In the run-up to the NFL Draft, we are publishing a weekly “Mailbag” feature here at Cheesehead TV.

If there’s something you’d like answered, tag your queries with the hashtag #PackersDraft on Twitter.

@BrianCarriveau @cheeseheadtv Based on how the Packers use their ILBs, which prospects are good fits, which ones are poor fits?

— Nate Rau (@tnnaterau) February 9, 2015

@BrianCarriveau with Barrington being the thumper type ILB, does it matter if the guy next to him has more speed? Kendricks vs Perryman?

— Luke Mills (@lmills34) February 9, 2015

Steven Bondeli also had a similar question I think I can answer in one fell swoop. Let me preface this by saying we're one week out from the NFL Combine. Based upon measurables and workouts, I'm liable to change my mind in the next few days. But for the moment being, it's my opinion that UCLA inside linebacker Eric Kendricks is the the most likely player to be drafted by the Green Bay Packers in the first round. He fits the best combination of "need" and "likely to be available" with the 30th overall pick in the draft. And he's a good player, voted the Butkus Award winner as the nation's best linebacker.

I'm convinced that the Packers will address inside linebacker at some point in the first two days of the Draft, and one of six players will end up wearing green and gold when it's all said and done: either Kendricks, Washington's Shaq Thompson, Miami's Denzel Perryman, TCU's Paul Dawson, Mississippi State's Bernardrick McKinney or Clemson's Stephone Anthony. I think Thompson will be off the board by the time the Packers pick.

Meanwhile, a trio of players are at opposite ends of the height/length spectrum. McKinney is the rare inside linebacker measuring in as much as 6-5 while Perryman and Dawson are cut from the relatively sawed-off cloth of 5-10, 5-11. That doesn't mean any of these three can't be good players, but Kendricks just fits the prototype (6-0, 230 lbs.) you're looking for at the position. Anthony is Day 2 material if the Packers pass on inside linebacker in the first round.

I think there's something to Luke's point about the Packers finding a player with more speed to complement Barrington's "thumper" role, but the most important thing is that they find the best overall athlete, the best combination of speed and strength and smarts and everything all rolled into one. When Kendricks lined up next to the insanely athletic Myles Jack at UCLA, it was Kendricks that was more of the "thumper" of between the two. But Kendricks is also a good enough athlete to make plays himself.

Above all, the Packers need a true three-down player at inside linebacker that can stuff the run on early downs and still be a reliable pass defender on third-and-long. And I think Kendricks proved at UCLA that he's very good in coverage. I don't necessarily think any of the aforementioned six linebackers is a poor fit for the Packers. They could all potentially be effective. You're just looking for the best one, and it's my opinion that Kendricks will be the best one available. The game tape of his performance against Virginia is becoming the stuff of legend if you want to check him out for yourself:

@BrianCarriveau @cheeseheadtv Would you concur biggest needs are ILB/TE/DT? Example of a potential faller that could supercede these needs?

— Tom Stadler (@TStads20) February 9, 2015

@BrianCarriveau If a similar situation where 1st round ILB are all gone at 30, what would GM Brian do instead? #PackersDraft

— Travis Pineapple (@Rob_In_WI) February 9, 2015

Once again, I also received a question from Chris White that shares a similar sentiment to these two. I would agree that inside linebacker and a big run-stuffing defensive lineman are two of the Packers' major needs. I'm not as convinced as some that tight end is a big need for the Packers. I think Richard Rodgers fills that role. He may not fit the new-age mold of 6-6, seam-busting tight end like a Rob Gronkowski or Antonio Gates. Instead, the Packers are going old-school. Think about the Super Bowl XXXI Packers. Rodgers is more like your Mark Chmura/Keith Jackson tight end. I've also seen comparisons to Mark Bavaro. All of them were good, effective tight ends in their own right, just different than the brand of tight end sweeping the league today. That being said, if the right player falls into your lap, you don't pass him up. I do think the Packers could use a big, run-blocking tight end that is also a tall, red-zone target, but they could address that outside the first two rounds.

If I had to pick one more position that's a big need on the Packers roster, it's offensive tackle. And that's even if Bryan Bulaga comes back. I'm just not convinced that J.C. Tretter is tackle material in the NFL. He looked fine at center in preseason action, and it's possible that's the only place he fits in the NFL. I'm willing to give Tretter the benefit of the doubt and see what he can do in 2015, but he certainly looked overmatched at tackle in limited action this past season, and it would scare me if the Packers had to rely on him or Don Barclay for an extended amount of time. Obviously if Bulaga leaves in free agency, the need only becomes exacerbated. T.J. Clemmings of Pittsburgh is a potential late first round draft pick. He's raw, but with the proper coaching, he could be dominant.

@BrianCarriveau @cheeseheadtv Do you feel that this might be a good year for Ted Thompson to trade back into the second round?

— Lombardi Ave (@lombardiave) February 9, 2015

I think this same argument can be made nearly every year. It's just a situation we'll never know until draft day arrives, and we see how the first 29 picks ahead of the Packers actually play out. Obviously Green Bay went this route back in 2008 when they traded back and still got wide receiver Jordy Nelson the second round. Suffice to say, that turned out well.

The thing that makes you believe this could happen in 2015 are those six inside linebackers referenced earlier. If the Packers happen to think they're all capable (or at least a majority of them of them are capable) of being starting-caliber players in their defensive system, and they're still comfortable with the possibility that a few might come off the board before they pick in the second round, then yes, maybe the Packers general manager could trade out of the first round and pick up an extra second round pick.

@BrianCarriveau what's most likely, Packers re-sign Flynn or Tolzien, draft a backup QB, obtain a backup through free agency?

— Kyle Schwaggs (@Delta_Kyle) February 9, 2015

I think it's a given the Packers will re-sign Scott Tolzien, and I became convinced of that back in August of 2014, the moment they kept Tolzien on their 53-man roster. At that point in time, the Packers had the entire 2013 season and a full offseason and training camp in 2014 to evaluate Tolzien and decide whether he was worth continuing to develop. I see no reason why they would have kept three quarterbacks on the active roster coming out of training camp for the first time since 2008 if they didn't feel as if Tolzien had a future with the organization.

Even if the Packers re-sign Tolzien, that won't necessarily prevent them from drafting a quarterback or signing another in free agency. They shouldn't pass up an opportunity to make the team better. I don't think the Packers have yet reached the point, however, where they're looking for an eventual replacement for Aaron Rodgers like they did with Brett Favre in 2005. Rodgers is under contract with the Packers through 2019, and in a perfect world, you're not looking for another quarterback to take a single meaningful snap for the Packers for the next five years. All this is to say, I don't think the Packers will address quarterback in the first round this season. Anything in the second round and beyond is fair game if the right player is available.

Brian Carriveau is the author of the book "It's Just a Game: Big League Drama in Small Town America," and editor at Cheesehead TV and its "Pro Football Draft Preview." To contact Brian, email [email protected].