play2win
10 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



Yeah, I checked the chart to make sure the deal was skewed in our favor! 😆 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
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago
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.
UserPostedImage
play2win
10 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



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.
+1
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago
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.
UserPostedImage
+1
steveishere
10 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



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
10 years ago

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

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



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
10 years ago
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...



“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago

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

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



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.
UserPostedImage
+2
mi_keys
10 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



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.
Born and bred a cheesehead
+1
steveishere
10 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



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.
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    buckeyepackfan (42m) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
    Mucky Tundra (9h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
    beast (9h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
    bboystyle (10h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
    Mucky Tundra (13h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
    Mucky Tundra (13h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
    Mucky Tundra (13h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
    buckeyepackfan (13h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
    Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.
    Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak
    beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other
    beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)
    Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.
    beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs
    packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.
    beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating
    Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!
    wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.
    beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!
    beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed
    Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed
    Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)
    Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird
    Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."
    Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.
    Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"
    Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.
    Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”
    packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB
    Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him
    beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie
    Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b
    Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with
    packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie
    beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.
    Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst
    Martha Careful (17-Dec) : The Viking uniforms, the whiteout uniforms specifically absolutely suck
    beast (17-Dec) : Thanks Zero2Cool, looks a lot better now
    beast (17-Dec) : Seems like someone has a crush on me, can't stop talking about me
    Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : Should be gooder now. The forum default theme went to goofy land.
    Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : What the hell
    packerfanoutwest (17-Dec) : yeah beast hates the Winter Warning Unies
    Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Okay I'm glad to know it's not just something happening to me lol
    Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Zero, did you copy the Packers uniforms from last night and white out the board?
    beast (16-Dec) : Oh crap, is the board going to the Winter Warning Uniforms too?!? It's all white on white right now!
    Zero2Cool (16-Dec) : WR Odell Beckham Jr is officially a free agent after clearing waivers.
    Zero2Cool (16-Dec) : Packers are 6th in sacks.
    Zero2Cool (16-Dec) : RB David Montgomery will undergo season-ending knee surgery.
    Mucky Tundra (16-Dec) : Dan Campbell on onside kick with 12 minutes left: In hindsight, wish I didn’t do that
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    29 - 34
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    16 - 10
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    30 - 14
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    29 - 31
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    24 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    34 - 13
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    24 - 22
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    30 - 27
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    14 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    20 - 19
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    38 - 10
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    30 - 17
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    31 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    30 - 13
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
    Vikings
    Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
    BEARS
    Recent Topics
    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.