How is TE not a need for the Packers? As has been mentioned, Finley is as good as gone after this season. When using the approach the Packers do, needs are identified and filled in advance (ideally), not after the holes already exist. If TE is the best player available according to their board, I'd love the pick. I want the player that is most likely to have a great 10+ year career, not simply a player that is a "need." The other tight ends on the roster are nothing more than backups, imo, and possibly not even great backups. I don't think many would cry over losing a Ryan Taylor, DJ Williams, Mulligan, etc. Their just depth and/or special teams guy. Quarless is still a huge question mark and even if fully healthy again he would be stretched to be anything more than a decent number 2 quality tight end. Definitely not a guy teams would have to spend much time game-planning for.

I simply can't see Lacy being the "best player available" at pick number 26. Perhaps a trade back into the second round could work out, but I'd rather just pick up some later round value RB. The Packers should be able to get a very nice value player at 26, imo.

I say Quarless is sound and puts up big numbers. But then what do I know?

---

That's for sure. I think the last time he did the expected, we ended up with A.J. Hawk. (I wanted Vernon Davis that year).

I agree with wpr that Quarles may be decent; Also with play2win that it has to be defense; Also with the guy that pointed out RBs are deep this year and Ted Thompson will probably get one later. Montee Ball in the 4th would be a dream pick; in the 3rd wouldn't be bad either.

---

For what it's worth, I went with LSU safety Eric Reid.

Porky's Mock Draft 


I do prefer Florida safety Matt Elam, but I slotted him earlier. This is my second mock draft. I originally went with Alabama DT Jesse Williams, but I did more homework on Reid and I'm liking him a lot more.

---

I certainly hope you're right. But even before Quarless' injury, he looked like an average starter, at best, to me. I suppose I'm just skeptical that he'll be much better than that any time soon, if ever, after such a bad injury. Yeah, a team like the Packers can get by with only an average to slightly below average tight end when they have 4-5 very good WRs, but it's obviously not ideal. The Packers WR group is still good, but as it stands now, I wouldn't consider them "great" (although with Rodgers throwing them the ball, perhaps they still are).

As I said, I just want the player that Ted Thompson and staff thinks has the best chance to have a very successful 10+ year career, regardless of position. Personally, I hope that player plays defense, specifically a defensive linemen or pass rusher, but any defender would be great. Otherwise, if a tight end such as Eifert is clearly the best player available, I would like the pick. Even without any draft picks, I expect the Packers defense to be better this upcoming season, so long as they stay somewhat healthy. Like it or not, the Packers are likely to still win most their games on the back of Aaron Rodgers and the offense so if the draft goes that way, I can understand it.

After witnessing what has happened to our team, I agree with Woodson's assessment after our playoff loss that we need to get bigger and faster on defense. It won't happen if we don't pick those players, because we just don't add those players in FA.

Given that, I do trust Ted, and I agree doddpower that if TE is the pick, and they feel confident they can address the D R2-7 that's fine with me. But we need a lot of players on that side. Everything has to go right with some coming off injury, like Bish & Perry. Whoever we pick at DE will have to be starting talent.

I'm really just hoping for the best. I think we are perilously thin on our front 7. I don't like that.

Figure, we shouldn't be counting on Pickett due to age, Wilson due to his inability to get to the QB, Worthy due to his injury which has put his 2013 in question, Perry & Bishop coming off injury.

What does that leave? Neal, Raji, Daniels, Matthews Hawk... all with NO backup.

I mean, I like Moses...

Why cant Pickett be counted on to do what he does best? Take on blockers and stop the run.

He will be. But he can only play so many snaps, PLUS he's what, 32 now? Getting up there.

---

I know what you are saying. Pickett is my favorite DL, and arguably our best DL. I just think with his age, and considering he has taken almost all the snaps for 2+ yrs, the guy needs to be used differently, in a platoon. I think it would be foolish of this team to assume he could take all the snaps through 16 games again, plus playoffs. We should be inserting a starting calibre DE in place of Pick, and let him work in a rotation.

I would say the same for Raji. He's young enough to absorb a giant load of the snaps, but that doesn't mean he should. He already has, for over 3 years now! I think it is foolish the way they have been using BJ Raji, with no real backup. He is a far more effective player when he gets a breather. We should be looking to add starters at both DE and NT so there is no drop off in rotation, and those who have been there for years can be used more effectively.

While I liked the Perry pick last year, he has a lot of proving to do. Do we just assume we are OK at LOLB because he is returning from IR? I would add an insurance pick there. ILB is the same situation with Bishop returning from IR off the hamstring. Do we assume we are good to go there? I guess we have Brad Jones to soften the blow if not. Are we better at the position? Are we improving? I'm hoping like hell Dezman Moses and Terrell Manning come on like a Tsunami in year 2 with the Packers.

We haven't even gotten to S, but we could probably stand to get a really good one. I do like McMillian a lot, and hope he makes this a non-issue. They sure do like Sean Richardson, keeping an extra roster spot for him last season. Maybe we are better there than we might think. Certainly, it is a huge unknown.

How many picks is that to shore this up on D? We have to get bigger and faster in our front 7. We only have 8 picks. Based solely on need: DE, NT, LB, S, C, RB, TE, WR, LT. I see 9 positions there that could use upgrades, with only 8 picks. Figure half, if we are lucky, will be improvements over what we had last season.

Couldn't we have picked up ONE quality FA at a position of need? One that makes us markedly better at a position? I guess not. Sorry, I'm still a bit burned by that issue... Maybe we hit one or two positions with an older vet after the draft.

Mike Daniels, Mike Neal, Jordan Miller, CJ Wilson, Johhny Jolly. That's who we have right now besides Pick and Raji. I'm not counting Worthy as he's in danger of missing the season altogether on IR. IMO, our only sure bet in this group is Mike Neal. I really like Daniels, but he is a smaller player. He's going to have to really show well this year. We only kept 6 DL on our final 53 man roster last year. I think that is one short.

Maybe Johnny Jolly comes back after 3 years away and contributes. I'm not banking on that, as much as I would love to see it. Counting on that though seems a bit crazy to me.

None of this is directed at you doddpower, I'm just trying to explain why I wanted us to shore up a couple of areas in FA, and what I see as our real needs if we are to become a better team. I think we have a lot of positions to address. And, yes, maybe Bish and Perry come back and we are in a far better position than I am making this out to be here. I just want our team to make sure we are covered with better talent where we really need it.

If we draft Lacy or Eifert, I'll be fine with that as long as they have a plan to get the rest of our needs addressed.

I'm glad to see publications saying this...because that's usually what Ted Thompson does not do.

---