Official 2020 Draft Thread

I could really see something like this. While Gutekunst is "new", he comes from the Wolf tree. And neither Wolf nor Thompson has taken an ILB or WR in the first round in the last 30 years.

It seems the board/fan consensus is the Packers should take a WR, ILB, OT, DL early. Even if everything were to magically fall in to place for those positions, and Gurtekunst feels the same needs, one of those positions still wouldn't be taken until Round 4. Withe the signings of Kirksey, Funchess and Wagner, he's not forced in to taking one of those spots early and using Free Agency as likely the best way.

Heck, even if he sticks to the "script" we could well see something like this:

I think Burrow will be a bust but mainly because he's going to Cincy.  If he went to the right team with the right coach, he'd probably be a very good QB.  I see him like a Goff-type QB - probably not good enough to overcome poor talent and poor coaching.  I think Cincy has both (although the jury is out on Zac Taylor, just have little faith in  Cincy as a franchise).  

Signing Wagner gives the Packers more flexibility to draft a raw OT.  That's both good and bad, as raw OTs are a huge gamble.  Give me a Tauscher/Clifton/Bakhtiari any day - I'd rather an OL of great technicians that get the job done than a bunch of athletes that don't actually know how to block. 

I've been seeing quite a few mocks with a TE in the 2nd and 3rd.  Not sure what makes sense either - this is a pretty weak TE class and the Packers already have a 3rd round TE in Sternberger.  Only way they go TE is if they're ready to give up on him and dont think that's the case. 

CUPackFan posted:

Signing Wagner gives the Packers more flexibility to draft a raw OT.  That's both good and bad, as raw OTs are a huge gamble.  Give me a Tauscher/Clifton/Bakhtiari any day - I'd rather an OL of great technicians that get the job done than a bunch of athletes that don't actually know how to block. 

Agreed.  No more TE conversion projects.  This raw shit rarely works for Oline.  Draft guys that produced in college no matter how "unathletic" they may be.  I can think of one conversion guy that produced and that was Tretter but they kept Stubbie McPusharound instead.  Even then Tretter had already played oline effectively.

CUPackFan posted:

Signing Wagner gives the Packers more flexibility to draft a raw OT.  That's both good and bad, as raw OTs are a huge gamble.  Give me a Tauscher/Clifton/Bakhtiari any day - I'd rather an OL of great technicians that get the job done than a bunch of athletes that don't actually know how to block. 

If my memory is correct, both Tauscher and Bakhtiari were 4th round draft choices.  That’s not exactly a rock solid choice or guarantee.  They have turned out amazingly well for the Pack, but that was not a given when drafted. 

Tauscher was a 7th rounder.  Sitton was a 5th rounder.  Lang a 4th rounder.  There are numerous examples of solid but unspectacular olinemen in college who were better investments than a Tony Mandarich or some shit TE underwear champion raw/conversion project.

YA Tittle is a walking participation ribbon.

Bulaga was a 1st rounder, Clifton was a 2nd rounder, Jenkins was a 2nd rounder, etc. Early round OL have a higher success rate in general...maybe not for the Packers recently, but across the league that’s generally true. 

I know its a big  (  IF  ) ..... Louisville OT Mekhi Becton free falls all the way to 30,  would you snagg him ???

Absolutely

Grave Digger posted:

Bulaga was a 1st rounder, Clifton was a 2nd rounder, Jenkins was a 2nd rounder, etc. Early round OL have a higher success rate in general...maybe not for the Packers recently, but across the league that’s generally true. 

It's simply a statement that Oline (real olinemen) investment across the board is your best bet in the draft.  Leave the raw/potential bullshit at the door. 

Bectons drug test was flagged at combine. Not sure he makes it down to 30. Sapp flunked his and did not drop too far.

Herschel posted:

I could really see something like this. While Gutekunst is "new", he comes from the Wolf tree. And neither Wolf nor Thompson has taken an ILB or WR in the first round in the last 30 years.

It seems the board/fan consensus is the Packers should take a WR, ILB, OT, DL early. Even if everything were to magically fall in to place for those positions, and Gurtekunst feels the same needs, one of those positions still wouldn't be taken until Round 4. Withe the signings of Kirksey, Funchess and Wagner, he's not forced in to taking one of those spots early and using Free Agency as likely the best way.

Heck, even if he sticks to the "script" we could well see something like this:

 

Wasn't AJ Hawk a first round ILB....and Nick Barnett?

Herschel posted:

I could really see something like this. While Gutekunst is "new", he comes from the Wolf tree. And neither Wolf nor Thompson has taken an ILB or WR in the first round in the last 30 years.

It seems the board/fan consensus is the Packers should take a WR, ILB, OT, DL early. Even if everything were to magically fall in to place for those positions, and Gurtekunst feels the same needs, one of those positions still wouldn't be taken until Round 4. Withe the signings of Kirksey, Funchess and Wagner, he's not forced in to taking one of those spots early and using Free Agency as likely the best way.

Heck, even if he sticks to the "script" we could well see something like this:

 

Wasn't AJ Hawk a first round ILB....and Nick Barnett?

Wait....those were Sherman picks. I stand corrected. 

Thompson drafted Hawk

CUPackFan posted:

I've been seeing quite a few mocks with a TE in the 2nd and 3rd.  Not sure what makes sense either - this is a pretty weak TE class and the Packers already have a 3rd round TE in Sternberger.  Only way they go TE is if they're ready to give up on him and dont think that's the case. 

No need for a TE in this draft. We have Sternberger, Lewis, Tonyan on the roster now, plus Bayliss on the PS with Looney trying to transition to TE, also on the PS. We can draft a "big" WR like a Claypool or use ESB or Funcheese there, if needed. 

These days I'm a fan first. 

YooperPackfan posted:

Thompson drafted Hawk

And to be an outside linebacker in a 4-3.

ammo posted:

Is he really that bad?  Why is he even projected to be drafted? 

He's a less athletic (way less athletic) Mitch Trubiski. 

He will get drafted real late by a team that falls in love with his arm and production in college. 

Ketchmam via Tony Pauline thinks the man from Epenesa would help the D more than anyone else that may be available at 30.

Okay Oscar Wilde.  Who?

https://www.google.com/search?...=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Maybe PackerHawk can fill us in.

Epenesa is a good player and will be a good player, but what is his role in GB? Replacement for Dean Lowry? Epenesa is a DL, but we need a true 5T/3T to replace the undersized Lowry not a 9T/5T player who will be playing roughly out of position. He would improve the pass rush, but is he going to be an upgrade against the run? Not against power. He’s a better fit as a 9T/OLB, but we literally just burned a top 15 pick on the same skill set last year. 

Hungry5 posted:

These days I'm a fan first. 

I was never a fan...in fact I didn't even try it.  

i am getting on the side that wants Gutey to package his 2nd round pic and move up in the teens. He can then have his choice of one of the top 4 WRs that is left. , one of the top four tackes or one of the top two inside Linebackers if he wants to go there. The quality beats the quantity. He needs to get in front of New Orleans, Philly, and Minnesota who have similar needs. 

Herschel posted:

I could really see something like this. While Gutekunst is "new", he comes from the Wolf tree. And neither Wolf nor Thompson has taken an ILB or WR in the first round in the last 30 years.

It seems the board/fan consensus is the Packers should take a WR, ILB, OT, DL early. Even if everything were to magically fall in to place for those positions, and Gurtekunst feels the same needs, one of those positions still wouldn't be taken until Round 4. Withe the signings of Kirksey, Funchess and Wagner, he's not forced in to taking one of those spots early and using Free Agency as likely the best way.

Heck, even if he sticks to the "script" we could well see something like this:

 

Nick Barnett

Javon Walker

RochNyFan posted:

Herschel posted:

I could really see something like this. While Gutekunst is "new", he comes from the Wolf tree. And neither Wolf nor Thompson has taken an ILB or WR in the first round in the last 30 years.

It seems the board/fan consensus is the Packers should take a WR, ILB, OT, DL early. Even if everything were to magically fall in to place for those positions, and Gurtekunst feels the same needs, one of those positions still wouldn't be taken until Round 4. Withe the signings of Kirksey, Funchess and Wagner, he's not forced in to taking one of those spots early and using Free Agency as likely the best way.

Heck, even if he sticks to the "script" we could well see something like this:

 

Wasn't AJ Hawk a first round ILB....and Nick Barnett?

Hawk was a 4-3 OLB and played there for GB his first year or two until they switched to a 3-4. Then he moved inside.

I think his rookie year it was Hawk, Barnett and Poppinga. Hawk probably had his most impact that season. Then I think the roids wore off.

Floridarob posted:

i am getting on the side that wants Gutey to package his 2nd round pic and move up in the teens. He can then have his choice of one of the top 4 WRs that is left. , one of the top four tackes or one of the top two inside Linebackers if he wants to go there. The quality beats the quantity. He needs to get in front of New Orleans, Philly, and Minnesota who have similar needs. 

This is one year I really hate the idea of trading up for a WR, and I really want a WR

As noted, Barnett & Walker were Sherman picks (Hershel commented about Wolf and Thompson).

Ditto that El-Ka-DontTradeUpForWR

We've all read plenty about there being starter WR talent to be had into the 3rd round. With Rodgers as the QB makes no sense to jump up for a WR. Maybe move up for a speedy/thumping ILB, but I'd be happy with some big dude for the DL or OL with the 1st pick.

I think the idea that there are "starting" caliber WRs deep into this draft has been overstated by the media. I think the R1 WRs (Lamb, Jeudy, Ruggs, Jefferson) are clear Day 1 starters. After that I think the next tier (Reagor, Pittman, Higgins, Shenault, Aiyuk, Mims) are maybe not immediate starters, but definitely early contributors. The next tier (Jefferson, Johnson, Peoples-Jones, Gandy-Golden, Hill) aren't early starters, but have starting ability after development. It's a deep draft and it's obviously abnormal to have so many NFL ready WRs, but it's deep more in upside/potential than immediate starter ability IMO. Within the context of GB, if you don't grab one of the Tier 1 players then your opening day #2 is likely Lazard unless you sign a veteran UFA or make a trade.

Are there really any day 1 starters in a new offense?  I would rather say day 1 contributors but I don't think anyone is immediately going to be the #2 for the entire season.  I guess it could happen but history says otherwise. 

A guy like Reagor or Duvernay may offer more in the first year as gadget/ST guys but even then I couldn't see starter like playing time. 

We need a guy like Cock lover Brak’s Deebo

any of the top 10-15 guys is a step up  

I will have my consensus bored put together by Wednesday, that’s if I don’t take up stripping - so I can play softball all summer - seriously.  

Henry posted:

Are there really any day 1 starters in a new offense?  I would rather say day 1 contributors but I don't think anyone is immediately going to be the #2 for the entire season.  I guess it could happen but history says otherwise.

The leap to the NFL is immense.
The leap to an AR-led offense is even higher. Reading defenses, beating press man coverage, changing plays at LOS, knowing how /where to run a route are just a few of the hurdles any rookie WR will face in GB.

Now, take away mini camps and OTAs, limit their time in the facility and cut down on available reps with QB1.   2020 is looking like vet year in WR world.

Sometime late in the season, the rooks might  start catching up, but it took Jordy and others 2 years under ideal circumstances. 2020 ain't gonna be ideal for player development.
You still draft em, but their contribution will be minimized by current reality

From Peter King:

Serious question: Why would you take a receiver high in this draft when the depth is so good, and when recent history argues vehemently against the first-round wideout?

This is neither foolproof nor conclusive, but GMs who do not pay attention to history might be condemned to repeat it. Could happen in this week’s draft, when three red-hot receivers—CeeDee Lamb, Jerry Jeudy and Henry Ruggs—will tempt general managers and coaches to pick them in the top 20 of the first round.

In the past four drafts, teams have picked 11 wide receivers in the first round and 19 in the second round. The production of the second-round picks, clearly and without ambiguity, has been superior to the first-rounders. I totaled the 30 combined seasons of the first-round receivers and plotted the average season, and then did the same with the 40 combined seasons of second-round wideouts. The numbers:

Average season of 1st-round WRs, 2016-19: 32.8 receptions, 450.1 yards, 13.7 yards per catch
Average season of 2nd-round WRs, 2016-19: 52.8 receptions, 681.8 yards, 12.9 yards per catch

If you have the right QB, you just need 'good' WRs and he'll make them great.  If you need a top 5 WR, then you don't have your QB and thus don't need to worry about drafting WRs in the first round.  

Look at what TT did in the second and third round - Jennings, Jones, Nelson, Cobb and Adams.  I'm not sure how good any of them would have been without Rodgers but highly doubt any have the career they have if they go to the Jets, Browns, Raiders, Dolphins, or any other team that's had a black hole at QB in the last 10 years.  

Agreed.  All BS aside, I think the only great WR's GB has had in my lifetime (I'm 49) are James Lofton and Sterling Sharpe.  The rest of the guys we all know were good to really good WRs made great by HOF QBs in Favre and Rodgers. 

Pakrz posted:

Agreed.  All BS aside, I think the only great WR's GB has had in my lifetime (I'm 49) are James Lofton and Sterling Sharpe.  The rest of the guys we all know were good to really good WRs made great by HOF QBs in Favre and Rodgers. 

I agree with you - but it is interesting that both guys mentioned were first round picks, 6th and 7th overall respectively. 

It seems like if you’re considered a top 10 talent, you have better than average chance of being a high level player. Recent history seems to bear that out...