Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Who trades up to 2.1 with the Packers?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DraftHobbyist


Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 349
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:25 am    Post subject: Who trades up to 2.1 with the Packers? Reply with quote

The Packers traded down to 2.1, and GM Ted Thompson came out and said that they are shopping the pick. He rarely gives out information like that, so I consider it close to a guarantee that they do trade. What team do you guys think will trade up to 2.1?

Source: http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Thompson_taking_calls_for_pick_No_33/a78a596e-4cee-4341-93b7-7fc5b02754d4
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DraftHobbyist


Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 349
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One trade I thought of is Jacksonville from 2.3 up to 2.1 to get Cam Robinson or Forrest Lamp. The Packers could move down only a few spots to make sure they get one of their guys and possibly trade down again if the board falls right, while Jacksonville can jump Seattle who desperately needs OL for what would likely be a reasonable cost.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 4798
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Since there's reason to believe that 33 is worth more in trade than 31 (since teams have hours to reset their board and talk themselves into things) I don't imagine anybody is paying what the pick can command unless they're going up to get Kizer.

I'm not sure anybody will though, since if you wanted Kizer you probably would have wanted the 5th year option for him and those late first round picks were available in trade.

So I honestly expect GB to make the pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nobody. I think Green Bay takes Cook or Willis. Seattle takes Lamp or Cam or King. Jax takes Lamp / Cam. Chicago trades their pick to Arizona who selects Davis Webb.
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3587
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ARI probably trades up, because NYJ and NO pick before them, and they are very much in the market for a QBOTF. But as Forge pointed out, they may not need to go all the way to 33 to jump those guys.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 4798
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forge wrote:
Nobody. I think Green Bay takes Cook or Willis. Seattle takes Lamp or Cam or King. Jax takes Lamp / Cam. Chicago trades their pick to Arizona who selects Davis Webb.


I honestly can't see Green Bay interested in Cook at all, at least not this high. They have athletic thresholds for every position, and only go away for them for RBs who fall at least a round based on their initial projections (i.e. Lacy at 61 instead of 55 or 26). In particular they key on 3 cone time for RB and the only two guys they've taken that weren't under 7.00 (Cook was 7.27) were Lacy (who fell at least a full round) and DeShawn Wynn (who probably fell at least 2 whole rounds); both these guys are bigger than Cook too.

If it's an RB at 33, it's likely to be Mixon or Kamara.

But I expect Bowser, Willis, Mixon, King, Wilson, or Wormley.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Forge


Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Posts: 19458
Location: Las Vegas
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Forge wrote:
Nobody. I think Green Bay takes Cook or Willis. Seattle takes Lamp or Cam or King. Jax takes Lamp / Cam. Chicago trades their pick to Arizona who selects Davis Webb.


I honestly can't see Green Bay interested in Cook at all, at least not this high. They have athletic thresholds for every position, and only go away for them for RBs who fall at least a round based on their initial projections (i.e. Lacy at 61 instead of 55 or 26). In particular they key on 3 cone time for RB and the only two guys they've taken that weren't under 7.00 (Cook was 7.27) were Lacy (who fell at least a full round) and DeShawn Wynn (who probably fell at least 2 whole rounds); both these guys are bigger than Cook too.

If it's an RB at 33, it's likely to be Mixon or Kamara.

But I expect Bowser, Willis, Mixon, King, Wilson, or Wormley.


I actually forgot about mixon, and i heard that they were interested and doing research, so yeah, I'd change that to willis / mixon
_________________


Stupid NFL coaches and their need to reach for quarterbacks....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Techbert


Joined: 24 Apr 2014
Posts: 997
Location: Orion Spur
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Since there's reason to believe that 33 is worth more in trade than 31 (since teams have hours to reset their board and talk themselves into things) I don't imagine anybody is paying what the pick can command unless they're going up to get Kizer.

I'm not sure anybody will though, since if you wanted Kizer you probably would have wanted the 5th year option for him and those late first round picks were available in trade.

So I honestly expect GB to make the pick.


I've slowly decided that the 5th year option is not really valuable for quarterbacks in today's NFL. If they don't develop, you know a lot sooner than 4 years. If they do develop, you cause hard feelings if you enforce that 5th year, feelings that split your locker room.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 35143
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I doubt it's them, but there's a strain of history-based logic that suggests the Chargers could be the mover. Tom Telesco notorious hates his 4th round (he's made only one in his tenure as GM and traded it away every other year) and there was HEAVY steam that the team absolutely loves Forrest Lamp, who would also be an extraordinary fit for them.

Typically Telesco has used his 2nd round pick on a high-upside "future-starter" (in the sense that the player may not project to start as a rookie but the player ahead of him was entering the final contract year and/or aging) - which is why Malik McDowell could reasonably be in play here (as Corey Liuget's contract is easy to get out from under starting in 2018) as could an EDGE (Willis/Rivers; I believe Willis is the one they've shown more interest in IIRC) as if they were intending to give Melvin Ingram the extension at APY he's asking for, they'd have done it by now (it's not like their FO doesn't have a track record of paying-up on potential/anticipation of production to come - see the past Liuget, Weddle, Allen, and Donald Butler contracts).
_________________

MathMan wrote:
I think I'm obfuscating all over the place!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 35143
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techbert wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Since there's reason to believe that 33 is worth more in trade than 31 (since teams have hours to reset their board and talk themselves into things) I don't imagine anybody is paying what the pick can command unless they're going up to get Kizer.

I'm not sure anybody will though, since if you wanted Kizer you probably would have wanted the 5th year option for him and those late first round picks were available in trade.

So I honestly expect GB to make the pick.


I've slowly decided that the 5th year option is not really valuable for quarterbacks in today's NFL. If they don't develop, you know a lot sooner than 4 years. If they do develop, you cause hard feelings if you enforce that 5th year, feelings that split your locker room.

Doesn't change the fact that it gives you an extra year to spread bonus monies on an extension over to make for more manageable cap-hits over the course of the monster second contract if they guy does develop. And it does so in a way that doesn't violate the CBA standard of teams not being able to execute more than one contract in a given league-year with a player with differing cap-hits... because the execution of the 5th-year option is made in Y4 of the contract.
_________________

MathMan wrote:
I think I'm obfuscating all over the place!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3587
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The LBC wrote:
I doubt it's them, but there's a strain of history-based logic that suggests the Chargers could be the mover. Tom Telesco notorious hates his 4th round (he's made only one in his tenure as GM and traded it away every other year) and there was HEAVY steam that the team absolutely loves Forrest Lamp, who would also be an extraordinary fit for them.

Typically Telesco has used his 2nd round pick on a high-upside "future-starter" (in the sense that the player may not project to start as a rookie but the player ahead of him was entering the final contract year and/or aging) - which is why Malik McDowell could reasonably be in play here (as Corey Liuget's contract is easy to get out from under starting in 2018) as could an EDGE (Willis/Rivers; I believe Willis is the one they've shown more interest in IIRC) as if they were intending to give Melvin Ingram the extension at APY he's asking for, they'd have done it by now (it's not like their FO doesn't have a track record of paying-up on potential/anticipation of production to come - see the past Liuget, Weddle, Allen, and Donald Butler contracts).


If LAC moves up, and they pass on Lamp, if I were a Chargers fan I'd start a riot (assuming I hadn't already). Malik McDowell is a decent plan B, but the team supposedly gave a hard look at Lamp in Rd 1. To get him with the 2nd rd pick would be insane. Protecting Rivers and giving MGIII bigger lanes in the run game is a great way for LAC to take a big step forward.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Broncofan


Joined: 02 Dec 2013
Posts: 3587
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The LBC wrote:
Techbert wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Since there's reason to believe that 33 is worth more in trade than 31 (since teams have hours to reset their board and talk themselves into things) I don't imagine anybody is paying what the pick can command unless they're going up to get Kizer.

I'm not sure anybody will though, since if you wanted Kizer you probably would have wanted the 5th year option for him and those late first round picks were available in trade.

So I honestly expect GB to make the pick.


I've slowly decided that the 5th year option is not really valuable for quarterbacks in today's NFL. If they don't develop, you know a lot sooner than 4 years. If they do develop, you cause hard feelings if you enforce that 5th year, feelings that split your locker room.

Doesn't change the fact that it gives you an extra year to spread bonus monies on an extension over to make for more manageable cap-hits over the course of the monster second contract if they guy does develop. And it does so in a way that doesn't violate the CBA standard of teams not being able to execute more than one contract in a given league-year with a player with differing cap-hits... because the execution of the 5th-year option is made in Y4 of the contract.


Plus, not all 5th year options are created the same. A 5th year option for a top 10 pick at QB is 19M, that's probably way too high for most. So it's fair to dismiss that as realistic for all but the elite QB's. But for picks 11-32, the 5th year option drops to 12M+. That's very affordable. Guys like Tyrod Taylor make more than that. It puts a guy in the 20th highest 2017 salary. Seems like it's negligible, but that kind of extra value also helps teams get more talent around the QB.

I don't know that the 1-10 5th year option makes much sense, but the 11-32 option is very much a viable team choice.
_________________
steelpanther wrote:
This is like playing checkers with a pigeon. No matter how well you play, sooner or later the pigeon is going to crap on the board, then puff his chest out and strut around like he won something.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 35143
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Broncofan wrote:
The LBC wrote:
I doubt it's them, but there's a strain of history-based logic that suggests the Chargers could be the mover. Tom Telesco notorious hates his 4th round (he's made only one in his tenure as GM and traded it away every other year) and there was HEAVY steam that the team absolutely loves Forrest Lamp, who would also be an extraordinary fit for them.

Typically Telesco has used his 2nd round pick on a high-upside "future-starter" (in the sense that the player may not project to start as a rookie but the player ahead of him was entering the final contract year and/or aging) - which is why Malik McDowell could reasonably be in play here (as Corey Liuget's contract is easy to get out from under starting in 2018) as could an EDGE (Willis/Rivers; I believe Willis is the one they've shown more interest in IIRC) as if they were intending to give Melvin Ingram the extension at APY he's asking for, they'd have done it by now (it's not like their FO doesn't have a track record of paying-up on potential/anticipation of production to come - see the past Liuget, Weddle, Allen, and Donald Butler contracts).


If LAC moves up, and they pass on Lamp, if I were a Chargers fan I'd start a riot (assuming I hadn't already). Malik McDowell is a decent plan B, but the team supposedly gave a hard look at Lamp in Rd 1. To get him with the 2nd rd pick would be insane. Protecting Rivers and giving MGIII bigger lanes in the run game is a great way for LAC to take a big step forward.

The McDowell part was more me rambling and speculating who fits with the SOP of Telesco's "2nd rounder for the future" tactic. In the case with Lamp, I think he actually fits with what they pulled off last year with Hunter Henry - a guy who can actually step in and contribute immediate and then they circle around for the "future starter who needs to develop" in the 3rd like they did with Max Tuerk last year.

Only reason I can see them being somewhat hesitant about trading up using the 4th to go get Lamp is that it pretty much telegraphs them as going pass-rusher (hate to say it but Telesco doesn't value safety highly and for some strange reason the team loves Jahleel "I injure my own teammates" Addae) in the 3rd - but then I'm high on Joe Mathis who I feel like should definitely be there because of his past injury concerns, so I don't mind that.

The trade-up talk from me was exclusively referring to going up for Lamp. I feel like, if you've made the statement that you made with your 1st round pick - that the blame (probably rightfully so) for losing so many of those games last year falls on the shoulders of the offense - then you double down and push hard on fixing that, especially when there's a player like Lamp (or even Cam Robinson) on the board.
_________________

MathMan wrote:
I think I'm obfuscating all over the place!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DraftHobbyist


Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Posts: 349
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Forge wrote:
Nobody. I think Green Bay takes Cook or Willis. Seattle takes Lamp or Cam or King. Jax takes Lamp / Cam. Chicago trades their pick to Arizona who selects Davis Webb.


I honestly can't see Green Bay interested in Cook at all, at least not this high. They have athletic thresholds for every position, and only go away for them for RBs who fall at least a round based on their initial projections (i.e. Lacy at 61 instead of 55 or 26). In particular they key on 3 cone time for RB and the only two guys they've taken that weren't under 7.00 (Cook was 7.27) were Lacy (who fell at least a full round) and DeShawn Wynn (who probably fell at least 2 whole rounds); both these guys are bigger than Cook too.

If it's an RB at 33, it's likely to be Mixon or Kamara.

But I expect Bowser, Willis, Mixon, King, Wilson, or Wormley.


Joe Mixon and Alvin Kamara both had a 3-cone of a 7.10, so if Cook's 7.27 3-cone excludes him from interest because it's over the 7.00 3-cone benchmark, shouldn't that mean the Packers won't have interest in Mixon or Kamara, either?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 23560
Location: PGH
PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2017 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Forge wrote:
Nobody. I think Green Bay takes Cook or Willis. Seattle takes Lamp or Cam or King. Jax takes Lamp / Cam. Chicago trades their pick to Arizona who selects Davis Webb.


I honestly can't see Green Bay interested in Cook at all, at least not this high. They have athletic thresholds for every position, and only go away for them for RBs who fall at least a round based on their initial projections (i.e. Lacy at 61 instead of 55 or 26). In particular they key on 3 cone time for RB and the only two guys they've taken that weren't under 7.00 (Cook was 7.27) were Lacy (who fell at least a full round) and DeShawn Wynn (who probably fell at least 2 whole rounds); both these guys are bigger than Cook too.

If it's an RB at 33, it's likely to be Mixon or Kamara.

But I expect Bowser, Willis, Mixon, King, Wilson, or Wormley.


I think Ted Thompson possibly drafts a package of cabbage and turns it into a HOFer.

But really, they stay and draft a CB or pass rusher.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Draft All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group