It's a must-see event that always delivers

It’s a must-see event that always delivers

Dean from Leavenworth, IN

When looking at the Packers’ needs over the next two seasons, there aren’t many positions that wouldn’t qualify as a “need.” With the Packers’ five picks in the first three rounds, which positions on offense and defense are the Packers least likely to address with those five picks?

There are needs and there are opportunities. That’s why this draft is so critical. Because one playmaker at a position that wasn’t perceived as a “need” can be the difference. It sure was in 2010 when the Packers drafted Bryan Bulaga to develop behind Chad Clifton and Mark Tauscher. I’m sure running back, defensive line, inside linebacker and defensive back aren’t positions on the minds of most fans, but the right rookie at any of those positions could go a long way.

Joe from Liberty Township, OH

During this season of mock drafts, I treat them as a tool rather than a predictor of the Packers’ draft picks. Many, if not most, mock drafts fail to recognize the Packers’ draft tendencies. If I see a guard or ILB (and previously WR) mocked to the Packers in the first round, I know the author probably doesn’t know what any teams’ tendencies are. But it does give me a sense for where players will slot in the draft, and therefore who might be available when the Packers’ pick comes up.

Before I dive into a mock draft, I first look at position and then size of the player the Packers are projected to take. If Green Bay’s scouting tendencies match up, then I keep reading. If not, I move on. I’m not reading this stuff for entertainment. I want information and analysis.

Kerry from Lakewood Ranch, FL

Would you take any of the QBs in this draft over Jordan Love?

I don’t think so… but please don’t turn this into, “GREAT. WHAT CAN THE PACKERS GET FOR LOVE?”

Science is a process which involves making a hypothesis (theory) and testing it. Lather, rinse, and repeat. I know teams gather data and have metrics which they think relate to performance but in no way is the draft a science. Maybe if we stopped calling it that and used “art” instead people would understand what’s going on here.

The NFL Draft is an inexact art.

Marty from New Orleans, LA

“… Packers are biding their time for the prices on the market to return to sanity.” There’s no coming back from this. The WR market has been reset permanently.

Nothing is permanent, Marty. On a long enough timeline, everything is destined to change.

The absolute slander of the prized Hod arm! Maybe stick a sardine in your sandwich and leave it somewhere enticing. Thanks to Mike for the Chris Olave primer. He really sounds like someone who could take over the role MVS vacated. He seems to have as many challenged catches as he does catches made in open space after great separation, and playing for scrambling QBs means he’s ready to keep the play alive. What’s his experience like on special teams?

Not much, but that’s not why he’s going to be a first-round pick. As a receiver, Olave is the total package. The only thing missing is the size the Packers often covet in their receivers. But he has the speed and big-play ability Green Bay wants to take the top off the opposing defense like MVS. Olave is also a fluid route runner who can line up inside or outside. I’m not sure of Green Bay’s level of interest, but I’m a big, big fan.

How many prospects from your Prospect Primers for previous seasons became Packers?

I think Jeff Query was the most recent one. We sure know how to pick ’em.

I’ve found myself becoming frustrated with this column over the last month concerning inaccurate claims about WR quality vs. draft round. Cherry-picking data is not a sound form of analysis, so I did a quick and dirty survey. From 2011 to 2021, draft round, number of WRs picked, number of WRs who made a Pro Bowl at WR. (I counted Ty as a RB.) Results: Rd 1 – 41/9 (22%), Rd 2 – 53/11 (21%); Rd 3 – 41/5 (12%). Interpret this as you will, but at least it’s not cherry-picked. What conclusions would you draw?

It sounds to me like somebody woke up on the wrong side of the mock draft.

Jayson from Fayetteville, NC

Mike, in response to Jake from Decatur, GA, you listed cornerback as one of your needs. I’m curious as to why? Eric Stokes, Rasul Douglas, and Shemar Jean-Charles are locked up together for the next three years not even accounting for the possibility of Jaire Alexander’s potential contract. I definitely got the reasoning behind the other position groups you listed, just not CB.

I’m not Mike (but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last month). The Packers are loaded at cornerback with Jaire Alexander, Stokes, Douglas Jean-Charles and now Keisean Nixon. You can never have enough DBs. Last year was proof of that. Whether it’s a corner or safety, I think the Packers take a swim in the DB pool sometime over those three days.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.