First Round Wide Receiver for the Packers? Don’t Count on It
Look for the Packer Way to continue on Draft Day.
By Kevin Gibson
Even after signing Mecole Hardman, the Packers still need a wide receiver. The popular argument is that the Green Bay receiving corps needs a “true” No. 1.
Heck, even running back Josh Jacobs said so a few weeks back. Specifically, he praised the receivers already in Green Bay, then added, “but I think personally we need a guy that's proven to be a No. 1 already, somebody that we know is going to be a little bit more consistent.”
Free agency didn’t produce anything close to that, leading most of us to believe General Manager Brian Gutekunst will take at least one wide receiver in the upcoming draft which, in case you’ve been in a coma, is happening in Green Bay April 24-26.
Packers beat writer Matt Schneidman over at The Athletic recently made the bold prediction that Gutekunst will select a wide receiver in the first round of this year’s draft – and it would be the first time since 2002 and the Javon Walker pick since the Packers went receiver on Day 1.
And he may just hit on his prognostication. As I’ve said before, the only thing we can count on from a Gutey draft or free-agency period is that it’s hard to count on anything.
Schneidman has wondered aloud if the Packers might trade for Tetairoa McMillan, the 6-5, 212 pounder from Arizona, as a deep threat in the mold of the oft-injured Christian Watson. Going off the unpredictability argument, Gutey may actually trade up to get him. Meanwhile, others have linked Green Bay Iowa State’s Matthew Golden and even Utah State’s Jalen Royals as an early pick.
But I don’t think a trade-up or a first-round wideout is going to happen. Here’s why I think this: First-round wide receivers too often provide a low ROI. I think this is part of why the Packers never pull that trigger – the Packers' never taking first-round wide receivers, in my mind, is a combination of needing to be reeeeaaaally sure about a prospect and almost always picking in the bottom third of the draft, when the supposed “sure thing” prospects are typically off the board.
Prior to last year’s draft, ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler put together a list of percentages of first-round draft picks that “hit,” with the one simple qualification being that the player signed a second contract with the team that drafted him.
Between 2000 and 2019, per Fowler, the biggest first-round hits were centers, with – brace yourself, please – a staggering 92% of them signing a second contract. Offensive tackles provided teams with good value as well, with 59% of them re-signing. Not surprisingly, guards were third on the Round-One value list, with 50% getting second contracts. Betting on the O-line in round one generally pays off (Tony Mandarich notwithstanding).
And then there’s wide receivers. In that same time period, just 27% of players at that position were considered “hits” by Fowler’s admittedly very basic formula. I’m not going to sit here and say this should be an absolute reason the Packers won’t buck their own trend – just saying that I think Gutekunst will have to be EXTREMELY enamored of a receiver to snatch one with that 23rd pick. Trading up? I just don’t see it. (Granted, what I know about what the Packers might do in the draft is roughly equivalent to what I know about quantum physics.)
Just for fun, I took a look at first-round wide receivers in the 2021-2024 drafts, just to see how things are trending.
In 2021, Ja’Marr Chase, Jaylen Waddle, DeVonta Smith, Kadarius Toney and Rashod Bateman were drafted in the first round. The first three in that list all went Top 10, and I think we’ll all agree they’ve paid off for their teams. Chase just signed a four-year, $161 million contract, for crying out loud. Bateman has had only modest success working in a run-focused Ravens offense, while Toney is an unqualified bust.
The 2022 first round produced Drake London, Garrett Wilson, Chris Olave, Jahan Dotson and Treylon Burks. Wilson and Olave are the cream of that crop, with London having two very good seasons before a big breakout in 2024. His future certainly looks promising. Dotson has only regressed after a promising rookie season, while Treylon Burks is … well, Treylon Burks.
The 2023 first-round wideout class included Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Quentin Johnson, Zay Flowers and Jordan Addison. Johnson showed improvement last year and appears to be still developing. The rest of that class look like hits at this early stage.
And 2024 gave us Marvin Harrison Jr., Rome Odunze, Brian Thomas Jr., Xavier Worthy, Ricky Pearsall and Xavier Legette. The first four on that list all look promising, while the jury is probably still out on Pearsall and Legette. But hey, it’s way too early to judge.
Some really nice hits there, although most of the sure things were taken way earlier than pick 23 in their respective drafts. If, in fact, the Packers come away with a wide receiver in the 2025 draft (and I think they will), I believe it will be on Day 2 and/or Day 3. I just don’t believe Gutekunst will sacrifice draft capital to trade up for a wide receiver in Round 1. Agree or disagree with this methodology, it’s still the Packer Way.
Guess we’ll find out in about a month.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Kevin Gibson is a professional writer and author based in Louisville, Ky. He's also a former sports writer who covered high school, college and professional sports, a Packers shareholder and a fan since 1975. Even John Hadl couldn't break him. Follow him on Twitter: @kgramone
__________________________
Comments (94)
GregC
March 28, 2025 at 06:14 am
I agree that the Packers won't (and shouldn't) trade up for a WR in the first round. Day two looks like the best time to get one, but it could happen in the first round. I think the biggest reason they haven't drafted a WR in the first round is that they have seldom needed one, as they found several good ones in later rounds. The WR room finally ran dry in 2022, and they traded up early in the second round and got Christian Watson.
This year is interesting because although the WR room is not in as bad a shape as it was then, they could really use a top-tier WR. Watson is going to miss most of the season, he may not be as good when he returns, and he's in the last year of his contract. The problem is that there are only a few receivers who might be available and worth picking at #23. But all it takes is one.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 09:13 am
There have been a lot of round 1 and 2 WR in recent years...at some point, there will be a lag and they'll slide a little more. With the perception that this year's class isn't as prolific as in the past, it could mean GMs lay off them...or it could mean the few at the top of the class may hear their names called way earlier than expected.
I think you point out that player development isn't linear. We didn't see a statistical leap in the WRs. We saw drop issues. We were optimistic coming into the year that we would see an upward trajectory for these guys after they (arguably) overachieved last year, but statistically it was mostly flat. Some of these guys need to turn the arrow from flat to upward to replace Watson's production and to earn contract 2 from the Packers. The Packers can't afford to wait to see if Watson makes it back, or if these guys have plateaued.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 11:10 am
We also need to rebuild a pipeline that sees all of the WRs hitting FA after this year or next. Add to that the loss of Watson this season for practical purposes and the uncertainty over Doubs concussions.
We very much need to restock irrespective of second contract decisions: we won’t keep all 5 and we may not keep either of the ones hitting FA before the 2026 season. There’s nothing known amongst the PS holdovers, though Julian Hicks is a prospect I’m looking forward to seeing this summer based on film. The question is not if but when we draft, or should be.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:08 pm
"We very much need to restock irrespective of second contract decisions:"
YES
Handsback
March 28, 2025 at 01:19 pm
One item I forgot to mention below is this....Green Bay had a lousy passing attack last year. They had numbers for sure but what they didn't have was drive sustainability. Getting a first down by using the RB or TE was non-existent last year. The difference between last season and the year before was striking in terms of keeping the drive alive with those outlet passes.
So I'm not sure a new WR will help that part of the game. Kraft and Jacobs showed they were very good when used...they just wasn't used very much.
Again Just MHO
GregC
March 28, 2025 at 02:46 pm
Seems to me like a new WR would be a big help with drive sustainability. Getting a WR who can actually catch the ball would be a big help right out of the gate. Better yet, how about one who comes back to the QB on scramble plays?
Turophile
March 28, 2025 at 04:49 pm
Don't count on a WR..............and don't count on us NOT getting one in round one, either.
Early picks (day one and two) look to be taken taken from positions like:
DT, WR Edge, CB.
Maybe the Packers get an O lineman in the first two days - but I wouldn't bet on it. I also have difficulty believing there are any early additions to LB, TE, S, RB, QB.
Why the Packers COULD ignore the four positions of need.
CB. They choose to roll with Hobbs, with Alexander being kept for another year.
WR. They could just roll with who they have plus Hardman, bite the bullet until Watson returns later in the season and hope Doubs stays concussion free. They are probably also hoping for plenty of snaps from TE Musgrave. Even so, ignoring WR feels a bit unlikely.
Edge. Instead of an early draft pick they could just hope for improvement within. That is to say the new DL coach + healthy Gary + improvement from Van Ness, Cox, Enagbare. Maybe even Brooks could help at DE too (he is listed as DT on the depth chart).
DT. I cannot see this position being ignored, no matter what. Too many good DTs will be available and with the loss of Slaton and Kenny Clark unlikely to be on the roster in 2026, the time for a good DT is now, maybe even two. My bet is that DT is the most likely pick in round one, though of course it all depends on who is on the board.
As for trading up.....nope. The Packers want more picks rather than less, especially picks in day one and two. Trading back is far more likely their aim, though it would be hard to find a willing partner in this particular draft.
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 06:30 am
Just have to let the draft come to you. I think the real reason the Packer haven't drafted a receiver in the 1st is because they are usually drafting late and the few times they were in the middle of the draft there were defensive shortcomings and good players in line that outweighed taking a receiver.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 07:14 am
Agreed: the "let the draft come to you" philosophy should always be the starting point.
At this stage, WR can be found throughout the draft and in UDFA. I'm not saying it's a guarantee, but if you look around there are plenty of productive guys who had their name called on day 3 or later.
At this point, though, I think the Packers need an alpha. Is this draft going to serve up one in round 2? Maybe. Packers need to trust their scouting. Just like March isn't the end of roster building, the draft isn't the end, either.
TKWorldWide
March 28, 2025 at 06:50 am
IMHO, if the Packers are considering a receiver (in rd 1) and a larger player, they go with the bigger guy. One of their GM’s (TT?) said, “there is a very limited number of athletic big guys on the planet.” (Or something close to that.)
And I can’t argue with that. However, there have to be some exceptions. How many teams passed on Randy Moss and wished for a “do over?”
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 07:03 am
“there is a very limited number of athletic big guys on the planet." And they play in the NBA.
TKWorldWide
March 28, 2025 at 07:07 am
LOL
And they play sparingly due to load management.
Guam
March 28, 2025 at 08:07 am
Gute is a product of the Wolf/Thompson school of general managers and both of those guys preferred drafting big men early because there are fewer big guys than small guys. As much as I feel the Packers need a WR, I don't expect Gute will oblige in round one. I expect a big guy (DT?) in round one with a WR on day two.
Boneman
March 28, 2025 at 07:08 am
If Tet McMillan drops into late teens or early 20's Gute will try and trade up to snag him. He looks to me like the only WR in this draft good enough and also fitting Packer measurables. More likely is trading up in 2nd round to snag Higgens or Ayomanor. I then think he will double up later in draft with a fast deep threat like Thornton. IMHO.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:49 am
I hope not. I wanted Gute to reach for Jefferson, but McMillan isn’t that good and there are other positions that we could improve more through potentially available players if we don’t. There are also players that could fill the X role later and others that may well offer more versatility. Being a good prospect doesn’t necessarily make a player a great pick for us at the price. Trading up for McMillan looks like a bad use of draft capital to me.
murf7777
March 28, 2025 at 07:09 am
I think our fan base has over reacted about how good or bad our WR’s are. At the beginning of the 2024 season many were touting our young WR group as one of the top 5 and now fans are saying it’s one of the worst. My belief is they are somewhere in the middle. I know many had drop issues, but if we learn anything from the past many of our very good to great WR’s of the past had the same issue. There young give them time. We also have bigger needs.
Let’s draft a WR’s but not in the first round. Use that valuable pick and take a player in the trenches. If you protect the QB and get to the opposing QB quickly you make everyone else on the team better. Once again, the SB winning Philly team proved that.
stockholder
March 28, 2025 at 07:15 am
I don't believe anyone cares now.
Because the NEEDs are so obvious.
So lets use a little stat, too consider
why the packers avoid WRs and LBs.
RBs, Lbs and Wrs are known to be at a higher risk of injury,
And their injuries can average significantly longer in length.
The longer in Length is the point here. !!
Because OL do easily get hurt now.
( I really think age, and Weight,
have a lot more to do with this.)
Let's defy the odds and get a starter.
TKWorldWide
March 28, 2025 at 07:18 am
Who is this guy named “Length?” Will he be available in the second Round?
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 07:26 am
Isn't he a lefty?
LeotisHarris
March 28, 2025 at 08:54 am
Both are, yes. Twins Lloyd and Larry out of Louisville. Coupla loads!
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:13 pm
I thought it was a little town outside Liverpool. Apparently they have a harder time recovering.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 09:01 am
"RBs, Lbs and Wrs are known to be at a higher risk of injury,
And their injuries can average significantly longer in length."
The stat jockeys among us are vomiting in their Cheerios right now.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:15 am
You forgot CBs and linemen …. Punters are fairly durable.
Since'61
March 28, 2025 at 05:47 pm
Cookie for Coldworld! Thanks, Since '61
PackEyedOptimist
March 28, 2025 at 07:33 am
Wolf, TT, Gute all have followed the same process:
Draft the Best Player Available who ALSO is better than the current starter on the roster OR to replace that starter in the next year (due to age or contract).
The result is that it looks like they are "filling holes," because it's more likely that a "better than your starter" player will be better than a WEAK starter. However; if a much-higher rated (on the PACKERS Big Board, not the "Consensus Board") player is available--despite them not playing a "need" position, they will draft him.
So, I expect them to take whoever is their highest-rated player who is (potentially) also better than the/a guy already on the roster. If it's a WR or OT or QB or WHATEVER.
"WHO IS AVAILABLE WHEN YOU PICK" is the most important determiner.
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 07:44 am
"WHO IS AVAILABLE WHEN YOU PICK" is the most important determiner."
This is where I get lost when they trade picks. I can understand they don't think someone will be there when it's their turn to pick so they trade up, but is there no one on their board at all when they trade back?
Guam
March 28, 2025 at 08:18 am
It's not just that "there is no one on their board at all when they trade back" but it is about need, fit and value later in the draft. For example if #23 comes up this year and the only players still on the Packer board with round one grades are running backs or safeties, the Packers might well trade down since they have little need for running backs or safeties this year. Need and fit (playing time available) are important.
The Packers also have to see value further down their board to trade down. If there are lots of players they like in the second and third rounds and no one carrying a first round grade they can effectively use, then it makes sense to trade down. It is about matching need and value.
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 08:24 am
"Best player available " theory flies out the window then?
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:10 am
There is no such thing as a pure BPA. Ignoring the fact that assessments are subjective, players don’t neatly fall into some predetermined order of ability ordained by some immutable law of nature. Players don’t play the same position for one thing. How do you determine a comparative between, say, a DT and WR or compare different schemes, roles and opposition, for example.
Moreover some have relatively big floors and low ceilings and others low flaws and high ceilings? Which is better? Is that better now or over the contract? Then there is the question of do you draft a player at a position you do not see a need to because you are well stocked and pass on another at a position where you are weak?
In practice, BPA is an amalgam of projected talent and anticipated uplift. Uplift itself may be weighted towards immediate or over the life of the contract, depending on where the team stands. The real objective is the player anticipated to improve the team most. BPA is just short for the player who the GM feels likely to have the most positive overall impact. That may be now, it may be in future—GMs take a long view.
Sometimes a player is just thought so much better he’s picked regardless of immediate need. Usually though it’s really the player who a GM thinks moves his team’s particular needle the most.
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 09:24 am
"How do you determine a comparative between, say, a DT and WR or compare different schemes,"
Who comes up with these 5-star players out of high school? A 5-star versus a 3-star, for instance, would evaluate them in relation to their position, wouldn't it?
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:37 am
How many 5* players are there each year even then? 247Sports and Rivals typically name 32 or so every year, so a first round worth a year. Historically only about 55% of those ever get drafted anyway.
Guam
March 28, 2025 at 09:42 am
No ranking is absolute. It is much more about the eye of the beholder than anything else. One person's five star is another's three star. That's the problem with rankings.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 09:06 am
"So, I expect them to take whoever is their highest-rated player who is (potentially) also better than the/a guy already on the roster. If it's a WR or OT or QB or WHATEVER."
I think what you're pointing out is that the draft isn't checkers or chess, it's Dungeons & Dragons.
"Draft the Best Player Available who ALSO is better than the current starter on the roster OR to replace that starter in the next year (due to age or contract)."
We tend to view roster construction in the immediate, but GMs are looking at least a couple years out. Morgan wasn't necessarily a pick for 2024, and there are plenty of people who chafe when that pick isn't chosen for the "right now". With a young roster, you're going to have significant turnover every year--yes, Stockholder, and that's not a bad thing--if only because you can only sign so many guys to second and third contracts.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:40 am
If GM believes he can get an extra pick and make two positions better, will that outweigh staying put and getting better at one? The answer is sometimes that two is perceived as a bigger improvement than one. So many things to consider.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 12:06 pm
Agreed. Sometimes you sacrifice the druid to get the magic sword.
Bitternotsour
March 28, 2025 at 12:31 pm
a middle-ages marshmallow test
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 02:14 pm
Or, you could get two people to make ONE position better. In this case, the 555 snaps and 660 yards that Watson won't be giving us this year. Is that better filled by Egbuka, or by a combo of Day 2 guys?
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:26 pm
I'll make an "I'm sure to be wrong" prediction, and that's that the Packers' first WR pick will be Jalen Royals in round 2. Brandon Aiyuk-like...
Idaho Cheese
March 28, 2025 at 07:21 pm
That's a good point. The Packers Would have drafted a receiver in the first round; however, the player they would have picked was drafted ahead of them. Tell me if my memory is off, but I seem to remember reporting Gutey was going to pick Aiyuk but was picked at 25 (?). We may never know, but there may have been others.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 09:24 am
No doubt, the Jerel Worthy's of the World, don't come around too often. Sherrod over Kyle Rudolph ,etc etc etc all down the worm hole. Last season, the target should have been Q.Mitchell when Indy blew another draft up their noses. Nick Perry over Harrison Smith , a guy who accumulated almost as many sacks during his continuing career.
You do not chase needs, select the Player.
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 10:29 am
That first paragraph, PEO. How does that explain Morgan? Not better than the starter (Walker), and not replacing him the next year.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 11:32 am
Morgan might replace Walker (though I personally do not think it likely if all are healthy—I rate Walker more highly than many). It’s pretty clear that Morgan beat Rhyan out of camp and then again by week 4 or 5 before his injury was reaggravated. Presumably while still somewhat limited and at a new position.
At the very worst Morgan would be next man up every where except C (unless that’s an option they work on). Rhyan could very well lose out to him though. If Morgan is kept out of a T role because Walker continues to ascend in the run game, then I count that a win: we are better than we banked in being when Morgan was picked.
Just because talent appears from a later round pick is irrelevant if it does. Bakh, Tom, perhaps Walker (his passing game is already up there). If you win on a flyer (against heavy odds) then don’t fight the win. Morgan still potentially makes us better and that’s a win at whatever position he’s playing. Play your best players regardless of where you got them. Doing the opposite for a protracted period guarantees getting less from the roster than one should be.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:31 pm
We've been here before, but the Packers are going to need to make a tough call on their OL and who gets second contracts. This is the issue the Lions are dealing with as they work through their younger players, too. Can't resign everyone...so who do you prioritize? Neither Walker nor Tom will come cheaply.
Some guys will--out of necessity--walk or get dealt. It might surprise us who those guys turn out to be.
crayzpackfan
March 28, 2025 at 08:22 am
92% rate to second contract for centers and Gute finds a way to become the 8% that did not. SMH. On a side note, I'm starting to think his 3rd round curse just might be a 1st round curse too. Every other round he seems to do very well. He's pretty good at free agency too when he goes for it.
T7Steve
March 28, 2025 at 08:29 am
I think the last 4 1sts have not written their stories yet. Long way from writing them off. In fact, Quay has started every game he's been available for and if not clumped together with edge rushing LBs would now be considered for his 5th option.
crayzpackfan
March 28, 2025 at 08:49 am
I think QW is out there sort of by default. Very average players are starters all over every team. Just cuz they start doesn't mean they are good. I think he is one of them. Especially being a 1st round pick.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 09:36 am
Definitely, over-drafted. The Georgia LBs play behind Blue Chip D-Lines and their prototypes are at the Edge position. I trust Saban's guys more. Stockholder wants his Jihad, but he's hit and miss vs the big bodies. I'll take Stutsman to plug inside. They kept McDuffie?
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 10:31 am
YEs, I'm astonished that we can be the #6 defense with so many players who aren't good enough.
crayzpackfan
March 28, 2025 at 10:50 am
LH- Perhaps collectively they are much better as a unit than their individual play? Cuz if you think QW is a top 15 LB in this NFL, I'm glad you are not a talent scout, with all due respect.
LambeauPlain
March 28, 2025 at 11:20 am
Or conversely, perhaps some players' talent were being misused in coaching schemes. Walker, for example was misused playing for most of his career Barry Ball...too often covering speedy WRs running through his soft prevent zone.
I believe LH saw what I saw with Quay's play in Hafley's read and react pressure Defense. In the last half of the season, learning not to overthink at the snap, began playing urgently and fast and looking like he may just be a top 15 LB yet. Hafley saw his ceiling, Barry played him to his floor.
Walker was a key contributor to the #6 defense in the NFL. It is a heady realm for Packers Defenses. They haven't smelled that rare air for many years.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 11:41 am
If Walker was indeed ascending before his late season injury then he might be the player he was drafted to be and have taken some time to adjust to the system change and revised philosophy as far as what his role is.
I’m on the fence about how significant that uptick was, but not to the point that I accept flat denial that he was playing more effectively. To be decided. Walker could yet go either way and I think we find out fairly quickly now which one he will take.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 12:41 pm
Cooper and McKinney made that defense excel. Walker is a complementary guy. Not a big play guy.
crayzpackfan
March 28, 2025 at 12:31 pm
LP
"Or conversely, perhaps some players' talent were being misused in coaching schemes"
This is a valid point.
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 12:40 pm
.......
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 12:43 pm
Then they should have recognized Karlaftis is the better choice to be made.
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 12:41 pm
These talent scouts....were they the ones that had Walker as a consensus early first round pick in the draft? Were they right then, right now, right both times, or wrong both times?
He's been on the team three years. He's played in 44 of 51 games. He gets in on over 100 tackles a year. Our defense has gone from#17 to #10 to #6, and you're expecting me to believe that this is happening despite Quay Walker not being 'good enough'.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 09:25 am
As far as I can see the actual data has about 88% of centers taken in the FIRST ROUND securing a second contract in the NFL, but that would include Myers (if he were a first rounder), who did, just not get one from the Packers or a very big one.
So I very much doubt that figure’s accuracy, and more importantly, its significance.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 09:38 am
Yes, it would be helpful to qualify the regression and select those re-signed by their current club.
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 01:08 pm
Each team needs ONE starting center. You sign these guys for 4 years, which would mean that every year, about 8 teams need to extend or replace their starting center. It would mean that every year, you'd have 8 veteran centers looking for a job, and they'd be competing against the draft.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 12:10 pm
I've just rolled 92 sixes in a row. Seems pretty improbable that I'll roll another six. This next roll has nothing to do with the other 92.
Leatherhead
March 28, 2025 at 01:29 pm
IN fact, I'd say that there's obviously something I'm not aware of that's making 6 come up every time, so I'd say the next roll is probably a 6 .
GregC
March 28, 2025 at 02:53 pm
The 92% refers to centers drafted in the first round. The Packers have not drafted a center in the first round in a long time, if ever.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 05:27 pm
I think 74 drafts to be precise. The last I am aware of was Clayton Tonnemaker in 1950 (only because this came up before).
Handsback
March 28, 2025 at 08:47 am
Point not mentioned is that the Pack have a stable full of good receivers, not great but good. I believe Watson will prove to be a #1 if he stays healthy.
If the Packers trade up to grab a guy...he better be special. I just don't see a Chase type player on the board so don't expect it to happen.
I still think a DT like Nolen is their target. Pass rusher from the inside and/ or Phillips from MD.
A trade down to me seems like a given, but haven't stayed at a HI Express lately so my opinions haven't been vetted yet.
Just MHO
GilThorp
March 28, 2025 at 09:37 am
I agree with Schneidman on McMillan. Gutenkist was the only GM at his individual workout, watching a guy that no way will be available at 23. He's thinking about trading up to get him.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 09:44 am
If he wants to recover Watson's 4.3 speed he may look to Golden. If he wants Watson's frame, he may go with McMillen. You don't take one-year wonders. He scouted McMillen when they were looking at Jordan Morgan last Spring.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 10:08 am
Half the package is often not worth the taking. It’s the speed/size combination that gave Watson his ceiling. Very, very few smaller players succeed as deep threats in the NFL. Very few big WRs without elite speed do either unless they have an a different elite attribute instead.
Macmillan will be a good WR but I don’t see him being elite at anything to the point where trading up makes a sufficient difference. Golden is much more likely to be a bust as an X than he is to be the next Tyreek Hill. Those are incredibly long odds despite his speed. That’s if he can remain healthy as well. Not a gamble I would take with our first round picks and needs.
Egbuka is not a true X but he might be the best overall upside proposition and most ready to contribute now. I see him as an eventual Z like Adams. I wouldn’t trade up for any of those 3. I wouldn’t pick Golden at all. Fix the X with one of several later options and get one of the several second day options to develop as a versatile WR unless one of Ebuka or McMillan fall and make WR a legitimate choice.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 12:56 pm
Steve Smith, Brandin Cooks, McLaurin, Antonio Brown, Tyreek Hill, Emanuel Sanders...route running and speed to the Spot; then Catching the ball. The post-up, demolition derby types do not last too long.
splitpea1
March 28, 2025 at 10:08 am
The "Packer Way"? Sounds like something that's ripe for evolution. Past performance of selections is no guarantee of future results. Take the best player available that fits your needs in every round.
It used to be the "Packer Way" meant never taking an inside linebacker until Day 3, and that thankfully changed. So can this.
LambeauPlain
March 28, 2025 at 10:58 am
"Past performance of selections is no guarantee of future results."
No, not a guarantee...but past performance is a strong indicator of future results. The past is often prologue.
Team Gutey does not surprise me as much as TT in his draft selections. He is capable interesting surprises. I am expecting some of these at Lambeau Field.
Can you imagine the boos if he trades out of the first round? He can!
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 01:05 pm
Well, Wolf's "Packer Way" was signing four free agents for his defensive line along with Robinson, Prior, Desmond Howard and Beebe. He did hit on his one picks in general with Wayne Simmons, Newsome and Aaron Taylor. Get experienced guys if you think you're close, but back it up with talented new blood. Wasting high picks has cost this team another SB. The Tampa Bay debacle on Home Field is full view: King giving up two scores, looking like a guy with broken bones.
GregC
March 28, 2025 at 05:55 pm
They got five decent years out of Simmons, who was a #15 overall pick. Not a Pro Bowler or anything, but a very good role player.
Craig Newsome (not Newhouse) was a #32 overall pick who had two good (not elite) seasons, missed most of his third season, then played every game in his fourth season before going to the 49ers for one season and playing in only seven games, then his career was over.
Aaron Taylor was drafted #15 overall (very high for a guard), played for three seasons for the Packers, then went to the Chargers for two years and his career was over.
Ron Wolf did not hit on his first round picks in general. Most of them were average to poor NFL players, and the only one who earned a second contract from the Packers was Bubba Franks. Aside from him, only two others lasted as long as five years in Green Bay.
Winning a championship tends to put everything in a good light, though, when people look back on it.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 07:46 pm
Damn A.I. Yes, I concur. He had his whiffs, but at least put effort into securing the Trophy. I am not a fan of putting GMs into the HOF. Taylor just had his knee mangled. Maybe with today's surgical methodolgy, he may have endured a few more seasons. His big hit in the draft was Doug Evans who made a great pick in the Superbowl I attended in NOLA. I was a big fan of Wayne Simmons. He brought the bad ass attitude to the team and they suffered in the loss to Denver when he was jettisoned.
LambeauPlain
March 28, 2025 at 11:07 am
If a good proportion of the top Packers' Big Board prospects are looking to drop into the second round AND their top few BAP targets at 23 are gone, by all means trade down.
It would make sense to get two top prospects to challenge for starting roles or quality depth...with an eye on their very large free agent class of starters and top depth needing to be re-signed or replaced in the 2026 off season.
Bet 2026 is already causing Gutey some sleepless nights.
WD
March 28, 2025 at 11:59 am
McMillan and Golden will both be gone at 23 and the next tier of good WRs can be had in the second through the third round. There are at least a dozen or more WRs who run under a 4.5 forty. Our greater needs in the first round need to be addressed on defense. Take the highest rated CB, Edge or DT in the first and second rounds. The best WR in the third. Simple. The draft itself will show the path.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:49 pm
I think a day 1 or day 2 CB makes plenty of sense, and part of why is the fact that I don't see Keisean Nixon or JA in Packers uniforms in 2026. I don't hang on the "high draft picks must be immediate starters" philosophy. Sometimes you're picking guys to be impact starters after the current guys are swept out. Not all picks are for "right now" especially picking in the mid-to-late 20s.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 06:00 pm
Barring a spectacular fall, I don’t see a CB in round one and probably not in round 2. One in Rounds 3 and 4 is I think quite likely. I suspect we go heavy or WR first. Then again, I do t think that Hafley will want Nixon gone. If Hafley goes next year then we are back to asking what type the new DC wants.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 06:59 pm
I tend to agree that day 3 is more likely, but I can see a scenario where--if the right one is there--they go CB before that. Certainly hearing from many sportswriters close to the team that they see DB as a priority in this draft.
My sneaking suspicion on Nixon based on nothing more than his recent bravado and Hobbs' deal is that he's soon going to want more money than his now looking very Packers friendly contract gets him.
Leatherhead
March 29, 2025 at 07:01 am
Why would Hafley want Nixon gone? He's only our best, most dependable CB and one of our leading tacklers.
Packers0808
March 28, 2025 at 12:55 pm
Sometimes wonder if all this Watson stuff will ever come to fruition with all his physical problems yearly. At this point in time wonder if he is another Alexander, really good, but physically can't be counted on, might be a consideration to go WR 1st round if one good enough available!
NFLfan
March 28, 2025 at 01:16 pm
Part of transitioning into a WR #1 is drive, desire for greatness, and a QB who will demand crisp route-running, comprehension of the upcoming game plan, etc. Both Davante and Jordy were second-rounders but both agreed to do what it took to play on Rodger's level. This kind of phenomenon might not happen again. Love is not Rodgers. Love needs a WR #1 due to his inaccuracies and intermittent poor decisions-Rodgers upgraded his already great receivers-it was a thing of beauty over the years. All three are Hall of Fame worthy. I don't see any of GB's WRs on that level, nor is Love.
dobber
March 28, 2025 at 02:34 pm
There are a lot of really good WR playing with revolving-door QBs or sub-par signal callers (and throwers).
Adams and Nelson were both high-volume, college WR. Their skill sets were clear before they were even drafted. How many WR did the QB-who-shall-not-be-named NOT elevate or develop--and I'll guarantee there were plenty of hard workers in that set of guys.
harleycops
March 28, 2025 at 02:13 pm
We need ballers on both sides of the ball. Love has to be more accurate instead of throwing INTs or way over WR's heads. WRs have to catch the dagum ball instead of costly drops or running out of the route. Fix those 2 details and our passing offense would be much better. Guterk would never draft a WR in the 1st round cuz he knows he'd break his tradition and so no matter who/what, he will draft the usual DB, DL, OL, LB like he's done for the past yrs of his tenure. Show me a 1st round WR and I'll pass out from the shock! But I'm not worried - to say the least. It ain't gonna happen!!!!!!
stockholder
March 28, 2025 at 03:13 pm
So Lets say he takes a CB.
It Bumps him out of the Top DTs.
If he takes a edge-
It bumps him out of the Cb, Dt.
Hasn't he lost to many picks
that never developed in the secondary?
So lets say he has a shot at Egbuka WR.
He's got sure hands and stays on his FEET!
He then could grab Deone Walker
to replace Slaton.
And I 'll finish by showing you how
you protect against over-paying a OL.
With his 3 and 4th picks
Wyatt Milum OL. W. VIR.
Jackson Slater. OL. Sac. St.
Both have taken snaps at center.
And TT dumped OL when they wanted too much.
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 06:04 pm
I could see us taking McMillan or Egbuka in round one. We would still need a deep threat true X later in my view and to be willing to move on from someone to get them involved. I’m not sure either drop though and I would not trade up to get them. I would not touch any other WR in the first, even if we trade back a few.
jannesbjornson
March 28, 2025 at 07:52 pm
Slater brings the attitude missing since Sitton left the building. Shemar Turner is another DT who can make plays and was the glue for the A&M defensive front.
stockholder
March 28, 2025 at 09:50 pm
Turner isn't a good Tackler-
He's a development player.
Rotational - too many issues.
I don't want to package picks to move up.
HarryHodag
March 28, 2025 at 04:56 pm
Ah, yes, the annual "gee aren't the Packers stupid for not taking a wide receiver"(sarcasm) argument trudged out by the truly uninformed in many different media. Reporters feed off each other, even if it doesn't hold water.
Who is the Packers all-time leading receiver with more than 10,000 yards? Donald Driver, 7th round pick. The top 10 receivers are a mix of number #1s and other draft positions. Being a top pick does not guarantee the Packers a success. What's more important is who is throwing the ball.
So if the Packers can't generate a pass rush from the front four and the other teams run and throw all over Green Bay, that's less important than having a track star catching passes?
Is this flag football?
Coldworld
March 28, 2025 at 06:15 pm
I love Driver, but his first 3 years he was essentially a non factor who played STs.
If there’s a hidden gem on the 90, I remain interested to see what Julian Hicks can do after a year on the PS. Small school but some skills on film and an interesting story. 6’2, 201, 9.18 RAS. Not a burner but 4.53 40 and 1.52 10
davekenya
March 28, 2025 at 07:33 pm
It's a little deceiving to think of Donald Driver as a 7th round pick 'gem' in that he was contemplating not playing in the NFL that first year and instead competing in the 2000 Olympics. He may not have signed an NFL contract at all and the team's draft rights would expire...meaning he'd go back into the draft a year later. I think this realistically scared teams off and he slid in the draft...
PhantomII
March 28, 2025 at 10:58 pm
Yes ,the Packers are stupid for not MOVING UP and drafting many #1 WR's.... Last year Seattle got a pretty good one. I'll say it again:
(Rodgers) started his NFL career with:
1. Donald Driver
2. Greg Jennings
3. James Jones
4. Jordy Nelson
J. Love starts his career with:
1. Tucker Kraft TE
2. Jacobs RB
3-4 bag of potato chips
we'll be losing 2 WR's next season...I don't expect either to be signed and nobody has separated them self except Jacobs and Kraft and ML barely throws to either one. We have lost every playoff game by a handful of points and both QB's played poorly in those games and AR needed a #2 WR he never was given by Gute either. Our WR group was unforgivingly depleted before Adams left and is in even poorer shape now. Gute has been making our OL stronger and with an edge but we are still missing a lot of WR talent. I would pick 2 top WR's that fit and another top TE to start this draft off right followed by DL upgrades will help the DE's get home.
HarryHodag
March 29, 2025 at 09:41 am
You forget:
Reed
Doubs
Watson(not Gute's fault he's injury prone)
Musgrave(not Gute's fault he's injury prone)
You also forgot the bright shiny object of #1 receivers are usually gone by the time the Packers draft because....they're usually in the playoffs and pick far down the rotation.
Also not in your first list not one, repeat not one, of the receivers was a first round pick.
PhantomII
March 29, 2025 at 02:06 pm
Harry....I forgot " NOTHING". None of the players you mentioned are MENTIONABLE. They didn't show up and definitely did not show out, and HOPING they finally do is just MANDATING the Packers fail in the playoffs another year in a row...if they even get there. " OUR PACKERS " HAVE OFFICIALLY become the poorest NFL team in our Division. I expect no current Packer WR to make a difference this season. I hope some of them do, but all of them took a step back last season and GB had "THE MOST DROPS" of ANY NFL TEAM in 2024.
Yes #1 WR's need to be moved up for and since we have no WR worthy of extending...if we had a GM worth his salt we would and should move up 2x to get a legit starting WR instead of running out WR's that may or may not put effort into running a route and may or may not drop a pass. Like I said before may as well run out 3 RB's and have them run routes, at least they would catch a pass and are shifty with good vision and can get YAC with power and movement skills if we completely refuse to get better in FA or move up in the draft. I truly wish these WR's light goes on but I don't believe wasting another season on hoping it happens after regressing last season is a good idea for 2025. GB has pissed away multiple Super Bowl runs from being too conservative and unwilling to pick-up a key player nearly every season or give a solid player away for a draft pick. You're right not any of the WR's AR had started with were drafted #1, most people are smart enough to understand I'm showcasing the QUALITY of what AR started with and the DISPARITY of the difference Love is expected to take us anywhere but the CELLAR of the NFC NORTH DIVISION....which is where we are NOW. The reason for a reach up is we have nobody showing us ANYTHING in our WR group and we NEED that much FOCUS on improving it NOW.
jannesbjornson
March 29, 2025 at 10:13 am
Two Wides, Two CBs, LB, DT , OG and a bonafide TE like Ferguson , or Arroyo. Get Better