Green Bay Packers Forum
4 Pages123>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline play2win  
#1 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 6:38:03 AM(UTC)
Ted Thompson traded away our 3rd for a bevy of picks that will allow him to maneuver at will through today's 4th round.

With KC owning the 2nd pick in the round, look for Ted to package a nice group of selections for his old friend John Dorsey to give us 3 picks in the round. KC is a rebuilding team, and I would be shocked, shocked, if Dorsey didn't make a deal with Thompson to help his team rebuild.

With that said, lets suppose Ted also uses more of those picks to move up with his two current R4s to add three very specific players. Here is where our GM can pretty much shop for exactly what he wants in the 4th round:

NT Jesse Williams
C Brian Schwenke
C Barrett Jones
S Phillip Thomas
DE Alex Okafor
LT David Quessenberry

Any 3 of these would make fantastic additions to our team.

Add, there are others available in R4/R5 that could also make big impacts on our roster:

RB Jonathan Franklin
OLB Trevardo Williams
DE William Gholston
OT Xavier Nixon
WR Da'Rick Rogers
DE Quinton Dial
DE Joe Kruger
DE Lavar Edwards
TE Joseph Fauria
OT Chris Faulk
DE Devin Taylor
OLB Ty Powell

There is a lot to like about many in this latter group. A lot! My guess is that Ted Thompson will make us all very happy with what he does here today. I would guess his 10 picks are the most of any team at this point to maneuver around R4 and R5 if he likes. We are going to get some very good players.

Also, who the hell was there to warrant any kind of complaints at #88? The only truly impactful players I see that were taken in R3 were Damontre Moore and Jonathan Jenkins. Both were long gone by our #88. The only player chosen after that point in R3 that I might have wanted was Brandon Williams, a NT from Missouri Southern. He's just a giant of a wide body from a Division II school. There are plenty of those still available.

Ted's trading our #88 away, then again our #93 was brilliant. He'll turn that into just what we were looking for, quality talent at our many positions of need. I truly believe this. Ted Thompson will be dealing heavily today, and he now has the ammo to do so. If he pulls this off, and turns our R3 and R4 selections into three or who knows, maybe four R4s, - and gets the players we NEED to become a better team - I'll be thrilled.

My guess is he lands 3 more top 100 rated players today, making the grand total 5. That is just the kind of impact I was hoping for with this draft. Immediate infusion of high quality talent at 5 positions, and maybe more!
Sponsor
Offline wpr  
#2 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 7:01:26 AM(UTC)
I don't mind getting a couple of 4th round picks. A few actually develop into quality starters like Sitton did. I object to having 5 picks in the 6-7 rounds. The odds of finding gold in the bottom of the draft, any draft, is pretty remote. Yes it does happen. But then tell me how many Donald Drivers have we landed in the past 20 years? How many in the last 8? GB has had 26 6-7 picks in Uncle Teddy's time. It normally doesn't happen. Other teams know this too. They are not going to beat the door down looking to give up a potentially quality pick for the bottom of the draft scraps even in a deep draft.

It don't mind acquiring a few lower level picks with draft trades. The first trade with SF was fine. The second time was questionable. the third trade with Miami just plain ridiculous. I would rather get one starter or rotational player in the 3rd round that 2 long shots in the 6-7.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
gotarace on 4/27/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#3 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 7:08:28 AM(UTC)
wpr,

He's not going to take players with those late selections. He's going to use them in trade to add a 3rd R4. Period. If he doesn't, I'll personally buy you a case of your favorite beer...
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#4 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 7:14:56 AM(UTC)
Why I don't like trading back this year. Even if he moves up in the 4th. Because the chance to improve the quality of players added, would be better had we kept our 3rd and used it with out remaining tradeable picks and come away with 2 3rds. I would take 2 3rds and a 5th, over 3 or 4 4ths and a 5th.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 4/27/2013(UTC)
Offline wpr  
#5 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 7:15:56 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
Why I don't like trading back this year. Even if he moves up in the 4th. Because the chance to improve the quality of players added, would be better had we kept our 3rd and used it with out remaining tradeable picks and come away with 2 3rds. I would take 2 3rds and a 5th, over 3 or 4 4ths and a 5th.


my confidence level is at zero right now. It is as if my younger brother just smashed my only Christmas present and Mom and dad can't buy me another one.

The case of beer is easy. I don't drink. Least not yet. [aiee]
Online Zero2Cool  
#6 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 8:05:37 AM(UTC)
You could just read this thread ya know

http://packershome.com/f...d-2nd-rounder-to-SF.aspx
Offline warhawk  
#7 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 8:56:31 AM(UTC)
I will say again that I would rather Ted have 10 picks that will allow him to move up multiple time than to have end of round picks the rest of the way out.

I can't remember a draft where a team was sitting like the Packers where they have a way better chance to make today meaningful in landing good players.

Turn the tv on when it starts. Ted's not waiting long to pounce.
Offline play2win  
#8 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:03:41 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
my confidence level is at zero right now. It is as if my younger brother just smashed my only Christmas present and Mom and dad can't buy me another one.

The case of beer is easy. I don't drink. Least not yet. [aiee]


OK then. Um, let's say a decent lunch... $25. I'll send it to you if we don't get three R4s today.
Offline TwinkieGorilla  
#9 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:12:05 AM(UTC)
Ehehe! Never try to guess what's behind those staring eyes...
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 4/27/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#10 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:26:35 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
Why I don't like trading back this year. Even if he moves up in the 4th. Because the chance to improve the quality of players added, would be better had we kept our 3rd and used it with out remaining tradeable picks and come away with 2 3rds. I would take 2 3rds and a 5th, over 3 or 4 4ths and a 5th.


And take who? At #88?

Maybe they discerned the level of talent, the "quality of players added" was something they deemed negligible at this point between, let's say, the next 60 picks.

The only way we would have gotten two R3s was to trade up. Without the trades made at #88 and #93, we wouldn't have had the goods to trade up in R3 - not for two of them.

By stockpiling 10 selections in the next 4 rounds, Ted has given us a chance to add a third R4, and maybe more. If they see little change in the quality of the last 10-15 players, from #88 on, then what is the harm in being able to add another quality player?

If Ted trades back up into the top of R4 at #99 with KC or #100 with OAK, he could come away with two players that were projected maybe top 50! Just for that one choice that he turned into many...

We could venture to say, Ted could trade up with BOTH KC and OAK, to get 2 of the top 3 picks in the round, and still have another R4 left over, or possibly enough ammo to trade back into the bottom of R4 for another... and still have the R5 comp pick.

I would gladly take 4 quality, targeted players over 3 (2 really, because I do not see how he could have possibly managed two R3s - not without trading away from next year. BTW the numbers you propose just don't really add up. Let's just call it 3 quality players vs. 2 in rounds 3-4). It is precisely what we need. Both need and opportunity drove both R3 trades, and I anticipate they will result in more, trades moving us up to those players we wish to have out of this draft at exceptional value.
Offline steveishere  
#11 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:31:02 AM(UTC)
You can't win football if you don't have a 3rd round pick, you just cant, it's science. Season is over.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 4/27/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#12 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:41:55 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
You can't win football if you don't have a 3rd round pick, you just cant, it's science. Season is over.


Awwwww steveishere!!! Thanks for bustin' me up!!!!! [laughing] [laughing] [laughing] [laughing] [laughing]
Offline play2win  
#13 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 9:44:41 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
You could just read this thread ya know

http://packershome.com/f...d-2nd-rounder-to-SF.aspx


Oh, I have my friend. I just was amazed at the loss of confidence in Ted Thompson, even though he pretty much crushed it.
Offline macbob  
#14 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 10:15:40 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't mind getting a couple of 4th round picks. A few actually develop into quality starters like Sitton did. I object to having 5 picks in the 6-7 rounds. The odds of finding gold in the bottom of the draft, any draft, is pretty remote. Yes it does happen. But then tell me how many Donald Drivers have we landed in the past 20 years? How many in the last 8? GB has had 26 6-7 picks in Uncle Teddy's time. It normally doesn't happen. Other teams know this too. They are not going to beat the door down looking to give up a potentially quality pick for the bottom of the draft scraps even in a deep draft.

It don't mind acquiring a few lower level picks with draft trades. The first trade with SF was fine. The second time was questionable. the third trade with Miami just plain ridiculous. I would rather get one starter or rotational player in the 3rd round that 2 long shots in the 6-7.


The Miami trade was the one I liked best--Ted traded back 16 places, from 93 to 109, and picked up multiple picks. I didn't see anyone jumping out at 93 that we couldn't get a comparable player at 109.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#15 Posted : Saturday, April 27, 2013 10:16:17 AM(UTC)
Are we waiting to move up in the 6th?
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages123>»
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


Recent Topics
2m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

13m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / FLORIDA PACKER88

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / OlHoss1884

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey


Tweeter