What matters is what the board looks like not what round a guy is taken in. You could draft the same guy in the late 1st or trade back into the 2nd and get him, it doesn't change how good or bad he is. Both our starting CBs last year were undrafted and our best ILB over the last 5+ seasons was a 5th or 6th rounder (Bishop). If a majority of the players on the board are 2nd round quality which is the assumption in Zero's OP then it makes sense to try and trade back and pick up something extra. You aren't losing quality in a player just because he doesn't have the prestige of being picked in the 1st round. I mean you are talking about a handfull of picks difference here between our 1st round selection (30) and a trade back scenario, do you really think the quality of players is going to drastically change in that time?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

Why wouldn't I trust it out of the 2nd round? Randall Cobb, Eddie Lacy and Jordy Nelson were all 2nd round choices and they are starters. Casey Hayward was 2nd rounder and he's performed quite well. Morgan Burnett was 3rd rounder and he's a starter.

If you're sitting at 30th overall and you have several guys you like that could be had in the top of round two, you absolutely trade back 5, 10 or so spots and still get one of the guys you want while adding another selection. Why? Because you never know if that 6th rounder will be Tom Brady or that 7th rounder will be Donald Driver.

I think the bigger question is, why would wouldn't you trade back if you can still get someone you want while adding more picks?



Check this out for example. The 2013 Draft, the Packers had the 55th overall selection and traded back 6 spots and took Eddie Lacy while adding the 173rd overall selection, a sixth-round selection. They still got their guy and added a pick in the process. Interesting to note that the Packers packaged that 173rd (and the 146th overall) pick to move up to 125th overall to select RB Johnathan Franklin.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

The examples are guys that became starters. Find a starter ILB or CB out of the 2nd round ready from day 1? I am not saying they will not get there, but tell me where the comfort level is if we lose 2 starters because Clay should not be playing ILB next year.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 

Eddie Lacy was a starter right out of the gate. I think Morgan Burnett was too. The point was you can find the talent outside of round one.

The rest of what you're saying I can't follow, sorry.

I just don't see the issue with the Packers falling back 5-10 spots and getting the same player very early round two vs at 30 while adding another selection in the process. I mean, why pay $10,000 for a car when you could pay $8,000? Know what I mean?


If the Packers select at 30, I wouldn't be surprised, but I expect them to move out of the round one and into the top portion of round two with adding a pick.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I am not saying that the Pack should Pick at 30. I am saying the Pack should trade up without being ridiculous about it. If we need to find starters from day 1 I think they are better in the 1st round than the second.

Comparing a starting RB to starting ILB or CB is wrong based on the complexity of the position.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 

o_O so you're expecting (or preferring) the Packers trade up rather than trade back? Who do you think the Packers should target and how far up would they have to go to get'em?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I think we can trade up and find a starting CB. It appears all the ILB have lower grades. The problem is the guy I like Jalen Collins will proably be around a 10 spot jump. I don't have a calculator on what that should cost in terms of draft picks, but I'm guessing it would cost our 1st and 2nd rounder. Don't know what is available at ILB in the 3+ rounds that we can start.

Edit: I remember reading up on Taiwan Jones from Michigan State who is projected as a 4th or 5th rounder. This guy seems interesting as an ILB pick. Smart dude with leadership skills.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 

I am not saying that the Pack should Pick at 30. I am saying the Pack should trade up without being ridiculous about it. If we need to find starters from day 1 I think they are better in the 1st round than the second.

Comparing a starting RB to starting ILB or CB is wrong based on the complexity of the position.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 

Yeah we really don't know how teams truly value these guys though for all we know Ted has 5 CBs and 3 ILBs with high grades. I'm wondering even if we traded up for a CB would you expect him to win a starting spot early on over Shields, Hayward or Hyde? I wouldn't, we need to remember they are drafting a guy for the next 5 years not just for next year and shouldn't just automatically expect a day 1 starter. Would you rather have a guy whose ready to start day 1 and ends up above average or a guy who isn't very good his 1st year and ends up elite?

Originally Posted by: steveishere