The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
I advocate for moving up to around 15 and drafting Jameson Williams.
Wilson and London imo will be gone top 12, both are walk on ready to play, so is Olave but might drop to 15 or so, it's hard to place Williams, a team that can allow him to mend could grab him top 10, or he could be there along with Olave hard to say, to me these 4 have less warts then all the rest, teams hate warts they all go top 20Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 06:43I advocate for moving up to around 15 and drafting Jameson Williams.
If he’s gone before about 15 I guess we just missed out. Jumping Nola, Phillys second pick, and the Chiefs will help our cause tremendously though
A good trade partner may be the Texans at 13, who needs as many picks as they can get
I wouldn’t move Heaven and earth to get above 13
we'll have to trade up if we want one, I hope we do, then take Watkins with slot 28, that would fix our WR position for years., thing is it'll cost us our top 3 picks to get both players, costly, but a wise investment to meAn obvious investment to make, considering how awful our current WR room is.Yoop wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 06:56Wilson and London imo will be gone top 12, both are walk on ready to play, so is Olave but might drop to 15 or so, it's hard to place Williams, a team that can allow him to mend could grab him top 10, or he could be there along with Olave hard to say, to me these 4 have less warts then all the rest, teams hate warts they all go top 20Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 06:43I advocate for moving up to around 15 and drafting Jameson Williams.
If he’s gone before about 15 I guess we just missed out. Jumping Nola, Phillys second pick, and the Chiefs will help our cause tremendously though
A good trade partner may be the Texans at 13, who needs as many picks as they can get
I wouldn’t move Heaven and earth to get above 13
Well this is what bleacherreport says:bud fox wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 04:52No I advocate using 2 picks on a stud receiver and obviously disagree with the assessment by the famous lance zierlein.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 03:33"Wilson's game is lacking in polish, but some scouts believe his play strength and run-after-catch ability make him a more valuable draft commodity than Ohio State teammate Chris Olave. He's a linear, inside/outside receiver with trouble eluding press cleanly and is very inefficient with routes over the first two levels. His long speed is good, but the acceleration burst is what makes him such an effective separator in space. He might not be smooth getting there, but he has eye-popping ball skills when it's time to go make a play. Wilson needs to work on his ability to consistently uncover on all three levels, but he has the traits to become a very good WR2 if he tightens up areas of concern."
So you advocate using both first round picks on an undersized receiver that has the ability to be a very good WR#2 if he learns how to run a route?
https://www.nfl.com/prospects/garrett-w ... c826d8709c
I think teams will reach, 7 or 8 teams desperately need receiver help, most are like us that need a #1 and can't wait to develop them for a year, none may be worth a top 10 pick, but demand may get them taken there.
just my opinion on this.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:16Well this is what bleacherreport says:bud fox wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 04:52No I advocate using 2 picks on a stud receiver and obviously disagree with the assessment by the famous lance zierlein.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 03:33
"Wilson's game is lacking in polish, but some scouts believe his play strength and run-after-catch ability make him a more valuable draft commodity than Ohio State teammate Chris Olave. He's a linear, inside/outside receiver with trouble eluding press cleanly and is very inefficient with routes over the first two levels. His long speed is good, but the acceleration burst is what makes him such an effective separator in space. He might not be smooth getting there, but he has eye-popping ball skills when it's time to go make a play. Wilson needs to work on his ability to consistently uncover on all three levels, but he has the traits to become a very good WR2 if he tightens up areas of concern."
So you advocate using both first round picks on an undersized receiver that has the ability to be a very good WR#2 if he learns how to run a route?
https://www.nfl.com/prospects/garrett-w ... c826d8709c
GRADE: 8.3 (Year 1 Starter - Late 1st-2nd Round)
OVERALL RANK: 21
I don't have any problem with the Packers taking him at 22. But to give up a future starter at OLB or Dline or Safety and a competent backup this year at any of those positions - the price is too high.
If he is gone at 22, somebody else who should have gone about 20 should be there.
You won't get a star at ANY position except for maybe RB and specialists on a cheap second or third deal. The spikes in the cap see to that. To me, doesn't really matter where you save, as long as you hit on more players in the draft than the opposition and get guys anywhere who will start and produce on rookie salaries, you're fine.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:50The WRs second contracts and their ability to contribute early is absolutely going to drive guys up the board.
How else can a GM get a WR for a decent price these days? If you dont draft the guy, you are going to pay what used to be QB money for a good one.
This launches guys up the board that would go later in years past.
I think WR is the last position you reach for. Good WRs are more abundant than any other position group, except maybe RB. But you don't draft them high anyway.salmar80 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 09:48You won't get a star at ANY position except for maybe RB and specialists on a cheap second or third deal. The spikes in the cap see to that. To me, doesn't really matter where you save, as long as you hit on more players in the draft than the opposition and get guys anywhere who will start and produce on rookie salaries, you're fine.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:50The WRs second contracts and their ability to contribute early is absolutely going to drive guys up the board.
How else can a GM get a WR for a decent price these days? If you dont draft the guy, you are going to pay what used to be QB money for a good one.
This launches guys up the board that would go later in years past.
WRs are usually ticket sellers, even top rookie ones. A sexy position. But this year, there's no ticket seller, so sucky teams can't fill seats with one. That's why I predict none go in top 10.
Y'all may be right, teams may still reach. As in taking or trading up for a lesser WR prospect than a more highly graded prospect at another position. I hate reaching. I'd take the better prospect any time.
there will be a star or two come out of this draft. Maybe not Megatron, but a star.paco wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 10:39I think WR is the last position you reach for. Good WRs are more abundant than any other position group, except maybe RB. But you don't draft them high anyway.salmar80 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 09:48You won't get a star at ANY position except for maybe RB and specialists on a cheap second or third deal. The spikes in the cap see to that. To me, doesn't really matter where you save, as long as you hit on more players in the draft than the opposition and get guys anywhere who will start and produce on rookie salaries, you're fine.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:50The WRs second contracts and their ability to contribute early is absolutely going to drive guys up the board.
How else can a GM get a WR for a decent price these days? If you dont draft the guy, you are going to pay what used to be QB money for a good one.
This launches guys up the board that would go later in years past.
WRs are usually ticket sellers, even top rookie ones. A sexy position. But this year, there's no ticket seller, so sucky teams can't fill seats with one. That's why I predict none go in top 10.
Y'all may be right, teams may still reach. As in taking or trading up for a lesser WR prospect than a more highly graded prospect at another position. I hate reaching. I'd take the better prospect any time.
Would rather reach for someone you think is special on defense or OL. Only if its a Calvin Johnson or something like that, do you go up. Basically no one believes that of anyone this draft.
It is also very tough to identify which ones will be the good ones.paco wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 10:39I think WR is the last position you reach for. Good WRs are more abundant than any other position group, except maybe RB. But you don't draft them high anyway.salmar80 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 09:48You won't get a star at ANY position except for maybe RB and specialists on a cheap second or third deal. The spikes in the cap see to that. To me, doesn't really matter where you save, as long as you hit on more players in the draft than the opposition and get guys anywhere who will start and produce on rookie salaries, you're fine.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:50The WRs second contracts and their ability to contribute early is absolutely going to drive guys up the board.
How else can a GM get a WR for a decent price these days? If you dont draft the guy, you are going to pay what used to be QB money for a good one.
This launches guys up the board that would go later in years past.
WRs are usually ticket sellers, even top rookie ones. A sexy position. But this year, there's no ticket seller, so sucky teams can't fill seats with one. That's why I predict none go in top 10.
Y'all may be right, teams may still reach. As in taking or trading up for a lesser WR prospect than a more highly graded prospect at another position. I hate reaching. I'd take the better prospect any time.
Would rather reach for someone you think is special on defense or OL. Only if its a Calvin Johnson or something like that, do you go up. Basically no one believes that of anyone this draft.
Pretty sure they were talking about Garrett Wilson...Yoop wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:44just my opinion on this.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:16Well this is what bleacherreport says:
GRADE: 8.3 (Year 1 Starter - Late 1st-2nd Round)
OVERALL RANK: 21
I don't have any problem with the Packers taking him at 22. But to give up a future starter at OLB or Dline or Safety and a competent backup this year at any of those positions - the price is too high.
If he is gone at 22, somebody else who should have gone about 20 should be there.
I bet there are 31 GM's kicking themselves for not moving up in the teens for Justin Jefferson, if ours isn't he should be, there is no way that Olave will last till the 20's, zero.
and anyone can find some draft site that thinks Olave will last till slot 21, you can also find a bunch of others that say he wont, seems draft site grades go from one extreme to the other this year.
https://www.nfl.com/news/maurice-jones- ... witter_atnGood to be optimistic, teams will reach for QB's, they do every year, would be nice to push several players down to us, and just because most mocks have 4 WR's going top 20 doesn't mean they will, seems based on positional need they will, I hope your right though.BF004 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 13:02Pretty sure they were talking about Garrett Wilson...Yoop wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:44just my opinion on this.TheSkeptic wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 08:16
Well this is what bleacherreport says:
GRADE: 8.3 (Year 1 Starter - Late 1st-2nd Round)
OVERALL RANK: 21
I don't have any problem with the Packers taking him at 22. But to give up a future starter at OLB or Dline or Safety and a competent backup this year at any of those positions - the price is too high.
If he is gone at 22, somebody else who should have gone about 20 should be there.
I bet there are 31 GM's kicking themselves for not moving up in the teens for Justin Jefferson, if ours isn't he should be, there is no way that Olave will last till the 20's, zero.
and anyone can find some draft site that thinks Olave will last till slot 21, you can also find a bunch of others that say he wont, seems draft site grades go from one extreme to the other this year.
However, Olave could certainly fall 22 if 4 QB's go in the top 10.
this aint then 
Yeah, Jameson Williams is my 'guy' right now.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 17:37many people keep saying they dont see the guy worth moving up for, or the "lock". It is true no one is a "lock", but there is someone close to it.
That is Jameson WIlliams. The ACL tear is a nothing burger. These days guys come back from that better than they return from a high ankle sprain that can always linger.
I think Willams will be ready earlier than expected, but even if he missed the first 10 weeks...by January...that guy is going to help a team move the chains and score points.
My point in this post is to say, not moving up or drafting him at 22 because he may not be ready by week 1 is no reason to overlook him at all. He will be back in time, and he will help us for years to come.
love the idea of giving up 22 and 59 to go get a guy of Jamesons caliber. How far up the board do you think that could get us? Im not super sure about those things. I really think Houston at 13 and the Chargers at 17 are our most likely dance partners. I think Baltimore, Philly and Nola would all love to get Jameson so we may need to get above them to grab him.BF004 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 17:51Yeah, Jameson Williams is my 'guy' right now.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 17:37many people keep saying they dont see the guy worth moving up for, or the "lock". It is true no one is a "lock", but there is someone close to it.
That is Jameson WIlliams. The ACL tear is a nothing burger. These days guys come back from that better than they return from a high ankle sprain that can always linger.
I think Willams will be ready earlier than expected, but even if he missed the first 10 weeks...by January...that guy is going to help a team move the chains and score points.
My point in this post is to say, not moving up or drafting him at 22 because he may not be ready by week 1 is no reason to overlook him at all. He will be back in time, and he will help us for years to come.
Drake London probably coming in a second.
Tiers and rankings, I could justify 22 an 59 for Jameson. He's in his own tier. So that is my 22 and 59 tier. Offer 22 and 59 every pick till he's taken. Literally every pick.
Maybe a negligible difference, but I don't love 22 and 53. Something about that tier that ends around 45, I want one of those guys, every mock I do, someone goes from 52-58 that I really like.
After that is my 22 and 92 tier, London and Wilson in that order.
Other than that, Olave, Pickens, Burks at 22 with no trade up.
I am comfortable with all those.
I am not huge on Watson, I surprisingly don't hate Dotson, despite his numbers. Maybe competing with Wilson for best route runner in class.
Love a lot of guys in the later 2nd round to 4th round. I'd be happy with any of them around 52 or 59, reach be damned.
Still trying to finalize my thoughts on everyone I didn't name.
Most commonly used trade chart shows it would take us to Baltimore at 14. Baltimore is highly unlikely to be targeting a WR in round one; just took Bateman last year and are a run-first, defensive-minded team.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 18:04love the idea of giving up 22 and 59 to go get a guy of Jamesons caliber. How far up the board do you think that could get us? Im not super sure about those things. I really think Houston at 13 and the Chargers at 17 are our most likely dance partners. I think Baltimore, Philly and Nola would all love to get Jameson so we may need to get above them to grab him.
I think Philly would trade with us seeing they have two picks in the mid first range, but I still think they may want williams at a cheap cost to put beside Devanta
I was thinking the Ravens may want to go WR due to maybe not paying Hollywood in the coming years. If they want to trade with us I would love to get to 14 and secure Williams.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 18:10Most commonly used trade chart shows it would take us to Baltimore at 14. Baltimore is highly unlikely to be targeting a WR in round one; just took Bateman last year and are a run-first, defensive-minded team.Drj820 wrote: ↑22 Apr 2022 18:04love the idea of giving up 22 and 59 to go get a guy of Jamesons caliber. How far up the board do you think that could get us? Im not super sure about those things. I really think Houston at 13 and the Chargers at 17 are our most likely dance partners. I think Baltimore, Philly and Nola would all love to get Jameson so we may need to get above them to grab him.
I think Philly would trade with us seeing they have two picks in the mid first range, but I still think they may want williams at a cheap cost to put beside Devanta
To get to Houston at 1 we'd probably have to throw in our 3rd, but could maybe do it with a 4th, but I hate 3-for-1 trades--especially when all the picks are in the top 150.