Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
5 Pages«<2345>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline DoddPower  
#31 Posted : Saturday, January 18, 2014 12:06:56 AM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,087
Applause Received: 528

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
I think they would have screamed bloody murder at the time but if we would have drafted Patterson I think they may be OK with it now.



How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 1/18/2014(UTC)
Offline sschind  
#32 Posted : Saturday, January 18, 2014 8:54:20 AM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 123
Applause Received: 450

Originally Posted by: DoddPower Go to Quoted Post
How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.


Don't you think there would have been an uproar of negative responses last year it Ted Thompson would have drafted Patterson? At least more so than the uproar of negative responses that folowed the Jones pick. People didn't see a WR as as big of a need as a pass rusher so if Ted Thompson would have taken Patterson most people would have been upset. At this point yeah, I think almost everyone would be OK with it and I said so in my post.


Take this year for example. The majority of people seem to feel a safety or DL or OLB are our biggest needs. If the BPA is a TE and Ted Thompson takes him most of those people will be angry. If that TE turns out to be the next Graham or Gronk people will change their minds. That is what I meant.

As far as taking the BPA all the time that depends. It's also very subjective. I doubt any two GMs or any draft "experts" have the exact same board so what may be the BPA for half of them may not be the BPA to the other half. Non GMs can make their draft boards without factoring in need. If they think this CB is just a little better than that WR they will have him higher. A GM of a team that desperately needs a WR may have those two players reversed. When it comes time for that GM to make his pick he will probably take the WR. He thinks he is taking the BPA and the experts think he is drafting for need.

Obviously if we are talking about 1 or 2 spots its not a big deal. The problem comes in when the team right in front of your GM takes that WR and now your GM takes a WR he had rated 10 spots below the CB just to fill the need. That is not the right move to make.

The question is should GMs take their current roster into account when they make up their board or should they go simply on their opinions of the players in the draft. I guess ideally they would forget about their current players and simply make a list of the best players in the draft. That would eliminate the possibility of a current weakness on the team influencing their opinion of a particular player or position causing them to inflate their value.
I respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Offline DoddPower  
#33 Posted : Saturday, January 18, 2014 5:40:32 PM(UTC)
DoddPower

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2011

United States
Joined: 9/24/2007(UTC)
Location: Visalia, CA

Applause Given: 2,087
Applause Received: 528

Originally Posted by: sschind Go to Quoted Post
Don't you think there would have been an uproar of negative responses last year it Ted Thompson would have drafted Patterson? At least more so than the uproar of negative responses that folowed the Jones pick. People didn't see a WR as as big of a need as a pass rusher so if Ted Thompson would have taken Patterson most people would have been upset. At this point yeah, I think almost everyone would be OK with it and I said so in my post.


Take this year for example. The majority of people seem to feel a safety or DL or OLB are our biggest needs. If the BPA is a TE and Ted Thompson takes him most of those people will be angry. If that TE turns out to be the next Graham or Gronk people will change their minds. That is what I meant.

As far as taking the BPA all the time that depends. It's also very subjective. I doubt any two GMs or any draft "experts" have the exact same board so what may be the BPA for half of them may not be the BPA to the other half. Non GMs can make their draft boards without factoring in need. If they think this CB is just a little better than that WR they will have him higher. A GM of a team that desperately needs a WR may have those two players reversed. When it comes time for that GM to make his pick he will probably take the WR. He thinks he is taking the BPA and the experts think he is drafting for need.

Obviously if we are talking about 1 or 2 spots its not a big deal. The problem comes in when the team right in front of your GM takes that WR and now your GM takes a WR he had rated 10 spots below the CB just to fill the need. That is not the right move to make.

The question is should GMs take their current roster into account when they make up their board or should they go simply on their opinions of the players in the draft. I guess ideally they would forget about their current players and simply make a list of the best players in the draft. That would eliminate the possibility of a current weakness on the team influencing their opinion of a particular player or position causing them to inflate their value.


Well, I was completely speaking in hindsight. I understand it's not easy to truly identify whether one player is actually "better" than the other, regardless of position. But if a general manager feels that one player is truly the best player available, than I hope he would take them every time. I liked the Datone Jones pick, and still do. But based on this last season only, Patterson was the better pick. The Packers could have probably signed a dozen different free agents that gave them what Datone Jones did this season, and possibly more. I'm not sure that's the case with a guy like Patterson, unless the Packers traded for Percy Harvin or something . . . and that didn't work out either.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 1/18/2014(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#34 Posted : Monday, January 20, 2014 11:40:48 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: DoddPower Go to Quoted Post
How could anyone complain with a team adding another potentially elite player, regardless of position? Almost any average NFL caliber player could offer what Datone did this season. There are only a few players from every draft that have the talent of Patterson, if that. Obviously this could change, but at this point, Patterson is absolutely the better pick, even for the Packers.

Of course I truly believe in BPA. If a team adds elite talent almost every single year, chances are they will find a way to have a good team. Be it by draft and develop, trades, having the teams strengths being so strong that they outweigh the weaknesses, or whatever. There is always free agency to fill a couple of holes with average players, at least for some teams. I'll take elite talent every time, and find ways to fill any gaps that it creates. Just seems much easier and logical that way than the reverse.


Your point is well taken DoddPower. Imagine how differently this team may have fared this year had we taken Patterson instead of Jones...
Offline porky88  
#35 Posted : Monday, January 20, 2014 9:49:10 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 194
Applause Received: 409

My first mock draft of the year.

Quote:
21. Green Bay Packers -- C.J. Mosley, LB, Alabama
Getting tougher upfront is a necessity if Green Bay is to compete with San Francisco and Seattle in the NFC. Mosley fits the bill. Many regard him as one of the elite prospects of this draft, but linebackers tend to fall on draft day, and the Alabama tag makes him a little overrated. Still, Mosley is an excellent two-down linebacker. He and long-time Green Bay linebacker A.J. Hawk would give the Packers a rugged look at the position.
thanks Post received 2 applause.
wpr on 1/21/2014(UTC), DoddPower on 1/21/2014(UTC)
Offline Rockmolder  
#36 Posted : Tuesday, January 21, 2014 3:14:03 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 161
Applause Received: 263

Originally Posted by: porky88 Go to Quoted Post
My first mock draft of the year.



May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?
UserPostedImage
Offline steveishere  
#37 Posted : Tuesday, January 21, 2014 5:56:35 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 48
Applause Received: 981

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?


Yeah, I was under the impression that his strength was pass coverage ability.
Offline cheeseheads123  
#38 Posted : Tuesday, January 21, 2014 10:56:56 AM(UTC)
cheeseheads123

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/28/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 72
Applause Received: 117

Remember that time Kiper had Brohm #1?
UserPostedImage
Offline porky88  
#39 Posted : Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:17:38 PM(UTC)
porky88

Rank: Pro Bowl

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2013Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2014

Joined: 4/26/2007(UTC)

Applause Given: 194
Applause Received: 409

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
May I ask why you see him as a two-down linebacker?

I think he’s a good player who is being mistaken for a great player. I conclude this based on two things.

1. He doesn’t react quickly to a play. That doesn’t mean he won’t make the play, but it also means he may not make as many as he should.

2. Do his workout numbers translate into his on-field athleticism? I’ve seen some reports suggest he runs a 4.5 or 4.6 in the 40. I don’t see that on the field. In my opinion, he’ll cover the flats well enough, but he’s not going to turn and run stride for stride with quality NFL tight ends.
Offline wpr  
#40 Posted : Tuesday, January 21, 2014 7:35:56 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,147
Applause Received: 1,517

Originally Posted by: porky88 Go to Quoted Post
I think he’s a good player who is being mistaken for a great player. I conclude this based on two things.

1. He doesn’t react quickly to a play. That doesn’t mean he won’t make the play, but it also means he may not make as many as he should.

2. Do his workout numbers translate into his on-field athleticism? I’ve seen some reports suggest he runs a 4.5 or 4.6 in the 40. I don’t see that on the field. In my opinion, he’ll cover the flats well enough, but he’s not going to turn and run stride for stride with quality NFL tight ends.


Hawk 2.0
UserPostedImage

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages«<2345>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
5m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27m / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

53m / Green Bay Packers Talk / gotarace

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Tezzy

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / porky88

22-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / packman82

22-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann