Should The Packers Trade Out Of The First Round?
by Brandon on Mar 19, 2011 5:00 PM CDT
in Green Bay Packers Draft
Email
PrintI'll spend most my time, and most mock drafts, writing about who the Green Bay Packers should select with their first round pick. But it's just as likely that they'll trade out of the first round. What could they expect to receive?
The last time they traded out of the first round, they sent their 2008 first round pick to the Jets (No. 30 overall) in exchange for the No. 36 overall pick in the second round, and an extra fourth round pick. The Jets took TE Dustin Keller, and the Packers took WR Jordy Nelson. That extra fourth round pick was traded again, and eventually the Packers ended up with DE Jeremy Thompson (4th round) and OL Breno Giacomini (5th round). Of course, neither player is with the Packers any more. They probably did all right on a straight up swap of Keller for Nelson since Nelson's paid less as a second round pick.
If the pick in the second round isn't so high (going from No. 30 to No. 36 isn't very far), then they might expect what the Ravens got last year, who received three picks (second, third and fourth) from Denver for their No. 25 overall selection. Depending on who's remaining on their draft board, dropping down twenty spots might be a good deal if they want the extra picks. There are many free agents, such as WR James Jones, that they might want to replace with a younger player instead of re-signing. Those extra picks would then help.
The final option is to trade for a future first round pick, which is something the Patriots commonly do. I'm not a fan of that strategy because you have to wait that extra year. I'd rather target a player now because the future is always unknown. The Patriots won the future first round pick lottery in 2007 when they traded their No. 28 overall selection for a 2008 No. 7 overall (plus an extra fourth round pick). And even then, there's a case to be made that the 49ers did just fine in the deal.
And that's the problem with discussing whether to trade down. We don't know who's still available, and who the Packers have on their draft board. And we don't know what the Packers will do to re-sign their free agents. If they re-sign everybody, then having more 2011 draft picks that might not make the team isn't so welcome. As of right now, I'd prefer they keep their first round draft choice and select the best player available.
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
We should keep our 1st rounder
take Pouncey if he’s there, or a DL or OLB. Trade up into the middle of the 2nd round for WR/KRS Randall Cobb.
I gots to put the team on my back, doo.
Ew and ew.
Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.
Author at Acme Packing Company, a Green Bay Packers blog
Fighting the Battle of Who Could Care Less since 12/29/09
by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Mar 19, 2011 10:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Pouncey should be a great guard....
and maybe down the line a better center than Wells. Then maybe the team could run…..
by PhoenicianPakFan on Mar 20, 2011 1:38 AM CDT up reply actions
He's not as good as his brother,
And his brother was enormously overrated last season. Maybe they both make a jump, Pouncey at the end of the 1st seems like the right spot. Of course, I think Pittsburgh takes him at 31 if he’s there, so it might not matter.
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Mar 21, 2011 2:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Why do you think his brother was overrated?
Fire Slocum
by packallday555 on Mar 21, 2011 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions
Me neither. I remember being really, really impressed with Pouncy whenever I watched him.
Fire Slocum
by packallday555 on Mar 22, 2011 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Tex?
Didn’t Randall Cobb give Muhammad Ali a good fight once back in the ’70s?
Sorry. Couldn’t resist. :)
That glass is flowing over!
"It's a great day to be great, baby!"
"Here I am, brain the size of a planet,
and they ask me to pick up a piece of paper.
You call that job satisfaction?
'Cause, I don't."
THE BEARS STILL SUCK!
Stay Put
I wouldn’t trade down unless it was no more than four or five spots. We have the roster depth; what we need to do is find upgrade talent at left guard or a future tackle. I think we need to concentrate on O line, with OLB the second choice.
I agree with BlackPack Fan that TT needs to look hard for a kick returner this draft.
Kicker returner might go the way of the dodo...or the fullback.
I’m starting to get skeptical about the need of a returner. If the league makes the proposed changes to the kicking game then basically a KR is a position that you don’t want to dedicate a full position to. Really you could just get a PR and stick him back there to catch and kneel down for the KR’s and let the offense go to work at the 25.
by PackApologist on Mar 20, 2011 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions
" KR is a position that you don’t want to dedicate a full position to"
I think that has been the philosophy of Teddy T anyway, and if this rule change passes I don’t think he will give to hearty craps about it at all.
New idea….
They should allow kickoffs go out of bounds and be placed at the spot (I think I said this in another post) but that being said, all kickoffs that are touchbacks should be placed at MIDFIELD! That would generate more offensive scoring! And make kickers a little less useless….
by PhoenicianPakFan on Mar 20, 2011 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Yes, but
Most kickers don’t get it all the way to the end zone anyways. Or at least not deep enough to make it worth kneeling to get to the 25. I know the Bears wouldn’t.
I think the greater need is for someone who can return punts because Tramon Williams just shouldn’t be back there.
53 Bears, 1 Cup
by I voted for Kodos on Mar 20, 2011 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions
I kinda' like the Patriots approach
You’re gaining value essentially for nothing.
All you lose is a little bit of time. And there’s no risk there, unless you think the NFL is going to suddenly blink out of existence in a year’s time. And it’s not like they’re saying “we’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.” Y’know, they can’t welch on the deal.
Especially if you’re picking #32, as we are, and some perenial doormat offers you their 1st rounder next year… I mean, you get to move from the last pick to the top 10 for nothing. I don’t see a downside there. Y’know, it’s not like it’s 2005 and we’ve got a talent-depleted roster and need a bunch of picks right now. So, I say, if the Bengals want to trade us (what we all know will be) a top ten for the very last pick in the first round just because they just can’t wait… Then… by all means, have the pick, and that’s why you’re the Bengals and we’re not.
by Curly Lambeau on Mar 19, 2011 10:38 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
I agree
I proposed this idea a couple months ago. However, it will be hard to get some bites. Even if we could get a 1st Round next year, it’ll probably be from a team likely picking in the high teens or early 20s. We’ll also get another pick though because a 1st Rounder next year is the value of a 2nd Rounder this year. So I think it’s worth it regardless. Like you said, we don’t have a lot of needs.
Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!
13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!
Nuff said....
Fleecing the desperate is the American way
With these sorts of situations I just think back to the Browns a few years ago when they selected Joe Thomas and then gutted their next year’s draft for Brady Quinn. If the Packers find a team that is that desperate to move back into round 1 to get a guy and is willing to pony up some decent picks this year or better picks next year then by all means do it.
Next year’s picks could be especially good value for a few reasons like: with the current situation getting back key players for a year could be relatively easy (see James Jones, John Kuhn, Brandon Jackson, etc.) but harder if a new CBA comes in later and screws everything up; since there is no guarantee of a draft next year the Packers could demand higher picks to cover the risk of not having players; and finally if the Packers can forecast which positions will be deep next year and it fits better with our long term needs then we might find better value next year than this year.
by PackApologist on Mar 20, 2011 11:29 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
If there weren't perpetual suckers in this league
people like Belichik and Thompson wouldn’t have anyone to take advantage of. Just glad I’m not a fan of one of them!
by PhoenicianPakFan on Mar 20, 2011 11:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Is there a player that great
at 32 that a team would give you 2 picks ?
There are some good players but I dont see anyone that might jump out at 32.
In 2008 players taken from picks 31-35 before Nelson were Kenny Phillips FS Miami,
1 (32) Miami Dolphins Merling, Phillip DE 6’5" 272 Clemson
] 2 (33) St. Louis Rams Avery, Donnie WR 5’11" 186 Houston
[ 3 (34) Washington Redskins (From Raiders through Falcons) Thomas, Devin WR 6’2" 215 Michigan State
[+] 4 (35) Kansas City Chiefs Flowers, Brandon CB 5’10" 189 Virginia Tech
didnt seem to miss much by trading down.
But I agree I wouldnt trade down alot of spots.
Brandon Flowers is a pretty good CB
but yeah, the rest of the guys you said are nothing special.
Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!
13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!
Nuff said....
...it doesn't matter...
It doesn’t matter if there is a great player just as long as another team thinks so.
I’ve said for a month Christian Ponder may allow us to have a great draft; and I’ll add Kaepernick, Mallett and the ever rising Dalton to the mix. If Cincy, Buffalo, Tenn, AZ, Wash. or the Queens didn’t take a QB in the 1st round they may want to address the need w/ their 2nd round pick. Here’s where it gets interesting.
Teams may feel a need to move ahead of Buff and NE. Knowing several teams may be talking to NE, teams may feel they need to get the Packers’ pick. Plus Cincy and Tenn may not want to deal w/ their conference rival.
My favorite trade is our 32 and 96 for Tenn’s 39 and 77 (and hopefully more). TT would now have the 39th, 64th, and 77th picks. And if he wanted to get aggressive the 64th and 77th would net us a mid-40’s pick. Where we could get Cobb (who I’m also a fan of) and another playmaker. We would have turned the last picks in rounds 1-3 to 2 top half of the 2nd round picks).
Great points.
I think you are spot on with your thoughts. TT is unpredictable and with Rogers having the two concussions, one of those QBs might not be bad to draft, either as a replacement for Flynn or to force a trade with a desperate team. I know its crazy, but I have a feeling TT is going to do something odd.
by Bill Morgan on Mar 20, 2011 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks and...
I agree w/ you that TT could give AR his own “WTF” moment by drafting a QB, probably Ponder. Some say he could turn out to be the best QB in the draft…
…AND…
If an OT that TT has rated high enough falls to 26 I could see him trading 32 and 64 to go get him plus keeping the OT from Dud Bears at 29 like he did last year in the Burnett trade.
Bottom line TT’s unpredictable and as you said, may do something odd.
No.
We should take the best OL available either guard or tackle.
What's interesting is that having the first round on its own day may make the pick more valuable
The pick is essentially an untimed selection. There are no teams picking after you that day. Remember when the Vikings didn’t pick on time and other teams essentially jumped over them until they turned in their selections. Well, nobody would be able to jump in front of the Packers because nobody picks until the next day. So, you could theoretically take as long as you want to negotiate trades and maximize the value. Taking more time also allows other teams to look at their draft boards and see if there is someone that they really like that is still available, maybe strengthening their offer to the Packers if they really want the guy.
by ceverettsdinosaurs on Mar 20, 2011 11:56 AM CDT reply actions
I don't think so...
The NFL couldn’t allow teams to do that w/ picks 32 and/or 64. W/ no downside teams would do it every year. I think we would be bumped and NE would have the 32nd pick. So NE doesn’t lose the overnight position the NFL may start up the next day w/ NE going first (pick 32).
You brought up another reason pick 32 is important. So teams can’t reset their board and to keep Belichick from creating a bidding war and maximizing the value of pick 33 a team may want the 32nd pick, thus giving it more value.
Outside the box on the other end
This will probably not happen….like at all….but instead of trading down imagine a trade up. Say if Patrick Peterson falls out of top 5 maybe try to make a dynamic move to go up and get him. I know Von Miller would probably fit better into our current defense, but the interesting thing about Peterson is that he may be one of the few guys to be a true replacement for Woodson some day. Peterson has the athletic ability to be a top corner, the strength and grit to play safety and the knowledge to be the utility player the Woodson is now. All the while having C-Wood and Williams to mentor him along.
It would take a sizable amount of picks, but think of what the Pack could do with a guy like that. He’s also a pretty good punt returner to boot.
Peterson
I’ve gone over a trade up scenario before.. Using #32, 64 and valuing Matt Flynn as a mid 2nd prospect, trading those 3 pieces would get us up to about #11… I certainly don’t see Thompson trading those assets to move up that far, give his affinity for his draft picks! What I can see is possibly trading #32 and 96 to move up say 5 spots to get a player he has ranked in the top 20 at about 27… Haven’t checked this out w/ the draft pick trade chart, but its more possible than moving up to the top12 or so! I think this is possible for players like at OT, Jimmy Smith, Justin Houston maybe a JJ Watt or Cam Jordan. Guys that have legit value in the top 20 picks that fall to around 27 or so…
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
The difference
See this goes down the core of my point though….Charles Woodson is a unique player with a unique set of skills. Anybody we draft in that bottom run of the 1st round really won’t possess those skills, but it looks like Peterson might. To be able to secure that future dynamic defender might be worth those sorts of picks even though TT does love him picks.
After all, he did fall in love with the Claymaker, and loved getting that player much more than the number of draft picks. Now you are probably right that we don’t have the ammo to go up that high in the first round, but it was a nice thought to counter the trade down thought process.
Really, the talent level that we are talking about is going to be the same from about 28-38 so a trade down is going to be more valueable then a trade up….unless there is someone the Pack really loves in that mid to late twenties area.
by PackApologist on Mar 20, 2011 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Peterson
I was just pointing out how high we could get. I agree that Peterson has the skill set that would fill Woodson’s role very well! I also think that Jimmy Smith could be a reasonable facsimile for Woodson in the mid 20’s. Smith is a good tackler, has the size/speed numbers to match Woodson and is an excellent cover CB who could match up w/ large WR and some TE. Smith lacks the ball skills of Woodson, so he wouldn’t make as many INT’s/turnover plays! I also think that Capers could adjust his scheme if he doesn’t have someone w/ Woodson’s skills in that kinda role. Tho it certainly would be nice to have a CB/safety combo w/ Woodsons skill to play in that role!
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
Thats right before Atlanta, Jets, and the Patriots
Right? Because they almost have the same needs as us.
Ugh. Reply Fail
That was meant for you Stroh on your trade to #25-26
Good point...
And that certainly is worth considering in a trade up. Especially if a player suited for a 34 D is available. Particularly a 34 DE, OLB… Would also be beneficial for a CB that has great cover skills like Jimmy Smith! Would have to be for a player really well suited to play in a 34 D and that is rated say in the top 20 overall…
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
No Way on Smith
Apparently his stock is dropping like Sarah Palins…Geronimo!!!
Plenty of better choices in the second-third round…Marsh, C. Brown, Burton, Carmichael, Patrick, J Brown. Williams may even fall out of the 1st round.
Smith is falling due to character concerns.
Apparently he is coming off as arogant and cocky. But he does have legit skills and w/ Woodson as a mentor he might get straightened out… But your right he is falling and Thompson won’t take a guy w/ Character concerns. I’m a big fan of the kid from New Mexico? House… Big CB 6’ 200 ran a 4.3 40 and has good numbers across the board… He could be a steal in the 2nd… He’s been all WAC along w/ Kyle Wilson who was drafted in the 1st by the NYJ. House is a 2 time WAC selection! And he’s best at man coverage…
You've been Stroh'd™!!!
Yup...
Forgot about him…a STUD…and I think he is a returner. Several mocks have us taking him.
House I think.
He doesn’t appear to be a fan of the reply button.
Go Suns, Packers, Jays, and Huskers!
Green Bay Packers: Super Bowl XLV Champions!!!!
trading up for peterson
Would it be nice to beable trade up and get peterson hell yeah it would but even if he is there at 11 or whatever and im just going based on what strohman was saying. #11 would be the texans pick and you have to remember even if he does fall to 11 the texans were dead last in pass defense so the thought that the first 10 teams would pass on him im sure the texans would love the sound of just him dropping and were talking about trading up the only difference is, is that the texans need a lot more help than just one corner on defense so who knows but thinking the 49ers and cowboys would pass up the safest player in the draft is highly unlikely. I wouldnt mind seeing the packers move up to get a good OL tho I trust TT the front office knows what there doing.
it's about value there - if we pick or trade
if there’s a solid player at a position of interest for us there, awesome and we should use the pick. But if there are no OT, LB, or DE prospects at that pick that we feel are the right value, I’d be an advocate of trading (either down or up), or for future picks. What I don’t feel is the right approach is to pick there regardless. We don’t need a RB, WR, CB, etc. there unless a great one were to fall – those are players we can take later in the draft or in free agency (whenever that happens)
The Packers are in a great situation as we have a team that won the SB, AND get back our 15 IR players to make our team even more complete. We only have a few clear needs (OT, OLB, DE), and if we can directly address those with quality players in the draft, awesome, but we also have the luxury of being patient and shouldn’t reach
by rip_city_swagger on Mar 21, 2011 3:34 PM CDT reply actions
trading out
I can see it happen. Our cap number is the 2nd highest in the league. Barnett will help clear out cap room with others. The last we did it we drafted Nelson, Jones and the rest that year. I would really think about it.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
