Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
5 Pages<1234>»

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
play2win  
#21 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:31:39 AM(UTC)
mi_keys said: Go to Quoted Post
Yeah, the trade for the player is probably unlikely but one of them trading up for the draft pick and taking the QB on their own is a possibility depending on picks 1 through 20.

For what it's worth, based on the draft pick value chart, here's how the picks you suggested stack up:

GB:
Pick 21: 800
Total: 800

HOU:
Pick 33: 580
Pick 65: 265
Total: 845

JAX:
Pick 39: 510
Pick 70: 240
Pick 105: 84
Total: 834

source:
http://walterfootball.com/draftchart.php

Based on the draft chart, it says Green Bay is getting the slightly better value. Based on the alleged depth of this draft, we probably would be getting the better value but, again, it depends on how the first 20 picks fall.

After the above scenario we could also potentially take the Jacksonville 3rd and 4th round pick or the Houston 3rd and our 4th (#121) and trade back into the 2nd round if there was one more player sitting there we really liked. Those sets of picks add up to about the 25-26 pick of the second round. That would give us 3 2nd round picks.


Yeah, I checked the chart to make sure the deal was skewed in our favor! [laughing] Your scenario of us jumping into R2 for three selections is something I think all of us could see Ted doing. Just as long as he hits on all three instead of a Pat Lee and Brian Brohm scenario... But, hell yeah, it could work for us with a draft this deep.

I do think that #21 will be coveted by a team who passes on a QB. Maybe these QB needy teams don't pass up the QB and the point becomes moot. If I'm HOU and I need the best QB I can find to run my team, and I'm staring at Clowney, I would be inclined to take the QB. Too many question marks with Clowney IMO. He was handled last season. What's going to happen to him in the Pros?

Same holds true for all the other QB needy teams. CLE? Are they really going to pass on a guy that can take them places and lead their team to nab a WR? JAX? MIN? TB? Hell, I could see NYJ taking a QB if the right one fell to them. It is only the most important position on a team.

If all these teams do jump on their QB of choice, we will be seeing a lot of talent falling our way, at positions we could use. Something tells me that's more how this will shake out.
wpr  
#22 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:32:27 AM(UTC)
The flip side to trading with some of the teams who need a QB is that they need a lot of help. Giving up extra picks to get the QB will mean they will still need more help at other positions next year and probably the year after that. While GB has a pretty set roster and getting an extra pick or two won't insure those players even making the team.
play2win  
#23 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:53:09 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
The flip side to trading with some of the teams who need a QB is that they need a lot of help. Giving up extra picks to get the QB will mean they will still need more help at other positions next year and probably the year after that. While GB has a pretty set roster and getting an extra pick or two won't insure those players even making the team.


True. But, some of these teams have a ton of picks to play with. Both HOU and JAX have 11 picks. CLE has 10. NYJ has 12, as does STL. Also, other teams with established QBs: ATL has 10 and DAL and SF have 11 each.

Teams like AZ, BUF, OAK, TB and TEN, all teams with big needs, only have 6 choices each. You know they are going to want to trade back. I'm kind of hoping we trade up with one or more of these teams to land an extra special player or players.

Then there are teams like WAS and IND who only have 6 and 5 choices respectively, and no R1s. Those teams could become trading partners for R2 and R3 should Ted wish to maneuver up.

wpr, I want us to land top quality players this year. Trading up early is what I am hoping for if the right players are there, and I can see Ted doing a bit of both in this draft.
wpr  
#24 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 6:02:08 AM(UTC)
I am all for moving up and getting a better player than moving down and getting more run of the mill players. The draft is deep for run of the mill players.
steveishere  
#25 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:17:07 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I am all for moving up and getting a better player than moving down and getting more run of the mill players. The draft is deep for run of the mill players.


I'm all for moving back and getting more players that next year could have been 1st 2nd or 3rd round picks in later rounds this year. This draft is deep for those players. Now you don't move around just to do it obviously if there's a guy at 16 you think is some phenom that wont last to 21 then yeah maybe you go after him but there's a reason teams don't try and trade as many picks as they can to move up as much as they can. "Getting a better player" is nice in theory but usually not worth the cost in reality
play2win  
#26 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:33:46 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm all for moving back and getting more players that next year could have been 1st 2nd or 3rd round picks in later rounds this year. This draft is deep for those players. Now you don't move around just to do it obviously if there's a guy at 16 you think is some phenom that wont last to 21 then yeah maybe you go after him but there's a reason teams don't try and trade as many picks as they can to move up as much as they can. "Getting a better player" is nice in theory but usually not worth the cost in reality


It is pretty weird. This is super early to be speculating like this but from a fan perspective, man, I like 3 other Safeties better than the top two in all the mocks. Maybe it is worth trading back if one or two of the coveted players is taken before our #21.

Here is a trade projection that is kind of interesting:
http://www.gbnreport.com/tradeprojection.html

Trading 21 down to 30 with SF for an additional R3 at 77. That would give us 5 of the top 98 picks.
nerdmann  
#27 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 8:00:16 AM(UTC)
Ted should take BPA. Now our team is stocked, so BPA is also weighed agaist positions of need, so I would find it hard to believe that a QB would be available who would be better than any other player even in positions of need, and/or trading back.

If they find a guy who they really like and he's there, I could see it. Otherwise...
wpr  
#28 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 8:08:13 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm all for moving back and getting more players that next year could have been 1st 2nd or 3rd round picks in later rounds this year. This draft is deep for those players. Now you don't move around just to do it obviously if there's a guy at 16 you think is some phenom that wont last to 21 then yeah maybe you go after him but there's a reason teams don't try and trade as many picks as they can to move up as much as they can. "Getting a better player" is nice in theory but usually not worth the cost in reality


that's ok. I don't mind it if we have different philosophies.

Trading back seems to bring in average players. Average starters who do not stand out in a crowd. You absolutely need them. A bunch of them to have a team.

But trading up tends to land the player of special qualities. One who stand out in a league of extra ordinary gentlemen. At least is it is done correctly he will. Someone like CM3 when he is healthy.

I am not saying to trade up merely for the sake of saying we traded up. The player and the need have to be there before it makes sense.

The GB roster is full of players who would make most teams. Players who could start for most teams. Trading down to grab a bunch more of them only means dropping players of similar abilities to keep the new ones. There is no real increase in overall value in that process. GB can certainly use some help in a few positions. But by trading back and accumulating extra picks there will not be a guarantee they will be able to fill all those positions when the draft slots roll around.
mi_keys  
#29 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 10:12:43 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
that's ok. I don't mind it if we have different philosophies.

Trading back seems to bring in average players. Average starters who do not stand out in a crowd. You absolutely need them. A bunch of them to have a team.

But trading up tends to land the player of special qualities. One who stand out in a league of extra ordinary gentlemen. At least is it is done correctly he will. Someone like CM3 when he is healthy.

I am not saying to trade up merely for the sake of saying we traded up. The player and the need have to be there before it makes sense.

The GB roster is full of players who would make most teams. Players who could start for most teams. Trading down to grab a bunch more of them only means dropping players of similar abilities to keep the new ones. There is no real increase in overall value in that process. GB can certainly use some help in a few positions. But by trading back and accumulating extra picks there will not be a guarantee they will be able to fill all those positions when the draft slots roll around.


Philosophically, I feel there are many years in which what you say above probably holds true. But I believe in this case, those of us looking at potentiall trading back out of the 1st and into the 2nd (and then maybe even moving some later picks up into the 2nd or 3rd round) are thinking based on projections the 2nd round picks aren't that far off the expected value of the mid to high 1st round picks. If that's the case, we might have a better chance of drafting a couple players who end up having exceptional careers with three 2nd round picks and one 3rd round pick (my extreme hypothetical trade back and trade up scenario) than one 1st, one 2nd and two 3rds.

We've landed plenty of studs in recent years in the second round: Nick Collins, Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, Randall Cobb, Casey Hayward (at least stud rookie), Eddie Lacy and Daryn Colledge (if you're delusional like Zero). Maybe were all lemmings and just going off what the talking heads are saying, but there's a feeling this draft is deep. If we can't get exactly who we want in the 1st round, maybe those difference makers can come consolidating our picks in the 2nd round.

Maybe we've all been playing too much of that draft simulator.
steveishere  
#30 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 10:19:45 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
that's ok. I don't mind it if we have different philosophies.

Trading back seems to bring in average players. Average starters who do not stand out in a crowd. You absolutely need them. A bunch of them to have a team.

But trading up tends to land the player of special qualities. One who stand out in a league of extra ordinary gentlemen. At least is it is done correctly he will. Someone like CM3 when he is healthy.

I am not saying to trade up merely for the sake of saying we traded up. The player and the need have to be there before it makes sense.

The GB roster is full of players who would make most teams. Players who could start for most teams. Trading down to grab a bunch more of them only means dropping players of similar abilities to keep the new ones. There is no real increase in overall value in that process. GB can certainly use some help in a few positions. But by trading back and accumulating extra picks there will not be a guarantee they will be able to fill all those positions when the draft slots roll around.


What is that based on? From what I've seen our trade backs have landed some pretty high quality players (Nelson, Lacy) neither of those guys are average. The philosophy of trading down isn't to get more average players it's done when there is an abundance of similar quality players at your draft position (all of those players could be good, it doesn't mean they are average). You get a player of a similar quality to one you could have gotten had you stayed put and add a higher chance to get a guy like Mike Daniels or something later on. Or if you have a player really high on your board that you think will last if you trade back and can still get that player.

In reference to this draft in particular it looks to me like there are a handful of exceptional players (10-15ish). Beyond that there are just a bunch of guys that don't really stand out but are still really good that will last down into 4th or 5th round (more than usual). Typically draft classes I think have had 50 or 60 underclassmen the last few years. This one has 98, that's a lot of talent in there who are guys that probably in the next year or 2 could have been 1st or 2nd round picks.

It's way too complex to simply boil it down to trade up = better players, trade back = more average players. It could just as easily become, trade up = fewer good players and trade down = more good players.
wpr  
#31 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:53:49 AM(UTC)
steve I will ignore the last 3 drafts as it is too soon. "Stand out" to me is pro bowl/all pro caliber. A starter is a starter = average. We have to have some way of defining that they are more than just a really good starter.
2010 Mike Neal
2009 no 2nd round pick. trade up for CM3
2008 Jordy Nelson, Brian Brohm & Patrick Lee
2007 Brandon Jackson
2006 Daryn Colledge & Greg Jennings
2005 Nick Collins & Terrence Murphy
2001 Robert Ferguson
2000 Chad Clifton
1999 Fred Vinson
1997 Darren Sharper
1996 Derrick Mayes
1992 Mark D'Onofrio
1991 Esera Tuaolo
1990 LeRoy Butler

I have to stop somewhere so I will end it on a positive note with Butler.

17 players in 21 years. Nelson, Jennings, Collins, Clifton and Butler were the only ones that really stood out and were above average. Oops almost forgot Sharper. Then again most of his acclaim came after he left GB but he still counts.

Half a star to Vinson for being the trade bait to get Ahmad Green but he did nothing worthy on his own. A half star for Colledge to help pay the rent for this board. Mrs C will appreciate it.

I only looked at the 3rd round very briefly. There are a few above average players there but there are more average to below average players taken in the 3rd.

So with 98 underclassmen coming out that means that the opportunity to pick a street FA after the draft is even better than in most years.

I do not scout the college players. I can not say that this year's draft is better or worse than another year. I can only speak in generalizations. Generally speaking it will be better to move up and land the guy who is a difference maker than it is to trade down and get 3 average quality ones. Now keep in mind I am saying the average ones are still starters don't think I am saying they are no good. What I am saying is GB already HAS starters. At least at most positions. Guys who will play 8-10 years. If we are going to move one of them out and put someone else in it has to be someone who is a better player.

And I agree the whole scope is complex. That is why somewhere back there I said it has to be for a stud and it has to be at a position of need. What I didn't say because I assumed it would be a given is who every Ted pays the price to get would be worthy of the extra price GB would have to pay and not be another Jamal Reynolds or Justin Harrell. I don't even want him to be a B.J. Raji or Javon Walker.

edit- some how I missed Jordy. I must have skipped over the first name that year thinking it was a #1
dhazer  
#32 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 3:56:25 PM(UTC)
Why is it we would have to trade the QB if we draft him? I remember a few years ago when a certain QB dropped and we drafted him even though it wasn't a huge need at the time and how did that work out?
wpr  
#33 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:21:29 PM(UTC)
dhazer said: Go to Quoted Post
Why is it we would have to trade the QB if we draft him? I remember a few years ago when a certain QB dropped and we drafted him even though it wasn't a huge need at the time and how did that work out?


Wrong. It was a BIG need. Typically teams/players don't do well when they draft and then start a QB immediately. It takes 3 years for a QB to learn.

Sir Brett was waffling for a few years by that point in time. GB did not know if he would play 1 more year or 3. The time was perfect an the need immediate.
play2win  
#34 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:58:51 PM(UTC)
Well, here is a good link to reference regarding all of Ted's draft day trades, both up and down. The effectiveness of one over the other is certainly debatable.

http://www.packers.com/history/draft-history.html

Ted did well trading back in 2013, netting Lacy, Bakhtiari and Dorsey.

He did well in 2012 trading up for Hayward. Jury still out on trade up for Worthy.

He didn't fare so well trading back with DEN in 2011 getting DJ Williams and DJ Smith, as well as trading back with MIA netting Caleb Schlauderaff and Ryan Taylor.

Traded up with PHI in 2010 getting Morgan Burnett.

Traded up in 2009 with NE for Clay Matthews

Traded back in 2008 with NYJ landing Jordy Nelson. Also traded back with MIN getting Breno Giaccomini and Matt Flynn. Again traded back with STL to draft Brett Swain and with NO into 2009 to draft Jairus Wynn.

2007 traded back with NYJ for Brandon Jackson, Aaron Rouse and Korey Hall. Also traded back with PIT for Allen Barbre and Desmond Bishop

2006 traded back with NE and DEN landing Greg Jennings and Daryn Colledge and Jason Spitz. Back to PHI with Will Blackmon and Tyrone Culver. Back again with STL for Johnny Jolly

2006 back with CAR for Underwood and a pick that was traded back to PHI for Mike Hawkins and Curt Campbell. Again back with NE for Craig Bragg and Will Whitticker.


Pretty interesting when you look at the history of Ted's trades.
luigis  
#35 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:33:18 PM(UTC)
Can Geno Smith play safety? Yikes, I didn't know that.


I'm sure we have to stay put, unless it is better to trade up or down, then that would be better.
I hope Ted has the same conviction as I have about the correct course of action.

play2win  
#36 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:02:09 PM(UTC)
luigis, I think Ted will get his Safety or Safeties. I do wonder how he has them rated, and if he might have another playmaker in mind he would want to move up or gauge down to hopefully draft.

We could easily stay at 21 and take the best player available. But, we do have a lot of picks that would allow us to maneuver.

BTW, I don't know for certain we have to stay put. We could get a great offer for that #21. Might be worthwhile if Ted has other players he thinks are of equal value.
PackFanWithTwins  
#37 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:16:25 PM(UTC)
Unless you are planning on Rodgers not playing for another 5 years, QB in the first is out of the question.

I wouldn't mind moving up for the right player, I also wouldn't mind trading the pick away and using the acquired picks to max out on 2nd and 3rd rounders. The team doesn't have room for high volume of picks, we need more quality instead.
wpr  
#38 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:48:09 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
Unless you are planning on Rodgers not playing for another 5 years, QB in the first is out of the question.

I wouldn't mind moving up for the right player, I also wouldn't mind trading the pick away and using the acquired picks to max out on 2nd and 3rd rounders. The team doesn't have room for high volume of picks, we need more quality instead.


you said quality picks. that is more common when a team moves up.
PackFanWithTwins  
#39 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 7:53:57 PM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
you said quality picks. that is more common when a team moves up.


That is where trading back, and using the additional picks to max out on 2nd and 3rd rounders fits in. That would require trading back up, after moving the 1st rounder.
sschind  
#40 Posted : Tuesday, April 15, 2014 9:01:32 PM(UTC)
luigis said: Go to Quoted Post
Can Geno Smith play safety? Yikes, I didn't know that.


I'm sure we have to stay put, unless it is better to trade up or down, then that would be better.
I hope Ted has the same conviction as I have about the correct course of action.



Do you eat your waffles while sitting on a fence?[grin1] [grin1] [grin1] [grin1] [grin1]

Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<1234>»
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Cheesey (14h) : I like the white uni's. I'd like for them to wear the "chrome" helmets too! That would look neat!
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Color rush uniform game for the #Packers (all white) will be vs. #Bears Sept. 28, according to Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : "It's going to be a lot of fun for all our fans to drive across the state when we're in the Super Bowl in Minneapolis." Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Mark Murphy: Super Bowl at Lambeau not possible
Smokey (24-Jul) : Training Camp for GB begins July 26th (Wednesday ) .
Smokey (22-Jul) : After 11 days with no Cable/Internet , I'm pleased to be back !
Porforis (21-Jul) : Misery + Money = Misery
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : He left SIX kids fatherless. He had resources to get help, but sadly felt he was without hope.
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Has not*
Zero2Cool (21-Jul) : Money has and never will be a measure of happiness. Never.
Cheesey (21-Jul) : Another one kills himself. I don't get it. I guess money doesn't solve it all.
Zero2Cool (20-Jul) : Linkin Park Frontman Chester Bennington, 41, Dead
DarkaneRules (20-Jul) : RIP chester bennington :(
Zero2Cool (15-Jul) : Today's Birthdays: Since69 (52)
Cheesey (11-Jul) : Thanks Yoop! Smokey...I am "aged cheese!"LOL!
yooperfan (11-Jul) : Happy belated Birthday Cheesey
Smokey (10-Jul) : That's Gouda Cheesey ! LOL
Cheesey (10-Jul) : As Groucho Marx once said, "I'm gonna join a club, and beat you with it!"LOL!
Smokey (10-Jul) : Jolly Good Show , Welcome to the Club !
Cheesey (9-Jul) : Thanks guys. Officially a geezer now.
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Today's Birthdays: Cheesey (60) , DanJustDan29 (30)
wpr (9-Jul) : Happy birthday cheesey.
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Yo Alan!
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Today's Birthdays: Cheesey (60)
Smokey (5-Jul) : A good night to "You Tube" an old Football Game !
Smokey (5-Jul) : Lots of rain tonight across the nation !
Smokey (4-Jul) : Hello DoddPower
Smokey (3-Jul) : I recall the 200th as well, it was Spectacular !
Cheesey (3-Jul) : I remember the 200th....doesn't seem that long ago.
Smokey (3-Jul) : Happy 241st Birthday America !
Cheesey (3-Jul) : "Great taste, less filling!"LOL!
Smokey (3-Jul) : Mrs. Guion ? LOL
Cheesey (3-Jul) : I don't know...who hear wants to taste Guion???
Zero2Cool (1-Jul) : Today's Birthdays: Grabacr (29)
Smokey (30-Jun) : Guion did wrong , but he may also have good taste .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Around The NFL / wpr

14h / Around The NFL / Cheesey

24-Jul / Around The NFL / Smokey

24-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Around The NFL / Smokey

21-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Poppa San

21-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

21-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Poppa San

21-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Poppa San

21-Jul / Around The NFL / Poppa San

Headlines