Khalil Mack would be my first choice because I believe he is going to end up having a better career than Clowney. He also fits the mold of the Packers defense better than Clowney with the recent signing of Peppers (Clowney would play that exact position).

Watkins would be my runner up because the thought of him running routes for Rodgers gets me all giddy...

---

Watkins...Robinson ...Watkins...Robinson....gee...

I'd either:
1. Trade it to #3 and take whichever of those two is still available. If both are still available, I'd trade to #5 and take whichever one is available. I'd keep trading down two spots at a time until one of them disappears, and take the other.
2. At any point that I couldn't convince the team 2 spots down to trade as in #1, I'd go ... Robinson.

---

And if you trade back to #3 and Watkins and Robinson go 1 and 2? I'm assuming part of the terms of your trade is that the team trading up doesn't take either?

---

Good point. I can deal with fuzzy set theory or advanced calc, but basic math sometimes completely escapes me. Duh.

Let me correct that. I'd still trade back to #3, based on my belief that one of the first two picks will be a quarterback. If I'm wrong, I trade back again anyway, though perhaps a bit farther. After those are gone, I probably try to get to somewhere between 5 and 10 and take Clinton-Dix. And if somehow I miss on Clinton-Dix, in this draft I'd keep trading down until I was at the spot reflecting the value of one of the players I listed in the trade up/down thread or I I ran out of trading partners.

I'm not generally a fan of trading down, but this year to me is the exception. People think I'm crazy, but I'd be willing to trade down the #1 pick overall until I got all my picks between 40 and 110. Or all of them in the third and fourth rounds.[grin1]

---

Is there some crazy shit that is going to happen (quite possibly anyway) with the very top of this draft? I can see a lot of teams making plays for those top picks.

After looking in on the kid, I'd have to go with Mack at LB in the thread's scenario. Seems like the best bet.

Boy, that's a tough call if you can't trade the pick... Is there a true #1 guy? I don't like Clowney or Mack. I couldn't take an OL 1st overall in Green Bay.

There are 4 guys I would consider: Evans, Donald, Ebron, Manziel.

Manziel would set up another potential Favre/Rodgers scenario in a few years which isn't all bad because if Manziel is what you think he might be, you could deal Aaron a few years from now and have a younger version of him keeping the line of stud QB's going for a 3rd generation.

Evans has been likened to Randy Moss... a guy with his size and ability for Rodgers would be very hard to pass up.

Ebron has incredible ability and we're going to have a big hole with Finley likely finished.

Donald paired with Daniels inside and Peppers and Matthews would be a sight to behold.

I would reluctantly pass on Manziel due to knowing I have the franchise going strong for a few more seasons.

Ebron has a diva label.

Aaron Donald supposedly loves football and brings it on every single down but we've invested so much on DL the past few years.

Mike Evans, to me, has the best opportunity to really change the game for the Green Bay Packers. The other guys are all intriguing and would be wonderful additions, but I'd be going for best bang for the buck at 1 and nothing less. The Randy Moss comparison with Evans. Just think about that. A Randy Moss type along with Jordy, RC18 and Boykin. I know this is a deep draft at WR and you could still likely get a stud in 2nd or 3rd round, but Evans just seems more capable of being dominant than the rest.

I'd take Mike Evans. Packers love those A&M guys.

---