June 25, 2019, 10:45:57 PM

Author Topic: Hypothetical GM  (Read 2258 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3375
  • Karma: +59/-17
Hypothetical GM
« on: March 21, 2019, 11:01:43 AM »
You are the Packers GM and the 1st round has unfolded like this,

1.) Arizona- Kyler Murray
2.) SF - Nick Bosa
3.) Jets - Quinnen Williams
4.) Oakland - Josh Allen
5.) Tampa Bay - Rashan Gary
6.) Giants - Montez Sweat
7.) Jacksonville - Ed Oliver
8.) Detroit -  T.J. Hockenson
9.) Buffalo - Jawaan Taylor
10.) Denver - Brian Burns
11.) Cincinnati - Devin White

You are on the clock, but no trade offers are on the table. At the 5 minute mark before you need to make your pick the Patriots call and offer,

32 - 590 points
56 - 340 points
64 - 270 points
Total 1200 points  For the 12th pick= 1200 points

Now we all know what Gutes next move would be and that would be to turn to Murphy and ask him what his next move is going to be.

But the question here is what are you going to do?

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5143
  • Karma: +38/-2
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2019, 11:38:09 AM »
SOLD!!

That gives Gute 6 picks in the top 75.

1st rnd - 2
2nd rnd - 2
3rd rnd - 2

Irv Smith
Chris Lindstrom
Tytus Howard
Darnell Savage
Chase Winovich
Andy Isabella

Offline Fargofootball

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
  • Karma: +11/-0
  • Please get familiar with our Forums Rules & Guidelines.
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2019, 12:05:36 PM »
That offer indicates that the Pats are looking to draft Haskins. Can't identify any other target. They would be tossing away the core of their draft capital. Too much for Fant or Wilkins/Ferrell.
My board would have Jonah Williams at Tackle as my top prospect.

Sims showed I could get Adderly and Linstrom with the 2 extra NE 2nd rounders.

If correct the trade would make the draft look as follows:

30 Bush
32 Fant
44 Risner
56 Adderly
64 Linstrom

It would be incumbent on management to trade up with a couple of picks to find a solid DL and Edge in round 3. Likely suspects, Allen, Tillery, Nelson and Miller.

If I felt the board would run in this direction I would trade. 

Offline OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2336
  • Karma: +15/-10
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2019, 12:06:52 PM »

.....................Now we all know what Gutes next move would be and that would be to turn to Murphy and ask him what his next move is going to be.

A reasonable supposition - with the absurd addendum above. You are a quality poster and an enthusiastic one RT, but this particular hobbyhorse of yours is becoming an obsession.

I gave you a 'smite' vote for that unnecessary comment, the first one I can remember giving ANYBODY on this forum, ever. Please come back to a place where you only express opinions on Murphy's power in threads, where that is the topic. If you start one yourself to air those views, it's fine by me. I have no power to make you back off on this, it can only come from you. Please.
(ricky) "Personally, I'm putting this in a box, driving a stake through its heart, firing a silver bullet into its (empty) head, nailing it shut, loading it into a rocket and firing it into the sun. "

(Pink Floyd) "Set the controls for the heart of the sun"

Online ricky

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5935
  • Karma: +43/-20
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2019, 12:18:38 PM »

.....................Now we all know what Gutes next move would be and that would be to turn to Murphy and ask him what his next move is going to be.

A reasonable supposition - with the absurd addendum above. You are a quality poster and an enthusiastic one RT, but this particular hobbyhorse of yours is becoming an obsession.

I gave you a 'smite' vote for that unnecessary comment, the first one I can remember giving ANYBODY on this forum, ever. Please come back to a place where you only express opinions on Murphy's power in threads, where that is the topic. If you start one yourself to air those views, it's fine by me. I have no power to make you back off on this, it can only come from you. Please.

No "smite" because no spite, but definitely, this seems a bit over the top for a top drawer poster. So, Gutekunst is a Murphy puppet? Indeed, a thread exploring the relative powers of Gute and Murphy might be interesting. But snide asides are not necessary.
"My hopes are not always realized, but I always hope." Ovid

Offline The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2730
  • Karma: +48/-4
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2019, 12:33:27 PM »
If I HAD to pick there I'd go Jonah Williams, OT, but I'd be all over that trade.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2019, 12:41:04 PM by The GM »

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3375
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2019, 03:07:37 PM »
Some good responses to the question presented, only one person lost their focus and started chasing butterflies. So that is good.

I agree with your conclusion fargofootball, that it would be for a QB. Last year during the draft I mentally noted that Belichick was giving up some valuable draft capital to stockpile some picks for 2019. It is not hard to draw the deduction that he was trying to best position himself to possibly draft the eventual replacement for his 41 year old QB. New England could in theory make this trade and still have three 3rd round picks to add to their Super Bowl winning roster. It is just one of many subplots that will be fun to watch playout. 

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3015
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2019, 04:22:34 PM »
Stay put. Andre Dillard at 12 all day with that board.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3375
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2019, 04:47:47 PM »
Stay put. Andre Dillard at 12 all day with that board.

I am in agreement that it is very likely that Dillard would be at the top of their board at that point. With a lesser likelihood of a possibly of Christian Wilkins, Clelin Ferrell or Noah Fant being at the top of their board. But is it so overwhelming that they would pass on the trade? If they turned around and traded back up to 16 or 17 by using a late 1st and one of the 2nds to land one of the top players on their board, in the process pocketing an extra 2nd round. Is that enough to offset maybe missing their top guy at 12? 

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3015
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2019, 05:16:00 PM »
Stay put. Andre Dillard at 12 all day with that board.

I am in agreement that it is very likely that Dillard would be at the top of their board at that point. With a lesser likelihood of a possibly of Christian Wilkins, Clelin Ferrell or Noah Fant being at the top of their board. But is it so overwhelming that they would pass on the trade? If they turned around and traded back up to 16 or 17 by using a late 1st and one of the 2nds to land one of the top players on their board, in the process pocketing an extra 2nd round. Is that enough to offset maybe missing their top guy at 12?

Not for me. 12 is definitely the drop off for top tier players and they'd already be getting a bit of a project with Dillard since he'd be playing RT and not LT. Still, they would be passing on a player who would give them the best Tackle duo in the league. Not convinced an extra 2nd round pick or a 3rd+4th is going to provide them with better value on the field. The way I see it is, they have 2 first round picks and an early 2nd. More than enough picks to add players who can help the team as rookies and in the future.

Given your hypothetical would be the worst case scenario, I'm convinced Haskins goes in the top 10 and maybe Lock or Jones too, that would make a trade back more appealing. However, I believe they'll be looking at a couple blue chip players like Hockenson, Burns, or Dillard at 12.     

Offline The GM

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2730
  • Karma: +48/-4
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2019, 05:49:10 PM »
Stay put. Andre Dillard at 12 all day with that board.

I am in agreement that it is very likely that Dillard would be at the top of their board at that point. With a lesser likelihood of a possibly of Christian Wilkins, Clelin Ferrell or Noah Fant being at the top of their board. But is it so overwhelming that they would pass on the trade? If they turned around and traded back up to 16 or 17 by using a late 1st and one of the 2nds to land one of the top players on their board, in the process pocketing an extra 2nd round. Is that enough to offset maybe missing their top guy at 12?

Not for me. 12 is definitely the drop off for top tier players and they'd already be getting a bit of a project with Dillard since he'd be playing RT and not LT. Still, they would be passing on a player who would give them the best Tackle duo in the league. Not convinced an extra 2nd round pick or a 3rd+4th is going to provide them with better value on the field. The way I see it is, they have 2 first round picks and an early 2nd. More than enough picks to add players who can help the team as rookies and in the future.

Given your hypothetical would be the worst case scenario, I'm convinced Haskins goes in the top 10 and maybe Lock or Jones too, that would make a trade back more appealing. However, I believe they'll be looking at a couple blue chip players like Hockenson, Burns, or Dillard at 12.   

My concern for Burns is his ability to set the edge.  Great speed guy on 3rd down but he isnt going to overpower anyone on 1st and 2nd down.  Kind of a one trick pony and a guy teams will run at.  Dude has wheels I'll give him that.
Id go with Williams over Dillard.  Williams had faced some pretty good comp in the SEC including his own team in practice.  Dillard has faced a pretty weak Pac 12 schedule, and played in that funky Mike Leach offense that sometimes doesnt always translate to the NFL, I do wonder if Dillard playing in Green Bay would do anything for his former OL teammate Cole Madison.  Just a out of the box thought.

Offline claymaker

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3015
  • Karma: +14/-1
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #11 on: March 21, 2019, 06:24:48 PM »
Stay put. Andre Dillard at 12 all day with that board.

I am in agreement that it is very likely that Dillard would be at the top of their board at that point. With a lesser likelihood of a possibly of Christian Wilkins, Clelin Ferrell or Noah Fant being at the top of their board. But is it so overwhelming that they would pass on the trade? If they turned around and traded back up to 16 or 17 by using a late 1st and one of the 2nds to land one of the top players on their board, in the process pocketing an extra 2nd round. Is that enough to offset maybe missing their top guy at 12?

Not for me. 12 is definitely the drop off for top tier players and they'd already be getting a bit of a project with Dillard since he'd be playing RT and not LT. Still, they would be passing on a player who would give them the best Tackle duo in the league. Not convinced an extra 2nd round pick or a 3rd+4th is going to provide them with better value on the field. The way I see it is, they have 2 first round picks and an early 2nd. More than enough picks to add players who can help the team as rookies and in the future.

Given your hypothetical would be the worst case scenario, I'm convinced Haskins goes in the top 10 and maybe Lock or Jones too, that would make a trade back more appealing. However, I believe they'll be looking at a couple blue chip players like Hockenson, Burns, or Dillard at 12.   

My concern for Burns is his ability to set the edge.  Great speed guy on 3rd down but he isnt going to overpower anyone on 1st and 2nd down.  Kind of a one trick pony and a guy teams will run at.  Dude has wheels I'll give him that.
Id go with Williams over Dillard.  Williams had faced some pretty good comp in the SEC including his own team in practice.  Dillard has faced a pretty weak Pac 12 schedule, and played in that funky Mike Leach offense that sometimes doesnt always translate to the NFL, I do wonder if Dillard playing in Green Bay would do anything for his former OL teammate Cole Madison.  Just a out of the box thought.

Certainly don't need Burns to be your guy on 1st or 2nd down as a rookie. Matthews was a one trick pony his first few years and grew into the every down player. It's also a bit of misinformation that Burns can't set the edge. He was very good at it in college being very adept at gaining leverage to keep him in favorable position. The added weight at the combine solidifies my opinion on him, if he's at 12 take him.

Williams projects best at Guard in my view. Dillard is the better prospect to me since he will play a more valuable position and possesses all the traits that make an elite tackle.

Offline Shinesman

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2588
  • Karma: +26/-100
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2019, 10:38:19 PM »
I dont know if I'd go that far back. We need talent, and always trading out of where the talent lies (top 15) is counterproductive. Maybe trading back to 20 if the offer is right. If White is gone, which he will be now that Cincy cut their best ILB, we kind of sit right past the edge of the elite players of this draft. Go figure.
"Tradition! Just because we've always done it that way, doesn't mean that it isn't incredibly stupid."

Offline footballdad

  • Starter
  • ***
  • Posts: 168
  • Karma: +15/-0
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2019, 02:37:33 AM »
Would probably do it with the hope of trading back into the 15-18 range. IMO if anyone makes a move for a QB under this draft scenario, it would be with Arizona for Rosen. Thats' what I would do anyway.

Offline RT

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3375
  • Karma: +59/-17
Re: Hypothetical GM
« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2019, 08:38:21 AM »
Using these same scenario of the first 11 players drafted, but the Packers have no trade back options. Who are you selecting at 12 for The Green Bay Packers?

The GM said he would take OT Jonah Williams if he picked at 12 and claymaker stated he would stay at 12 and take OT Andre Dillard. Interesting that the first two guesses are OT's.