2025 Draft Prospects for Packers

[OldSchool101]

Yeah Savage was a rare Gluten miss, although I recall Savage having a decent rookie year.

I don't know when to call a guy a bust. It's subjective and we all have different views. Savage is a bust to me because he never came close to plying like a 1st round pick, over the length of his rookie deal. It's a big investment in draft capital and time waiting to see if the guy shapes up. Savage never lived up to the minimum standard for JAG.

Yeah I think everyone has a slight variation from each other on what a “bust” is.
For myself it’s more value driven.
If you look at a draftek draft value chart. That #1 or #2, #3 selection is worth several later Day 1’s. Those guys better be animals and have a lengthy career. By the time we get to #21 overall group. Call it Savage or Haha Clinton Dix? I don’t weight those guys nearly as heavily. Both of those Safeties were over drafted a little, but both weren’t busts either. I’d put their actual production fitting into what I’d expect from that Rd2-3 (Top 50-75) selections.

I think people in general are too harsh as soon as the “1st Round” terminology comes into play. Yet a #32 overall pick holds 590 points and a #1 overall holds 3,000 points. Big Difference of 2,410 variance.

A top 50 selection is 500 draft points.
A top 100 selection is 100 points
A much more reasonable disparity of value.
That’s why I always point out that we’ve typically drafted in the later 80’s 90’s in Round 3. A Packers #92 overall (132 points) is 1/2 as likely to succeed as a #65 overall pick (265 points) by Chicago etc. both are Round 3 but it’s 1/2 the player success rates by historical evidence.

 

[PikeBadger]

Savage if he were a third rounder would be graded at worst a B+ pick now able to properly grade him as a pro. Stokes is that C but with an asterisk because of injury and I concur on Walker. If walker were a third he’d be an A+ but since he’s a first rounder and we are three years in I currently still see a lot of potential movement up or down by him but he’s level pick for me. It is not easy being a starter day one and while he has straight up sucked at times, he’s still done it.

I just don't think that Stokes has ever had any natural ball instincts or is a playmaker which is why I think guys like that should not be picked in the 1st round. Just a guy you get in the 4th or 5th round. Never a difference maker.

 

[tynimiller]

I just don't think that Stokes has ever had any natural ball instincts or is a playmaker which is why I think guys like that should not be picked in the 1st round. Just a guy you get in the 4th or 5th round. Never a difference maker.

It’s fair to say he isn’t a playmaker because he doesn’t make interceptions, he’s played very well of late. Not to the degree of his rookie year end performances but better.

I think we have at minimum one incoming FA minimum and I outside chance could say Gute might try swinging for two high picks. Maybe not two day 1s but with GB hosting and some awesome CBs, DLs and Edges in this draft if he can even at cost of next year draft get us to two in top 40 or so it would be a blast in GB

 

[DoURant]

I just don't think that Stokes has ever had any natural ball instincts or is a playmaker which is why I think guys like that should not be picked in the 1st round. Just a guy you get in the 4th or 5th round. Never a difference maker.

Spot on Pike, he hasn't had a pass breakup this year. No ball awareness whatsoever

 

[Heyjoe4]

It’s fair to say he isn’t a playmaker because he doesn’t make interceptions, he’s played very well of late. Not to the degree of his rookie year end performances but better.

I think we have at minimum one incoming FA minimum and I outside chance could say Gute might try swinging for two high picks. Maybe not two day 1s but with GB hosting and some awesome CBs, DLs and Edges in this draft if he can even at cost of next year draft get us to two in top 40 or so it would be a blast in GB

I agree Gluten should try and get a solid CB in FA, much as he did with McKinney last year at safety. They have the cap room.

It might be a good idea to get a WR as well. If Watson tore his ACL yesterday his 2025 season is mostly done. Tyreek Hill wants out of Miami but imo it would be a mistake to go after him. Too expensive and too old. Still a very good WR, but not at his current price.

 

[tynimiller]

I agree Gluten should try and get a solid CB in FA, much as he did with McKinney last year at safety. They have the cap room.

It might be a good idea to get a WR as well. If Watson tore his ACL yesterday his 2025 season is mostly done. Tyreek Hill wants out of Miami but imo it would be a mistake to go after him. Too expensive and too old. Still a very good WR, but not at his current price.

Our WR room is sufficient to handle if Watson is gone for a while BUT I do think a toss at a WR pick in the draft is likely where this last year I felt was borderline guaranteed to not happen. Wouldn’t be shocked if we add one

 

[Heyjoe4]

Our WR room is sufficient to handle if Watson is gone for a while BUT I do think a toss at a WR pick in the draft is likely where this last year I felt was borderline guaranteed to not happen. Wouldn’t be shocked if we add one

Yeah the greater need is certainly at CB. I don't know what the FA market looks like for WR. We'll also have to wait and see the nature of Watson's injury. It reminded me of the time Jordy Nelson blew his ACL out in a preseason game, non-contact. Hope it's not that.

 

[tynimiller]

Yeah the greater need is certainly at CB. I don't know what the FA market looks like for WR. We'll also have to wait and see the nature of Watson's injury. It reminded me of the time Jordy Nelson blew his ACL out in a preseason game, non-contact. Hope it's not that.

In truth the only veteran type WR I would listen to adding is a role type guy. I’ll get hung for saying this but MVS is a FA and if Watson is truly down adding back MVS to compliment Doubs, Reed, Kraft and Wicks.

 

[Heyjoe4]

In truth the only veteran type WR I would listen to adding is a role type guy. I’ll get hung for saying this but MVS is a FA and if Watson is truly down adding back MVS to compliment Doubs, Reed, Kraft and Wicks.

That's not a bad idea. MVS wouldn't cost much, he's still pretty fast, and the Packers still have a lot of good receivers.

I don't think lack of talent is a problem in GB. This team is more talented than last year's team. The problem is something deeper. In the last two games, the Packers just looked like they'd rather be somewhere else. I don't get it - both were important games.

So my expectations are pretty low for the game in Philly. I hope they prove me wrong.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I just don't think that Stokes has ever had any natural ball instincts or is a playmaker which is why I think guys like that should not be picked in the 1st round. Just a guy you get in the 4th or 5th round. Never a difference maker.

I think this is the risk you take when you use a high pick on a guy that played in a very successful college program. Sometimes the players/coaches/opponents around you, make you look better than you actually are.

Now I know, scouts probably take that into account and you probably aren't going to use a high pick on a D3 standout, but I think individual players can be over-valued when they are surrounded by a ton of talent.

The Packers have 4 players that played on a very successful Georgia Bulldog team. All 4 are defensive players and 3 were 1st round picks, with Bullard being a 2nd rounder.

Stokes (29th pick)

Walker (22nd pick)

Wyatt (28th pick)

Bullard (58th pick)

 

[DoURant]

It reminded me of the time Jordy Nelson blew his ACL out in a preseason game, non-contact. Hope it's not that.

Jordy was the first thing I thought of, when they showed it on replay.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Jordy was the first thing I thought of, when they showed it on replay.

Yeah and at least Jordy was playing on artificial turf, well I think so. I remember Rodgers was irate for risking his favorite target in a preseason game. He had a point.

My guess is that Watson is done in GB. I haven't heard anything definitive, but it's easy to see that this was an ACL injury. He was running straight and then buckled. He must have been planting his foot and his cleats dug in. Tragic stuff really. I like the guy and he's been plagued with injuries.

But best case would have him ready to play late October, and that's just not gonna work. I like the talent of the receiver group. Still, they need a true #1 WR. Just my opinion.

 

[PikeBadger]

It’s fair to say he isn’t a playmaker because he doesn’t make interceptions, he’s played very well of late. Not to the degree of his rookie year end performances but better.

I think we have at minimum one incoming FA minimum and I outside chance could say Gute might try swinging for two high picks. Maybe not two day 1s but with GB hosting and some awesome CBs, DLs and Edges in this draft if he can even at cost of next year draft get us to two in top 40 or so it would be a blast in GB

Playmaking also includes tackles for loss, forced fumbles, pbu's, blitzing, contribute on specials. Stokes checks none of those boxes. Ever. Both Nixon and Valentine do. Both bring far more value to the team than Stokes. He can adequately be replaced by just about anyone.

 

[PikeBadger]

I think this is the risk you take when you use a high pick on a guy that played in a very successful college program. Sometimes the players/coaches/opponents around you, make you look better than you actually are.

Now I know, scouts probably take that into account and you probably aren't going to use a high pick on a D3 standout, but I think individual players can be over-valued when they are surrounded by a ton of talent.

The Packers have 4 players that played on a very successful Georgia Bulldog team. All 4 are defensive players and 3 were 1st round picks, with Bullard being a 2nd rounder.

Stokes (29th pick)

Walker (22nd pick)

Wyatt (28th pick)

Bullard (58th pick)

Totally agree. I've always been very suspicious of Alabama and Georgia players. Most of them top out in college. Only the really big stars on those teams are worthy of taking a hard look at imo. They carry the rest of the team.

 

[tynimiller]

Playmaking also includes tackles for loss, forced fumbles, pbu's, blitzing, contribute on specials. Stokes checks none of those boxes. Ever. Both Nixon and Valentine do. Both bring far more value to the team than Stokes. He can adequately be replaced by just about anyone.

Eh likely any veteran that isn’t a Corey Ballantine or equivalent guy on rosters all over…Stokes is likely replaceable but I would never say by anyone especially how he’s been in coverage of late.

I actually wonder if Stokes won’t have a market and stays one year very low cost deal while GB also brings in two or three via FA and draft and if that pushes Stokes out so be it.

 

[milani]

I agree Gluten should try and get a solid CB in FA, much as he did with McKinney last year at safety. They have the cap room.

It might be a good idea to get a WR as well. If Watson tore his ACL yesterday his 2025 season is mostly done. Tyreek Hill wants out of Miami but imo it would be a mistake to go after him. Too expensive and too old. Still a very good WR, but not at his current price.

Hill would want to be the go to guy. Cannot blame him but the Packers appear to have a different culture now than in the Rodgers era.

 

[OldSchool101]

In truth the only veteran type WR I would listen to adding is a role type guy. I’ll get hung for saying this but MVS is a FA and if Watson is truly down adding back MVS to compliment Doubs, Reed, Kraft and Wicks.

Exactly what I was thinking. 3 Things. He’s acquainted with our System, he’s still playing at a high level and he recently signed a very reasonable contract (1X 1.1M). If he came back for anything under $2-3m I’d be elated.
The Packers still need a Bonafide #1. MVS and Watson play a specific role, but neither are that true #1. The frugal thing to do would be draft someone that’s not our usual project. I think you could find one at #22 or #54 overall etc in some capacity. I’ve always loved the slight move back such as #22 sliding back to #24-27 area which is gaining an extra pick in that later 3rd round neighborhood early 4th rounder. Then using a 3rd or 4th or 5th paired with a #54 (just projecting) in a slight trade up in RD2 if a WR we like falls outside a Top 40 overall selection.

 

[Schultz]

IMO a WR should not be taken until day 3. Too many actual holes need to be filled first.

 

[Magooch]

IMO a WR should not be taken until day 3. Too many actual holes need to be filled first.

I’m kind of back and forth on it. On one hand… yes, I do think we have more pressing draft needs. On the other hand… saying we can wait till round 2, 3, 4 or beyond to invest in a WR is probably a contributing factor to why we’re feeling like “we don’t have a true #1” in the first place. If you’re not going to go out and get a true blue chip guy then it’s probably not too surprising to be in the spot where we are: a lot of 2-4 WRs with no true “alpha” if you will.

Not saying we should make that big investment right now, but I guess what I’m getting at is that I can’t really reconcile being like “we need a #1 WR” with “let’s draft for our need at WR in the 2nd or 3rd round,” if you get me

 

[Schultz]

I’m kind of back and forth on it. On one hand… yes, I do think we have more pressing draft needs. On the other hand… saying we can wait till round 2, 3, 4 or beyond to invest in a WR is probably a contributing factor to why we’re feeling like “we don’t have a true #1” in the first place. If you’re not going to go out and get a true blue chip guy then it’s probably not too surprising to be in the spot where we are: a lot of 2-4 WRs with no true “alpha” if you will.

Not saying we should make that big investment right now, but I guess what I’m getting at is that I can’t really reconcile being like “we need a #1 WR” with “let’s draft for our need at WR in the 2nd or 3rd round,” if you get me

I get you, I just politely disagree. I also said day 3, so that means 4th round at the earliest. I loved DA, but this team is a little different. The TEs are threats so I believe that an alpha WR is a lower priority.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Playmaking also includes tackles for loss, forced fumbles, pbu's, blitzing, contribute on specials. Stokes checks none of those boxes. Ever. Both Nixon and Valentine do. Both bring far more value to the team than Stokes. He can adequately be replaced by just about anyone.

He had a good, promising rookie year. Since then, Stokes has been a) injured or b) JAG when he plays. You point out he doesn't contribute in any other areas.

I feel bad for the guy, injuries can derail a great career. It's just time to find a better CB. I'm certain Gluten will go all in during the offseason to fix that, ideally as well as he addressed safety this year.

I'd like Stokes to reach the potential he showed as a rookie. It's just time for the Packers to move on.

 

[tynimiller]

IMO a WR should not be taken until day 3. Too many actual holes need to be filled first.

This is my current mindset as well. Only two scenarios do I actually think Gute grabs one:

1 - He does some trading and ends up with two third round picks type scenario.
2 - A guy drops beyond what he and the his scouts can believe and its a position where BPA trumps best player available at a position of need.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I get you, I just politely disagree. I also said day 3, so that means 4th round at the earliest. I loved DA, but this team is a little different. The TEs are threats so I believe that an alpha WR is a lower priority.

Interesting discussion. I side with Magooch on this one - that is, GB needs a real #1 WR. Going forward, the top receivers look like Reed, Doubs, Kraft, and one of Heath/Wicks/Melton - I'm missing someone I think......

I don't believe Watson will be back. If Watson had avoided that ACL tear, then I'm with you Schultz. But they need a go-to WR and they don't have one. FA is the best bet.

And now Tyreek Hill wants out of Miami. The Packers are $60 mil under cap, I think. When I first heard about Hill I dismissed it. It would require a) significant draft capital and b) a lot of money. Even so, this is a talented team. Hill would make the offense damn-near complete.

The draft is an option, but there's never a "can't miss" guy in the draft. Hill is a different story. I'd have to know more about a potential deal, but it's worth looking into. Hill has some baggage, and may not want to play in GB, but if he could get a ring? Just something to think about.

(And please don't shoot the messenger here. This is a rumor about Hill and I thought it would be interesting to get opinions.)

 

[Heyjoe4]

Hill would want to be the go to guy. Cannot blame him but the Packers appear to have a different culture now than in the Rodgers era.

Yeah good point. GB successfully closed the door on the Rodgers' drama. Better to keep it this way.

 

[tynimiller]

Interesting discussion. I side with Magooch on this one - that is, GB needs a real #1 WR. Going forward, the top receivers look like Reed, Doubs, Kraft, and one of Heath/Wicks/Melton - I'm missing someone I think......

I don't believe Watson will be back. If Watson had avoided that ACL tear, then I'm with you Schultz. But they need a go-to WR and they don't have one. FA is the best bet.

And now Tyreek Hill wants out of Miami. The Packers are $60 mil under cap, I think. When I first heard about Hill I dismissed it. It would require a) significant draft capital and b) a lot of money. Even so, this is a talented team. Hill would make the offense damn-near complete.

The draft is an option, but there's never a "can't miss" guy in the draft. Hill is a different story. I'd have to know more about a potential deal, but it's worth looking into. Hill has some baggage, and may not want to play in GB, but if he could get a ring? Just something to think about.

One thing to remember, once you factor in resignings, extensions and draft class....many esitmate GB has somewhere around $25M.

Now that is of course also without veteran restructures, cuts or trades.


The discussion of having that alpha WR is one many of us have had and it is truly an interesting one. The issue often times is that with that alpha guy comes an alpha **** to be honest. GB has been crazy lucky that most of our alphas over the years were grade A humans or were not the problem children like some are (Driver, Jennings, Nelson, Adams)....I would want NO PART OF Tyreek Hill - not even answering a phone call from his agent.


The thing I think so many forget is teams year in and year out illustrate that you don't need that alpha dog WR to succeed and see success. Shoot...Kansas City does it often. This year their leading receiver is Kelce and he only produced 823 yards and 3 TDs. Jayden Reed even with all his DROPS and non production of late had 857 yards and 6 TDs. Chiefs second leading receiver was Worthy with 638 yards and 6 TDs...ours Tucker Kraft for 707 yards and 7 TDs.

Production is all that matters. Ravens another favorite to go deep in playoffs with the Chiefs, barely had a 1,000 yard receiver in Zay Flowers putting up 1059 and 4 TDs...their second leader was Bateman with 756 and 9 TDs. Their top two produced 1,815 yards and 13 TDs....our top two produced 1564 yards and 13 TDs.

The production is there. I don't want the organization to feel a conversation with a high level WR needs to happen...not when one of your most productive per game guy in Doubs missed a handful of games and still put up 600 yards and 4 TDs AND if this team just drops HALF the amount of balls everyone's numbers bump a TON.

I see a much bigger need to "force" something if we must at CB or even EDGE