Packers 2022 NFL Draft Discussion

[CheeseheadInQC]

The whole Packers haven’t drafted a first round receiver in 20 years criticism has to be among the laziest of the lazy takes that proliferates around draft time. 1. They had so much success in rounds 2 and 3 early in Thompson’s tenure they didn’t need to. 2. Setting aside the Love pick (which no one can) pretty much every case even in retrospect of “I wish we had picked a receiver there” involves a second or third round pick. Kupp or Godwin over Jones, Gallup over Jackson, McLaurin or Renfrow over Sternberger, Davis over DeGuara or the wrong receiver last year (St. Brown). Maybe you could make a Deebo over Savage case, but even then it isn’t like Savage has been a bad pick.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I love the direction they are going. Just overload on premium defensive talent. Rodgers is year to year, so having a great defense if and when he chooses to go away is the best thing they can do.  And if he is this incredible QB (he is) he doesn't need Davante Adams to win. They definitely need to bring in at least 1 WR from some place, but both picks are exactly what I was hoping to see them do with two first rounders. Anything else in the draft is gravy, I am just elated they used both premium picks on impact defensive players.

[NBBrewFan]

3 minutes ago, CheeseheadInQC said:

The whole Packers haven’t drafted a first round receiver in 20 years criticism has to be among the laziest of the lazy takes that proliferates around draft time. 

Excellent summation. Your first sentence got me thinking (WALTERFOOTBALL), because in my opinion, they have some of the laziest of lazy takes and here's the piece de resistance of their grade:

I don't know how the Packers could spend a first-round pick on someone

who could easily be suspended repeatedly throughout his career.

 

[Sixtolezcano]

As “Ask Vic” has always stated “wide receivers are a dime a dozen”. 

[CheeseheadInQC]

9 minutes ago, NBBrewFan said:

Excellent summation. Your first sentence got me thinking (WALTERFOOTBALL), because in my opinion, they have some of the laziest of lazy takes and here's the piece de resistance of their grade:

I don't know how the Packers could spend a first-round pick on someone

who could easily be suspended repeatedly throughout his career.

 

Yah, that site has its pluses (agree or disagree with their depth chart analysis, they attempt a deeper dive into team needs than most), but things like nuance have never been among them.

[homer]

Plenty of people would have been fine with the Packers reaching for a guy like Skyy Moore at 28. That's just a dumb way to draft. If you want to complain that they had capital and didn't move up that's a legit point to make but to just complain they didn't take a wide receiver at 22 or 28 is silly.

[NBBrewFan]

The 30 year narrative that the Packers have been Lucky to have back-to-back HOF Quarterbacks has morphed into the only reason the Packers have been successful over that time. It ignores the mounds of data that even a team with a HOF-caliber QB doesn't have extended success without finding the best 21/52 other players.  I think there's just a huge and clueless POV that the Packers have a poor front office that is saved by their HOF QB. Outside of the TT Dementia drafts this team for 30 years has had smart people running the draft, player development and roster construction who know that a stable of elite WR doesn't win you much when your OL couldn't stop a turtle and your DL couldn't pressure the same turtle playing both ways. 

[Joseph Zarr]

 

[Joseph Zarr]

 

(For those of you unfamiliar with Owen, he is a Packer fan and analyst and was hired on as a Scouting Assistant by the East/West Shrine Bowl summer of 2021.)

If you click the link there are a good 6-8 clips to peruse.

[homer]

1 hour ago, NBBrewFan said:

The 30 year narrative that the Packers have been Lucky to have back-to-back HOF Quarterbacks has morphed into the only reason the Packers have been successful over that time. It ignores the mounds of data that even a team with a HOF-caliber QB doesn't have extended success without finding the best 21/52 other players.  I think there's just a huge and clueless POV that the Packers have a poor front office that is saved by their HOF QB. Outside of the TT Dementia drafts this team for 30 years has had smart people running the draft, player development and roster construction who know that a stable of elite WR doesn't win you much when your OL couldn't stop a turtle and your DL couldn't pressure the same turtle playing both ways. 

To be fair though, they were restocking the cupboard before it was bare.  And their hit rate on wide receivers was ridiculous.

[patrickgpe]

In my youth, i would read everyones draft grades and be upset if the packers were graded low. In my older age, i still read some grades but i take it with  grain of salt. They are put out by people that if they are wrong there is no consequences (except maybe they lose a few readers). Gutey if he misses, he could be fired. Clearly he thought Walker and Wyatt are better players than Walter and PFF. I am happy they didn't reach for a WR or overpay with extra draft capital to move up just to appease the masses. 

[areacodes]

What would we need to package with #59 to move up into the late 30’s/early 40’s?

[PeaveyFury]

4 minutes ago, areacodes said:

What would we need to package with #59 to move up into the late 30’s/early 40’s?

59 plus the 3rd and first of the 4ths (132) gets you to 39. Do the 2nd fourth instead, and you're at 40.

[reillymcshane]

Positional need is always a huge factor. But for the most part, stick with your board. The Packers did that - and I'm happy they did so. 

They investigated moving up, but didn't like the price. Again, that's smart. 

And let's point out - for everyone saying we need a WR, well, we also needed a DL and a LB. Having Adams and MVS didn't stop the 49ers from ramming the football down our throats a few years ago. 

Also, it's not like the draft is done. There are some good looking players on the board. 

 

[PeaveyFury]

Just a few more trade chart hypotheticals for tonight:

Both fourths get you an extra third, at about pick 99/100.

53 + 171 (fifth) moves you up a couple of spots. 59 plus the 5th gets you to 56.

If you're like me and believe one of the 4ths is a goner, 53+ a fourth gets you to 47/48. 59+ gets you to 52/54.

[PeaveyFury]

If you want to see ultra-clueless, check out a lot of today's re-mocks that are now force-feeding WRs to the Packers in the 2nd. I don't mean 'Pickens slides and the Packers take him' stuff, I mean like out there stuff like Khalil Shakir to them at 53. At some point they'll realize that they're more likely to double-dip at IDL than to reach for a WR just to take one.

[NBBrewFan]

13 minutes ago, PeaveyFury said:

Just a few more trade chart hypotheticals for tonight:

Both fourths get you an extra third, at about pick 99/100.

53 + 171 (fifth) moves you up a couple of spots. 59 plus the 5th gets you to 56.

If you're like me and believe one of the 4ths is a goner, 53+ a fourth gets you to 47/48. 59+ gets you to 52/54.

Well if there is a run on the 5-6 WR I think have Round 2 grades before the 47/48 picks then there has been a TON of talent left on the board which the Packers should feast on either by trading up to 47/48 (53+4th) or get at 53/59.  At some point teams will need to move vets that they can't afford or want to keep all of the 1st/2nd round receivers and Gute can make a trade.  They also could pivot to a TE like McBride at 59.

Pretty much a deja vu of last night, let the other teams overdraft WR then get the cream of the dropping/overlooked crop.  Value Value Value.

With the Defense the Packers are putting together, many teams might need 2 WR#1 to even have a chance.

[reillymcshane]

I'm sort of fascinated by TE Greg Dulcich of UCLA. Guy isn't a blocker, but he could be special as a receiver. Rodgers seems to love TEs who can catch. Dulcich would qualify as such. Probably a round 3 pick - but I doubt he drops to us at #92. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

If GB wants to target a WR in round 2, they have plenty of ammo to package one of their 2nds + a mid/late round pick to move up and get their guy at the start of another run at that position.

Without even looking at who's left on the board and current draft order for round 2, I'd expect the Packers to go receiver and O-line/TE with their two 2nds and then BPA left on their board with their 3rd round pick - assuming none are used as part of a trade.  However, there are some very intriguing edge/OLB options that will likely be available at 53 if the Packers have them rated super high and just want to troll Twitter with another defensive front 7 pick.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

What really sucked about last season vs. other flame outs was that the team was REALLY good. It is just still such a shame they not only couldn't finish, but went out so sheepishly. It's one of the reasons I'm over the moon about the two guys they added. They usually lose by way of some glaring hole you can see all season long. I don't know what happened that night, but it just wasn't the same team that played all year (well, other than the ST). I'm so stoked to see what they can do defensively.

[young guns]

1 hour ago, PeaveyFury said:

59 plus the 3rd and first of the 4ths (132) gets you to 39. Do the 2nd fourth instead, and you're at 40.

Using this as a spring board, say you had an agreement in place with the owner of 39 for this deal as long as your guy is still there, which of the receivers would you do this deal for? If none of them at this spot, where you would be aiming to get your top second round receiver?

 

This question is for any of the guys here who dig into the draft deep.  Just curious who I can get my hopes up for(so they can be dashed to pieces lol)

[patrickgpe]

My top 3 is

1) Pickens

2) Watson

3) Pierce

[LouisEly]

I don't like the idea of trading three picks for one player. 

#53 + #132 gets to #47

#53 + #93 gets to #40

So many teams grabbed WRs yesterday (draft or trade) that there can't be that much demand left in round 2.  I think they can get Pierce or Pickens (given his incident this weekend) at #47, probably #53.

Speaking of Pickens and Pierce, I just found out about the incident with Pickens in a teammates car at 4am this past Sunday.  Part of me wants to swap out Pierce for Pickens at #53, part of me thinks that by having Wyatt, Walker, and Stokes on the team those three can reel in Pickens as he will trust them.

[PeaveyFury]

As today has gone on, I personally am down on trading 92 as I see it as an opportunity to grab one of the TEs like Ruckert or a safety that is likely to be there, and possibly a WR like Tolbert. I think they’ll move a fourth for sure, but I’m kind of liking the idea of moving into the 40s with one or moving into the high 3rd by packaging 92+ one to go up and get someone but still making 3 picks today.

[nate82]

Draft grades are all nearly based on the player ranking and not based on team needs or fits on the team.

The grades are rather useless really as they don’t really say all that much after the first 5 or 10 picks in the draft.