Packers Huddle

Acrobat wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:00

Random thought. It's amazing how some of our draft crushes end up not turning in anything. Just read a blurb that Patrick Queen is not getting his 5th year option. So many of us really wanted him.

It's the biggest reason I'm not on the "Fire Gute because of 2020 train"

The list of guys we had crushes on were like 3 - 4 WRs and Kenneth Murray and Patrick Queen. Every player except Patrick Queen was gone by 25. I was mad because we didn't nab Queen at 26.

Ends up both Love and Queen might not get the 5th year option (for different reasons). So the pain from that draft is less for me.

go pak go wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:12

Acrobat wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:00

Random thought. It's amazing how some of our draft crushes end up not turning in anything. Just read a blurb that Patrick Queen is not getting his 5th year option. So many of us really wanted him.

It's the biggest reason I'm not on the "Fire Gute because of 2020 train"

The list of guys we had crushes on were like 3 - 4 WRs and Kenneth Murray and Patrick Queen. Every player except Patrick Queen was gone by 25. I was mad because we didn't nab Queen at 26.

Ends up both Love and Queen might not get the 5th year option (for different reasons). So the pain from that draft is less for me.

I'd go a step farther and just overall I try to realize that specific players aren't really a reason to get upset at draft time. Positionally I think there is more of an argument to be made. I think 2020 fits better into that bucket, but is looking better in that aspect 3 years later. Also, neglecting the WR to the point where we got 2023 was not good, which fits into the positional argument.

go pak go wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:12

Acrobat wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:00

Random thought. It's amazing how some of our draft crushes end up not turning in anything. Just read a blurb that Patrick Queen is not getting his 5th year option. So many of us really wanted him.

It's the biggest reason I'm not on the "Fire Gute because of 2020 train"

The list of guys we had crushes on were like 3 - 4 WRs and Kenneth Murray and Patrick Queen. Every player except Patrick Queen was gone by 25. I was mad because we didn't nab Queen at 26.

Ends up both Love and Queen might not get the 5th year option (for different reasons). So the pain from that draft is less for me.

Gute should be held to a higher standard for who he picks than us

paco wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:11

How are those names listed, perhaps by order of production? Anyhow, LOVE seeing Colby Wooden on that short list, for whatever the reason.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 13:20

paco wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:11

How are those names listed, perhaps by order of production? Anyhow, LOVE seeing Colby Wooden on that short list, for whatever the reason.

Love seeing 3 of the top 5 in green and yellow.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 11:04

BF004 wrote: ↑

26 Apr 2023 12:11

So this flow chart is crazier than we thought. Didn't take JSN, but here are the guys on the flow chart:
Van Ness
Musgrave
Kraft
Clifford
Kicker?

I predicted that this year's draft would not deviate too far from our expectations, just about every position was drafted commensurate with perceived need. The strength of this draft class lined up pretty neatly with our needs.

Labrev wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 16:35

I predicted that this year's draft would not deviate too far from our expectations, just about every position was drafted commensurate with perceived need. The strength of this draft class lined up pretty neatly with our needs.

Except for safety, yes

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 17:01

Labrev wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 16:35

I predicted that this year's draft would not deviate too far from our expectations, just about every position was drafted commensurate with perceived need. The strength of this draft class lined up pretty neatly with our needs.

Except for safety, yes

Grabbing Clifford surprised me, I thought when we passed on Henden, or Levis, and those other couple in the 3 rd I figured we'd wait till late 6th or 7th, but the Kid seems to polished to pass up, so much is mental and Clifford seems to have it, good choice.

took me a while to over come not getting KIncaid actually that was a far fetched dream and I new it, still he was the first taken, and if the Bills use him a lot as a receiver I think he'll thrive, for us though he was not worth moving back up for ( obviously) and not worth sliding back, we needed a pass rusher, I thought it would be LVN, Murphy, Smith, or the OL man B. Jones, if we went in that direction.

good draft class, solid DL help, Van Ness, Wooden and Brooks are great additions, another solid receiver prospect, and 2 TE's I liked, a kicker, only 1 safety, thin class, maybe we'll resign Amos.

now hopefully they all stud out, but I know thats about as far fetched as wishing for Kincaid
burn em if ya got em

Thanks to you Yoho, and all others that provided all the player info pre draft, your opinions and info where greatly appreciated

Drj820 wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:27

go pak go wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:12

Acrobat wrote: ↑

01 May 2023 12:00

Random thought. It's amazing how some of our draft crushes end up not turning in anything. Just read a blurb that Patrick Queen is not getting his 5th year option. So many of us really wanted him.

It's the biggest reason I'm not on the "Fire Gute because of 2020 train"

The list of guys we had crushes on were like 3 - 4 WRs and Kenneth Murray and Patrick Queen. Every player except Patrick Queen was gone by 25. I was mad because we didn't nab Queen at 26.

Ends up both Love and Queen might not get the 5th year option (for different reasons). So the pain from that draft is less for me.

Gute should be held to a higher standard for who he picks than us

You can hold him to the same standards as his peers. And honestly there are not many players picked after 26 where I'm like, "we totally missed that guy"

Tee Higgins is about the only one.

So as I mentioned for my 'hated players' pre draft, I said it was more about process than the players per se.

But I am very happy with the draft.

Starting back at the beginning of this offseason, its been very well known this was a great TE draft and an awful safety draft. Our situations weren't too dissimilar. c

But we resigned Ford and went and signed Ward as well. We did make a decision to keep Savage. Not sure if possible, but just with all of those picks we had, we could have maybe offered a 5 and a 6 and like $3M to someone to take Savage's contract. But either way. We mostly avoided safety all draft.

Then for TE, we didn't resign Tonyan or Lewis (yet) or sign anyone else, and we actually hit it in the draft, well.

I definitely applaud that.


I was a big JSN fan, but to me its really hard to argue with getting a premium edge at 13, especially the more I've been seeing of Jayden Reed the past few days. Wasn't on most radar's for size and maybe only above average tested athleticism, but he is shockingly impressive. Has some real dawg in him on contested catches and blocking, certainly doesn't look to be an only 'above average' athlete watching him. Happy with all that.


I'm not gunna complain about a 5th round QB, but sitting there with 7 I believe picks to go in the draft, and you even admit there was a run on QB's before him and he was your last one left. That kind of annoys me then that they couldn't have made a move to get a guy they wanted more. We aren't going to keep 13 draft picks, so we really should have moved up to get the QB we wanted. Seemed like a missed opportunity there.

Given the chart above and what some commentators are saying, is it possible that Guty and the Packers are thinking differently on defense? With Kraft and Wooden, are they looking more at “backfield disruption” than 2-gap?

I have to admit that i do hope we look to more of a disruptive scheme. That is, I thought, why we hired our current DC and moved on from the previous. Let’s hope!

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

02 May 2023 13:34

Given the chart above and what some commentators are saying, is it possible that Guty and the Packers are thinking differently on defense? With Kraft and Wooden, are they looking more at “backfield disruption” than 2-gap?

I have to admit that i do hope we look to more of a disruptive scheme. That is, I thought, why we hired our current DC and moved on from the previous. Let’s hope!

first thing that popped in my head when we took Walker at slot 22 a year ago is we'd see more 30 front, or base 34 front, to my way of thinking, if ya have two cover able ILB's then ya lessen the need to play so much nickel or dime, but that didn't happen, same way that when you have CB's that can play better man coverage, why play so much zone, cover 2 and 3, but then Barry comes out with we are a zone coverage defense, so I have no idea what Barry will do next.

BF004 wrote: ↑

02 May 2023 13:27

I'm not gunna complain about a 5th round QB, but sitting there with 7 I believe picks to go in the draft, and you even admit there was a run on QB's before him and he was your last one left. That kind of annoys me then that they couldn't have made a move to get a guy they wanted more. We aren't going to keep 13 draft picks, so we really should have moved up to get the QB we wanted. Seemed like a missed opportunity there.

I think they did get the QB they wanted without spending a 3rd on one.

Yoop wrote: ↑

02 May 2023 14:02

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

02 May 2023 13:34

Given the chart above and what some commentators are saying, is it possible that Guty and the Packers are thinking differently on defense? With Kraft and Wooden, are they looking more at “backfield disruption” than 2-gap?

I have to admit that i do hope we look to more of a disruptive scheme. That is, I thought, why we hired our current DC and moved on from the previous. Let’s hope!

first thing that popped in my head when we took Walker at slot 22 a year ago is we'd see more 30 front, or base 34 front, to my way of thinking, if ya have two cover able ILB's then ya lessen the need to play so much nickel or dime, but that didn't happen, same way that when you have CB's that can play better man coverage, why play so much zone, cover 2 and 3, but then Barry comes out with we are a zone coverage defense, so I have no idea what Barry will do next.

Okay. I’ll add that these two guys (assuming they both make the roster) are different types than in the past. They are not guys who simply cover their gaps. These are guys who are good at penetration beyond the LOS. Barry will have to coach differently with these guys. Who knows, maybe Barry is actually evolving.

I watched Ben Fennell with Andy Herman today. I like a thing that Ben said. He basically stated that LVN will probably play the number of snaps that Dean Lowry played last year. (Don’t want to load too much onto his rookie season.) And what you get from LVN is much better already than Lowry.

I like that way of thinking!

I know Hit Rate is a very hotly discussed topic around here, but here's a data set to add to the conversations--from 2009 to 2018 drafts

The criteria is for first-round picks who "signed a second contract with 'their' team," which I would think means "the team that drafted them," but not sure how they'd treat a guy who was traded and resigned with their new team.

Anyway, that's a methodology but obviously, a player who signs a big second contract with a new team is a successful evaluation for a draft pick, but maybe not a successful part of team building? Anyway, it's tough to find a criteria that doesn't have a degree of arbitrary decisions, but this is worth checking out.

I don't think it is a coincidence LB, TE, and RB are bottom with this methodology. I don't think teams want to sign them to 2nd contacts simply because of value at the position.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

02 May 2023 20:42

I don't think it is a coincidence LB, TE, and RB are bottom with this methodology. I don't think teams want to sign them to 2nd contacts simply because of value at the position.

Guard, too