Draft Tactics (Needs vs trades)

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's just surprising many here still don't value the importance of a edge rusher...when we have seen and will see what difference Mack has been. He single handedly has elevated a good defence to great. Many here even wanted us to buy Mack, so what has changed now?

I agree, although I would have been against paying the price to get Mack. The Packers seem to have needed a decent edge rusher for a few years now, yet after he didn't resign Peppers, TT sat on his hands and Gute did the same, both apparently thinking Matthews and Perry were enough. Even if both of those guys are back in Green Bay next year, this is the year to finally go all in on the position during the draft by using one high pick and a few mid to late round picks. Sure, Gute could go after one of the top FA Edge guys, but right now, nobody on that list is really jumping out at me, especially when I factor in the salary they will command.

 

[XPack]

We need to get to good before we need a single player to put us over the top to great and to incur the cost of said player.

I think our D is good. We've made leaps and strides since Capers and we probably are 2 or 3 players short of great. Breeland and maybe another veteran CB plus a edge rusher should elevate us to Top 10 in the league and I really can't see the new HC firing Pettine. There really are not that many upgrades to DC available out there.

I agree, although I would have been against paying the price to get Mack. The Packers seem to have needed a decent edge rusher for a few years now, yet after he didn't resign Peppers, TT sat on his hands and Gute did the same, both apparently thinking Matthews and Perry were enough. Even if both of those guys are back in Green Bay next year, this is the year to finally go all in on the position during the draft by using one high pick and a few mid to late round picks. Sure, Gute could go after one of the top FA Edge guys, but right now, nobody on that list is really jumping out at me, especially when I factor in the salary they will command.

Problem with TT is always about playing it safe and he took it to ridiculous lengths. At some point we need to take a risk or two. Gute's choices have been a step in right direction, but even then we have picked players who are right on edge of their peak and on way down (Jimmy G types). I'd be happy for him to risk a bit more and pick a young player who is on the edge of peak on the way up. Someone who we can trust for 3 years minimum to deliver at high levels.

 

[Mondio]

It's just surprising many here still don't value the importance of a edge rusher...when we have seen and will see what difference Mack has been. He single handedly has elevated a good defence to great. Many here even wanted us to buy Mack, so what has changed now?

I value you them, I'd love 2 of them. I think even a rookie level Clay Matthews makes us a lot better next year. I'm just pointing out that I'm not married to the idea of needing to make that position our first pick. I think if quality guys are there, that will be our pick. But how the draft falls and FA will have an impact on that.

 

[HardRightEdge]

[Mack] single handedly has elevated a good defence to great. Many here even wanted us to buy Mack, so what has changed now?

I was not one of those many, but what has changed is the perception at the start of this season that the Packers were a playoff team that Mack could put over the top. I don't think that perspective is so prevalent today.

Had the Packers signed Mack to a deal comparable to the Bears, the Packers would now be cap strapped and missing those top picks needed to reload.

"Reload" is the term Gutekunst has used, not "rebuild". That may or may not be a distinction without a difference but we do know using the latter term would freak people out.

 

[easyk83]

6th best edge rusher? yikes. not good. i read a thing today that projected us taking that safety. i'd rather have the best safety than the 6th best pass rusher.

Agreed, thing is that if we picked up a true centerfielder we could move Josh Jones up to the line and play him exclusively as an in the box safety. He's looked like a beast up there and IMO he's the kind of player who could be a star in Pettine's defense, just dont expect him to play Cover 2 at a high level. Simplify things for him and use him to attack the edges of an offense with speed and physicality and he can really cause some havoc. That's one pick that would completely stabilize the back end of the defense and IMO would probably lead to more sacks just by virtue of being able to clog up the short to intermediate routes.

 

[PackAttack12]

Above all, the Packers need more impact players. Regardless of what position that impact player occupies.

 

[AmishMafia]

Everyone wants edge rushers. That's why Mack got the contract he did.

As for trading for the #1 pick, I sure as heck don't want the Packers trading both 1st picks, a 2nd and more to move up to #1.

Go back and look at the drafts the last 8 years. Probably an average of 2-3 DE/LBs taken in the top 15. Most mocks this year have 3 or 4 gone in the top 15.

I would do it in a heartbeat. It would cost us much more than that.

As far as OLBs go, we should only look at these 4: Bosa, Josh Allen, Clellin Farell, and Sweat with our top pick. At OT, the only one I am looking at with the top pick is Jawaan Taylor, but I expect him to be over drafted and gone before we pick.

For DE, there is 4 or 5 who make sense. William's, Brown, and Simmons are probably gone. Then between Gary or Davis, one could be there. I would rather grab Tillery with our 2nd 1st.

 

[HardRightEdge]

As I mentioned some weeks ago, the Rams defense has been pretty ordinary despite Donald being a generational player who leads the league in sacks and is probably going to be the DPOY. The Rams defense has given up gobs of points to teams with winning records, the less than prolific Bears offense being an exception, a game they lost anyway.

How about KC?

• Chris Jones: 15.5 sacks, PFF grade 87.8
• Dee Ford: 12 sacks, PFF grade 90.4
• Justin Houston: missed 4 games in the middle of the season, has been coming on with 4.5 sacks and 2 forced fumbles in the last 5 games, 7.5 sacks for the season, PFF grade 84.0

They can't keep decent teams (and some less than decent teams) off the scoreboard. The Chiefs also put in a claim on Swearinger in a last ditch effort to shore up the back end.

It's one thing to say the Bears had an outstanding defense to start with, then Mack elevated it to one that carries the team. It's another thing with these other examples.

Is the Packer defense a good one that's just one high priced edge rusher away from being at least "very good"? I'm not seeing that. If one must take the plunge, for gosh sakes don't trade picks for one and don't pay a little less money for some aging star. If you're going to do it, do it right, and pay the money for a second contract rising star and hope he doesn't tank with all that singing bonus money in his pocket.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I would do it in a heartbeat. It would cost us much more than that.

I too would trade the #15 and #32 and # 47 for the #1 pick in the draft. According to the JJ draft chart, those three picks = 2120 points, positioned between the #3 and #4 picks, compared to 3000 points for the #1.

I'd then trade the #1 for better picks than I started with. That might require taking a 2020 first rouner in the package which would also yield higher total value. I'd be OK with that as part of a two year plan.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Above all, the Packers need more impact players. Regardless of what position that impact player occupies.

I would not go that far, but pretty close.

 

[OldSchool101]

IMO it might be wise to avoid putting all our eggs in one basket. Trading for the #1 pick never follows the draft calculator and can put an unusual amount of collateral at risk. However, that said, we don’t necessarily need to stand pat either.

As an example and just some ideas we could trade #14 + #46 (and do the opposite of last year) and move up into the top 8-9 overall. That would still allow us two 5th year day 1 options which I’d personally prefer not to give up. Then to compensate for the loss of our 2nd round pick, package our 3rd #78, one 4th #111, and one 5th #142 to move into the back of round 2 again.

We’d still have the normal 7 picks but it would look something like this..
# 8 overall (5th year option)
#31 overall (5th year option)
#61 overall (2nd day pick)
#110 overall
Leaving 2 Sixth rounders and 1 seventh rounder to fill out depth. That also gives us a realistic chance of landing 3 starters from our first 4 choices.


I like this because it gets us really involved in sniffing out that dynamic player at the top with ongoing positioning (think 2018 Buffalo strategy) but without sacrificing a second presumed starter late first round. By doing this, we also could consider throwing in a future 2020 2nd rounder to get into the top 6-7 overall and lock our guy if he slips out of that top 5. Again it would shift our resources slightly forward and infuse some much needed talent now rather than later, all the while holding onto 3 first and second day picks.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Suggs is 36 and I don't think Ravens will tag him. He may be on the lookout for a cheap-ish 1 year contract.

The Packers should definitely go younger and not use any cap space on an over the hill free agent.

after a year in which we had an aging Matthews and Fackrell as our starting OLB's and still managed to be near the top of the league in sacks, i'm not so sure OLB is a given with the first pick when we have as big of needs on the offensive line, defensive line, safety and both linebacking positions.

While the Packers surprisingly rank at the top of the league in total sacks they need to improve their pass rush as they didn't put consistent pressure on opposing quarterbacks though.

 

[Mondio]

consistent pressure is a problem, no doubt about that. But it seems a trend is to be able to bring pressure in specific situations in the NFL as being more important these days. Ideally, I'd love the front 3 to push that pocket like crazy and have the OLB's be a wrecking crew from the outside. I'm just afraid that if the team marries itself to needing an OLB and there is only so so there when we pick, I'd rather have so many other prospects at OL, DL, DB/Safety if they feel they are true 1st round talent then just taking the best of what's left at OLB. and that all depends on what happens with the coaches. Too many moving parts to have a good idea of where we're going at this point

 

[Deleted member 6794]

consistent pressure is a problem, no doubt about that. But it seems a trend is to be able to bring pressure in specific situations in the NFL as being more important these days. Ideally, I'd love the front 3 to push that pocket like crazy and have the OLB's be a wrecking crew from the outside. I'm just afraid that if the team marries itself to needing an OLB and there is only so so there when we pick, I'd rather have so many other prospects at OL, DL, DB/Safety if they feel they are true 1st round talent then just taking the best of what's left at OLB. and that all depends on what happens with the coaches. Too many moving parts to have a good idea of where we're going at this point

I definitely agree there's no reason for the Packers to enter the draft solely being focused on drafting an edge rusher with the first selection.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I would do it in a heartbeat. It would cost us much more than that.

As far as OLBs go, we should only look at these 4: Bosa, Josh Allen, Clellin Farell, and Sweat with our top pick. At OT, the only one I am looking at with the top pick is Jawaan Taylor, but I expect him to be over drafted and gone before we pick.

For DE, there is 4 or 5 who make sense. William's, Brown, and Simmons are probably gone. Then between Gary or Davis, one could be there. I would rather grab Tillery with our 2nd 1st.

Wouldn't go near Sweat with a high first-round pick. Interesting comment from PFF; Sweat had 44 pressures this year, 30th among edge players in college this year, and of those 44, 17 were either unblocked or clean-up (i.e., not really him doing the work). He might improve substantially in the NFL but I think there are probably a few edge rushers available ahead of him.

I'd replace Sweat in your list with Brian Burns or Jachai Polite. If those aren't available then I'd take Thompson at S ahead of Sweat.

As for DE, I would also add Ed Oliver and Christian Wilkins into the discussion. I really think that, outside of Thompson, the Packers REALLY need a legitimate pass rushing threat off the edge to help improve this defense. The only really great pass rusher on the team is Clark and he's "great" by the standard of a DT (not named Aaron Donald); Clark can collapse the pocket but he needs someone to provide some edge pressure to keep QBs from just moving to the side. While it's unrealistic to expect to draft a player as good as Mack, he does provide a great illustration of just how much better an elite edge rusher can make a defense.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I definitely agree there's no reason for the Packers to enter the draft solely being focused on drafting an edge rusher with the first selection.

Exactly, they should also look at Thompson at safety

 

[Sunshinepacker]

consistent pressure is a problem, no doubt about that. But it seems a trend is to be able to bring pressure in specific situations in the NFL as being more important these days. Ideally, I'd love the front 3 to push that pocket like crazy and have the OLB's be a wrecking crew from the outside. I'm just afraid that if the team marries itself to needing an OLB and there is only so so there when we pick, I'd rather have so many other prospects at OL, DL, DB/Safety if they feel they are true 1st round talent then just taking the best of what's left at OLB. and that all depends on what happens with the coaches. Too many moving parts to have a good idea of where we're going at this point

Taking the best player available is always the best strategy, so long as one player is clearly ahead of another. Barring that, I have no problem saying that certain players are all on a tier and then prioritizing certain positions ahead of those. If, say, the front office has an edge rusher ranked in the same tier as an OG, even if the OG is slightly better in their eyes, I would prefer they take the edge rusher. Certain positions are just more valuable and the payoff to getting a great edge rusher is far larger vs getting a great guard. Edge rusher is the closest thing for a defense to a QB; a QB makes the entire offense better, while the effect isn't as large for an edge rusher, they're the only position on a defense that can approximate that effect. Mind you, I'm excluding generational guys like Revis or Earl Thomas that allow a DC to build entire defenses around because I'm not sure any team should "plan" on getting guys like that.

 

[Favre>Rodgers259]

I'm staying pat if I'm Gute unless FA drastically changes things. There are 4 out of 13 teams in front of us that need a QB, and that's not even considering what crazy *** Snyder and the Redskins will do.

With Herbert returning to Oregon, that leaves Haskins, Jones, Lock, and Grier as the only 1st Round worthy QBs. I'm banking on a scramble for at least the first two out of four. Sprinkle in probably two or three OL and we go from "We only get the 6th best edge rusher"? How about the 3rd best?

 

[OldSchool101]

The one position I’m seeing many teams in front of us have a need for is at Edge. I don’t see more than 2-3 QBs at most before our pick. It’s very possible Edge is a position that is overemphasized to the point where a couple teams miss and get a Datone Jones type before we’re even on the clock.
I would rather make a solid attempt to lock down at minimum 1 solid veteran Edge rusher in FA. I think this would take some of the pressure off us. It’s very possible (but unlikely with Gute) we could stand pat altogether and lock a a top tier Offensive player. That would allow us to use our resources and package #32 (I think this will change for the better slightly when all is said and done)with our 3rd round draft pick in order to move into the early 20s overall for our second overall draft pick. I’d use that on a second pass rusher if possible.

Another idea I’d like to see us implement would be to double down at 2 of these 3 positions (Edge, S and OL) with 1 stellar FA each combined with a 1st round draft pairing.
My personal choice would be an OT and OG, then two at the Edge position. I’d do it early and make it entirely evident that we are 100% prepared to walk away from Clay Mathews unless he takes a substantial paycut and is flexible in moving positions if needed

Finally, I’d hit the 3rd position in that grouping in the draft with 2 players by #111 (such as 1-second rounder and 1-4th rounder) and I wouldn’t be adverse to packaging a couple of
mid /late rounders to move up the ladder if the right fit is there in either case.
We could even hit all 3 Positions once apiece in FA first with a starter caliber player.​

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Clemson DT Dexter Lawrence may have just cost himself a draft position or two or three or....