips about other "non-need" players going to the Pack at #30.

 

So barring a surprising drop of someone and assuming we don't draft an ILB, WR, or OT, what player would you be happy drafting?

 

I'd say anyone listed outside the top 20 is fair game for consideration. I'd be ecstatic to get Chase Young, but that isn't happening.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Defensive line really hasn't been talked about as a huge need, but are they really going to go into this season with Tyler Lancaster as one of their starters again? It wouldn't surprise me to see then grab a 3-4 DE early on.

 

Javon Kinlaw (DE, South Carolina) - He probably won't last, but I've seen him drop in a few mocks.

Marlon Davidson (DE, Auburn) - He might be there, and would be a good fit as long as he can stick at DE and wouldn't have to move to OLB in the Packers' system.

Raekwon Davis (DE, Alabama) - Just a huge dude that would be a nice fit at DE. Freaky good athlete for this size. He's be a bit of a reach at #30, but it wouldn't surprise me.

[CheezWizHed]

For myself, I'd say the pickings are really thin. The homer side of my loves Taylor, but I don't think I'd like him as our 1st round pick. I expected there to be a decent CB or DT to pick, but that cupboard is really bare too (at least at the end of the 1st round).

 

I guess I'd only say if a QB falls that we really think is BPA, I'd be ok with that. I really wasn't impressed by much else.

 

But on the flip side, it is really (pleasantly) surprising at how many late round 1 OT/WRs are listed there.

[nodakfan17]

Highest possible round I’d take a QB:

 

1) Justin Herbert

2) Jordan Love

3) Jacob Eason, Jake Fromm, Jalen Hurts

 

(would prefer Round 4 for that last tier)

 

* no chance Burrow or Tua fall to 30

[lcbj68c]

I've resigned myself to the notion that they'll take the 3rd best remaining interior 1-technique DT in the first round. In that way, I'll be satisfied if they do anything besides that and Long Snapper.

[nodakfan17]

I've resigned myself to the notion that they'll take the 3rd best remaining interior 1-technique DT in the first round.

 

* who is slightly undersized and made a position switch in college

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I've resigned myself to the notion that they'll take the 3rd best remaining interior 1-technique DT in the first round.

 

* who is slightly undersized and made a position switch in college

 

Ugh ... that is the one thing that they always seem to do that I'm so sick of. Jamal Reynolds, Nick Perry, Datone Jones, Rashan Gary ... even Mike Neal. They keep drafting these undersized college DEs and try to turn them into top-flight OLB/Edge rushers. It never works. Just stop it! These college DEs just aren't big enough to power past NFL tackles, and aren't fast/athletic enough to get around them. It's like they never learn, though. Enough already!

 

I say this while still having some hope for Gary.

[PeaveyFury]

I want Murray in the worst way, which means he'll go off the board in the teens. Beyond him, I'm hoping one of the elite WR's (both of the Alabama guys & Jefferson) fall enough to either plausibly make it to 30, or make a small trade-up possible without destroying their draft capital. Absent that, I want a small trade back to grab an extra 3rd, which I wouldn't mind them using on Frohm, Hurts, etc.

 

Seems like Jefferson is the guy that COULD be there in the 20s, and I'd be very interested. I want to stay away from Mims, who has projections all over the board and worries me. I'm also incredibly down on Austin Jackson.

 

I think Xavier McKinney would possibly fit the theme of this thread best, though. He's a slot cover guy when Savage and Amos are on the field, and great safety depth otherwise.

[wallus]

Not that I want them to continue to spend a lot of draft capital on the position but I could live with a CB if he is a stud.

[LouisEly]

I've resigned myself to the notion that they'll take the 3rd best remaining interior 1-technique DT in the first round.

 

* who is slightly undersized and made a position switch in college

 

Ugh ... that is the one thing that they always seem to do that I'm so sick of. Jamal Reynolds, Nick Perry, Datone Jones, Rashan Gary ... even Mike Neal. They keep drafting these undersized college DEs and try to turn them into top-flight OLB/Edge rushers. It never works. Just stop it! These college DEs just aren't big enough to power past NFL tackles, and aren't fast/athletic enough to get around them. It's like they never learn, though. Enough already!

 

I say this while still having some hope for Gary.

A 1-technique is a nose tackle - he lines up over the center. 3-technique is over a guard, typically a DT in a 4-3. A 5-technique lines up across from a tackle, typically a 3-4 DE, a 7-technique over the TE or well outside the tackle, typically a 4-3 DE.

 

As for undersized interior DL, Aaron Donald is a guy I wanted coming out of college and would be nothing short of ecstatic to get at #30. The next Mike Daniels wouldn't be a bad pick at #30 either.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

A 1-technique is a nose tackle - he lines up over the center. 3-technique is over a guard, typically a DT in a 4-3. A 5-technique lines up across from a tackle, typically a 3-4 DE, a 7-technique over the TE or well outside the tackle, typically a 4-3 DE.

 

As for undersized interior DL, Aaron Donald is a guy I wanted coming out of college and would be nothing short of ecstatic to get at #30. The next Mike Daniels wouldn't be a bad pick at #30 either.

 

I know. Perhaps that was the wrong post to reply to to complain about the Packers' propensity for drafting undersized college DEs and moving them to OLB.

[nodakfan17]

A 1-technique is a nose tackle - he lines up over the center. 3-technique is over a guard, typically a DT in a 4-3. A 5-technique lines up across from a tackle, typically a 3-4 DE, a 7-technique over the TE or well outside the tackle, typically a 4-3 DE.

 

As for undersized interior DL, Aaron Donald is a guy I wanted coming out of college and would be nothing short of ecstatic to get at #30. The next Mike Daniels wouldn't be a bad pick at #30 either.

 

I know. Perhaps that was the wrong post to reply to to complain about the Packers' propensity for drafting undersized college DEs and moving them to OLB.

I don’t think there’s a wrong place to complain. It’s been a huge problem for the Packers.

[LouisEly]

I know. Perhaps that was the wrong post to reply to to complain about the Packers' propensity for drafting undersized college DEs and moving them to OLB.

Not technically correct with Jones and Neal - they both played DL their first three years before being tried at OLB.

 

Neal measured at 6'3", 294 at the combine and was drafted to play DE. He was a bit of a workout warrior, running an impressive 4.87 for a 290lb DL. It was thought that losing weight (and not training so hard to sustain muscle mass and strength) would help with his propensity to get injured.

 

For Jones, the move to OLB was a last-ditch effort after being unable to crack the starting lineup (and gain the necessary strength and weight) for three years. There was no plan when drafting him to move him to OLB.

 

The Packers ran a 4-3 in 2001 when they drafted Reynolds - he wasn't an OLB.

[brewcrewdue80]

I guess Id have to say LB Zach Baun. Wisconsin ties, so I could accept the pick. Ive seen Baun mocked often either just before GBs pick til about top 6 picks in 2nd round. LB is a need to replace Martinez and Baun leaves the feeling of being that replica. But that doesnt fit the OP.

 

So Id have to say Safety. Generally that is either your #1 or 2 captain on defense with whomever is your LB leader. Maybe you make it happen with the idea to trade Amos for a draft pick? Might not happen this year but next off-season? CBS sports has Xavier Mckinney and Grant Delpit inside their top 30. That would be a value pick if dropped to #30. McKinney especially. The old BPA adage could apply.

[LouisEly]

To answer the original question, quarterback.

 

They've done it before, and it worked out really well.

[nodakfan17]

To answer the original question, quarterback.

 

They've done it before, and it worked out really well.

 

I agree with the premise that ‘GMs shouldn’t pass on a Rodgers because they have a Favre,’ but this time around, the QB isn’t waffling on retirement every year. If a guy who the Packers felt had franchise QB potential falls to 30, I hope they trade back and acquire surplus value for the pick. But if they can’t trade back? I’d take him.

[OldHeidelberg]

To answer the original question, quarterback.

 

They've done it before, and it worked out really well.

 

I am in the camp that you should always take the QB if he is the clear BPA. It's such am important position that there is nothing wrong with having a quality starter o the bench for a few years. If the guy blows everyone away in his first couple of camps and pushes Rodgers it's a good problem to have.

 

I remember reading TT was really high on Vince Young the year we drafted Hawk, the year AFTER he picked Rodgers. Favre would have lost his freaking mind.

[CheezWizHed]

To answer the original question, quarterback.

 

They've done it before, and it worked out really well.

 

I agree with the premise that ‘GMs shouldn’t pass on a Rodgers because they have a Favre,’ but this time around, the QB isn’t waffling on retirement every year. If a guy who the Packers felt had franchise QB potential falls to 30, I hope they trade back and acquire surplus value for the pick. But if they can’t trade back? I’d take him.

 

Favre wasn't really waffling when they drafted Rodgers. He was waffling when they drafted Brohm and Flynn.

 

Rodgers is showing some signs of age, so having a good backup and a QB developing for a year or two is a great idea. And if a franchise QB falls, you have to take him. If you don't think he is a franchise QB and someone else does, you pick their pockets in a trade down.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

The Packers ran a 4-3 in 2001 when they drafted Reynolds - he wasn't an OLB.

 

To be fair, Reynolds wasn't a DE either.

[PeaveyFury]

 

The Packers ran a 4-3 in 2001 when they drafted Reynolds - he wasn't an OLB.

 

To be fair, Reynolds wasn't a DE either.

 

Yeah, I think that was the bigger problem with Reynolds. Forced into a 4-3 DE role, and not sized for it at all.

[LouisEly]

 

The Packers ran a 4-3 in 2001 when they drafted Reynolds - he wasn't an OLB.

 

To be fair, Reynolds wasn't a DE either.

 

Yeah, I think that was the bigger problem with Reynolds. Forced into a 4-3 DE role, and not sized for it at all.

For a 4-3, there's a strong-side DE who is a 5/6 technique who usually is larger (think Vonnie Holliday), and there is a weak-side DE who usually is a 7-technique who usually is smaller (think Robert Quinn, who is listed at 6'4", 257, or Chandler Jones, who is 6'5", 265, or Danielle Hunter, who is 6'5", 255).

 

He's not small for the weak-side 7-technique DE, which is what he was drafted for.

[adambr2]

To answer the original question, quarterback.

 

They've done it before, and it worked out really well.

 

I agree with the premise that ‘GMs shouldn’t pass on a Rodgers because they have a Favre,’ but this time around, the QB isn’t waffling on retirement every year. If a guy who the Packers felt had franchise QB potential falls to 30, I hope they trade back and acquire surplus value for the pick. But if they can’t trade back? I’d take him.

 

Favre wasn't really waffling when they drafted Rodgers. He was waffling when they drafted Brohm and Flynn.

 

Favre had already retired from the Packers before they even drafted Brohm or Flynn. He waffled after Rodgers' rookie season in 2005, then again after the 2006 season before finally retiring after 2007.

[PeaveyFury]

 

To be fair, Reynolds wasn't a DE either.

 

Yeah, I think that was the bigger problem with Reynolds. Forced into a 4-3 DE role, and not sized for it at all.

For a 4-3, there's a strong-side DE who is a 5/6 technique who usually is larger (think Vonnie Holliday), and there is a weak-side DE who usually is a 7-technique who usually is smaller (think Robert Quinn, who is listed at 6'4", 257, or Chandler Jones, who is 6'5", 265, or Danielle Hunter, who is 6'5", 255).

 

He's not small for the weak-side 7-technique DE, which is what he was drafted for.

 

Problem was, they already had that guy on the roster in Kabeer. What they actually needed was the 5/6 guy to replace Vonnie Holliday, who left after the 2002 season. Add in an Aaron Kampman in the 02 draft, and Reynolds was swept away by a field of more productive 260 pounders.

[patrickgpe]

I'm assuming by traditional you mean; ILB, WR, or OT?

 

I obviously have had more time to review some mock drafts and simulations and have seem quite regularly that the ones in those positions I like are gone.

so i'd accept Baun, Epenesa, Ruiz, Taylor, AJ Terrell, or Shane Lemiuex - they should all be available at 30 or taken just before the packers pick.

[CheezWizHed]

Favre wasn't really waffling when they drafted Rodgers. He was waffling when they drafted Brohm and Flynn.

 

Favre had already retired from the Packers before they even drafted Brohm or Flynn. He waffled after Rodgers' rookie season in 2005, then again after the 2006 season before finally retiring after 2007.

 

He never retired after the 2007 season. He had talked about it from 2006-2007, but it was normally right after the previous season ended and he wanted to play after a month or two off.

 

In the offseason of 2008, He talked about it pretty seriously... on and off and on and off. After the 2008 draft, where they drafted 2 backup QBs to Rodgers, he proclaimed he still wanted to play. So they traded him to the Jets.

 

He didn't retire until 2010.