For the second year in a row, Bucky Brooks has Green Bay picking up Aaron Rodgers' heir  in the first round:
 Screenshot_20200225-230248.png You have insufficient rights to see the content.



As much as the notion of Green Bay taking a quarterback like Eason, who has a rocket for an arm, might please me personally, I remain skeptical. I think the Gutekunst is more likely to spring for an offensive lineman or wide receiver than a quarterback. Even a linebacker strikes me as a more probable choice. I also find it somewhat concerning that he lost the starting job at Georgia to Jake Fromm, who isn't nearly as gifted physically. I'd hate to think the Packers squandered a first-round pick on another Jake Cutler or Deshone Kizer.

---

I agree Non.
There are so many holes that need to be filled in order to contend now.
If he goes after a QB in the early rounds, then we will be in the same boat we were in last season.
He needs to pick for Now.
That’s how I see it, at least.

---

A lot will happen before the 30th pick. They just have to see who falls to them. Someone will.

I loved it when GB took Aaron. I thought it was a smart move by Uncle Ted. They certainly had holes to fill even then. Teams do every year.

It's a deep year for WRs so if they wait until the 2nd or 3rd round they will get someone who will help. There are no TEs or for the most part ILBs worth taking in the 1st round. That gives Gute plenty of room to take his BPA.

In general QBs who are drafted and pushed out on to the field their first season struggle. (There are exceptions.) Some of them recover and have a decent career. Some never get their head on straight. I can't say I want Eason more than any other QB. I don't mind it if they wait one more year before taking their next QB of the future.

---

You make a lot of great points.
It’s good that I’m not the GM!
I’m so afraid that the last few years of ARs career will be wasted. And the chance of getting another great QB has to be slim at best.
I sure would like to see another SB victory in my lifetime.

---

I quote you, but not aiming at you.

When someone says we have holes that's bullshit method to drafting. What are holes today won't be holes in July, August or December. Chasing this notion of plugging holes via draft is why bad teams stay bad.

If a QB is hugest grade on your board, you take him. Period. Football is about having the best football players. You don't take a 2 grade guy in round one when you have a 1 grade available. It's not Madden. But it is maddening that fans keep talking like this.

You draft for future, not right now.
You sign free agents for right now.

Now, if QB Jordan Love is there at 30 take him. Unless there's a WR available with the same grade your scouts gave the QB. When all things are equal, that's when you lean towards need or holes.

Now ya all know. Don't make me tell ya again! 😜😛😝😁

---

Z zinnged:So the idea then is if an edge rusher is the top player on our board when it is our turn to draft, we take him? Seriously?

Other than rare exceptions, like 12, need factors into the equation, no matter what anyone tells you.

Moreover, let's not mistake precision for accuracy....rating systems are all fudged with human inputs which skew outcomes. All things being equal, I am drafting for perceived need, especially in mid to late rounds.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, there are players scouts love who are under the radar and or drop, like Rodgers who you pick at the opportune time.

But to say need isn't a major factor in all teams draft (good teams AND bad teams) is counterfactual.

---

Hell yes! Since when does any team have too many edge rushers? You remember the 2007 Giants? They won a Super Bowl because of their front seven and constant harassment of the QB. As we all know, this league is a passing league (except the stupid ass 49ers) and if you can rotate good-to-great pass rushers? OMG, you jump the shit out of that because it makes your entire defense better.

When I talk about scouting grades, I am not talking about the assclown media mock drafts. I am saying if I am a scout, or General Manager and the players on the board are graded as such.


Quickly tossing this together to lay out my thinking, so don't hold me to this shit.


Number indicates the round.
Letter indicates grade strength. A being top 10, B being 11-20, etc...

WR Some Name - 2 A
OL Some Name - 2 A+
QB Some Name - 1 A
RB Some Name - 1 B


Now we're at pick 30 and I have my "holes" being WR and OL as biggest needs. You damn right I'm taking the QB at 30 even though there's a high 2 grade pick.

Does this logic make sense or did I fumble futt around?

---

Agree. Teams have players in brackets. They might have 3 players with similar values in that bracket. they can pick any of them. Odds are they will take the one who best suits their needs but most of the time they are not going to reach into a lower bracket simply because a player better suits their needs. (At least winning organizations don't do it very often.)

If a team doesn't want a player in that bracket then chances are they will trade back.

---

I have always been a BPA guy. A GM is not doing their job if not taking the best players they can find. That does not mean they should not consider a player at a position of need who might have a hairs lower grade. I will say that I think the QB position is very tricky when it comes to rating them talent wise to players at other positions. I question whether a QB like Love is actually the best player available at #30 or is he being considered by teams there because the need at that position is so great for so many teams. Love certainly isn't rated that high because of his numbers having thrown 17 int's last year. It's all about "potential" and "ceiling" which is what teams are considering in that 2nd tier group of QB's and where they are rated is often over inflated. In other words the 5th best WR in this class is probably a lot better player than the 5th rated QB.

The other thing to consider when drafting for "the future" is that the future at QB in GB is Aaron Rodgers for the next 3 years unless he gets hurt.Then this kid with potential and a high ceiling gets to come in when he's not ready and get his brains beat out. It doesn't look to me to be much of a future for the #2 guy for awhile and that tells me the time isn't now for that next guy.
If a top 3 guy pops out of nowhere by all means take the shot. Otherwise save the bullets. After all not a lot of teams get the luxury of having to settle on an Aaron Rodgers for the time being.

---

I think in principle the logic is sound. If one of the top 3 QB's is sitting there at #30, (realistically Tua Tagovailoa or Justin Herbert - because Burrow is gone top 3 for sure) it would make sense to snag them at #30. Really you can say this about many positions, QB, DL, OT, EDGE, CB, maybe WR, not necessarily TE, ILB, OG, & S as those positions tend to go a little later in the draft (no guarantee that the #3 OG or S has a better than 3rd round grade). If you're looking at one of the top players at a high-demand position at the bottom of the 1st, that's probably a pretty good pick.

However, with how many teams are willing to reach early in the draft in hopes of getting a half decent QB, I think it's unlikely the Packers will have a chance at value at the QB position at pick 30. By value I mean a QB with a genuine 1st round grade. In reality we're probably looking at guys with 2-3 round grades like Jacob Easton.

So I think it's very unlikely that BPA at 30 will be a QB. If it miraculously is, like it was with Rodgers, take him for sure, no complaints from me. I think the most likely scenario here is Tua, and in most years when you have a guy who was maybe in consideration for the #1 pick, looking at getting him at 30 would be a slam dunk. But if he's there at 30 it's probably due to significant injury concerns. An injured QB is a luxury GB can take, but you better be sure he's gonna hold up.

Assuming QB isn't BPA at 30, I would wait on the QB position until later in the draft or skip it entirely. If Rodger's play starts declining significantly over the next couple years, they'll be picking higher in the draft, and will have a better shot at a top-rated sort of guy. I think realistically Rodgers has at least 2 more years of above average play, and maybe you want to give a rookie QB at least one year on the bench, so I could see 2021, 2022 as good years to draft one.

It's a delicate balance, because you want to take advantage of a young, talented QB on his rookie deal, when you can afford to sign FAs and build a team around him, rather than having him sit for 3 years. Then looking at giving him a big money deal after only one year as a starter, that's not an ideal position to be in. I think it's important not to overlook the realities of the league and how important these sort of considerations are to the position and winning in general. So BPA as sort of black and white rule only gets you so far.

---